Good music is...?

[Beorn]

I think Dave just means cerebral vs. emotional, as in Kurtág vs. Tchaikovsky. I don't know if this sort of simplification invokes stereotypes but I suppose it does invite conversation.

QFT

That's what polls are for, aren't they?

[Cato]

Good music is not on the same level as great music, but is better than mediocre or bad music.   0:)

Here is another question: is there - in general - just as much bad music as great music, and just as much mediocre as good music, which would mean all music would form a shape e.g.



(Ignore the markings, although they are interesting!)

Or would a graph of all music be a regular pyramid, with a huge amount of bad music tapering into fewer great works?

Or is there so much good and great music that we would need an inverted pyramid?

Or some other shape?

That's what polls are for, aren't they?

Polls are the Devil's Workshop!      

[North Star]

And just how do you define bad music, other than 'I know it when I hear it'?

[Cato]

And just how do you define bad music, other than 'I know it when I hear it'?

Heh-heh!   0:)   Ask MN Dave! It's his poll!    0:)

[Beorn]

Heh-heh!   0:)   Ask MN Dave! It's his poll!    0:)

I have no answers; merely polls.  0:)

[Dancing Divertimentian]

QFT

That's what polls are for, aren't they?

Definitely. I mean, we're two pages in already.

Anyway, I have no doubt that composers work hard intellectually to make the experience for me as emotional as possible. They've gotta have something going on in the ol' cranium to organize the inspiration. At least I think....

[Karl Henning]

We's all got brains, and some of us larns how to uze 'em.

[Ten thumbs]

Given that pleasure is an emotion, I will have to go for the second option. Puzzles and complexity have no bearing on the quality of music.

[Parsifal]

Given that pleasure is an emotion, I will have to go for the second option. Puzzles and complexity have no bearing on the quality of music.

You've blithly declared the experience of half of the respondants to be invalid. 

[NorthNYMark]

I don't think I can choose any of the given answers (including "something else"), since there is no option for "both, neither, and/or something else, depending on the music in question."  Like most people (I would assume), I respond to at least some music on a mainly emotional level. I came close to going with "both," since I also enjoy a lot of music that is considered by many to be complex and cerebral; yet, as someone who can't read music, I never think of it as a puzzle to be solved, since I would not have the resources to solve it.  Is enjoying music that seems puzzling (or merely complex)--yet not seeing it as a soluble puzzle--to fall squarely into the "moves me emotionally" group? 

[DavidW]

I think you could keep the choices the same, but change the question to "Good poll is...?" and it would still work!!

[Ten thumbs]

You've blithly declared the experience of half of the respondants to be invalid. 

No. I didn't say there was anything wrong with complexity in music, it can produce wonderful results. It can also be exceedingly dull. As in all the arts, simplicity can also produce the most wonderful results. Therefore, I maintain, complexity in itself is not a measure of good music. Of course, you may argue, that simplicity must contain a hidden complexity not audible on the surface. Well, that may be so but there are no additional unnecessary notes.

[starrynight]

For some, listening to a fugue by Bach and recognizing the various transformations and combinations of the theme can give intellectual pleasure.  The same listening to Mozart, Beethoven,  Brahms or Wagner and following the development of a theme.  This "solving of the puzzle" can be a pleasure in itself, or can enhance the pleasure that comes from an emotional reaction to the music.

The structural stength of a piece is clearly needed to give it emotional value, otherwise it would just be, to use an American term, 'a hot mess'.

[Parsifal]

The structural stength of a piece is clearly needed to give it emotional value, otherwise it would just be, to use an American term, 'a hot mess'.

I agree completely.  However some enjoy being aware of and understanding the structure, while others don't.

[Ten thumbs]

Having thought about this further, I think what can distinguish the good in both the complex and the simple work are those little nuances and subtleties that are often difficult to analyse.

[12tone.]

Good music is....

[starrynight]

Having thought about this further, I think what can distinguish the good in both the complex and the simple work are those little nuances and subtleties that are often difficult to analyse.

The individual voice of a composer is probably defined through the individual combination of stylistic ideas reflected in the detail of the work.  Those who don't have such an individual voice may end up just highlighting the structural aspects of the work by default.