Interesting read *old* - Page 6

Mariuslol...r u high or drunk?
only way to explain chain posts like that

I've got something weird, like both of them, hypersomnia and sometimes insomnia. The replies are seperated because I discover something new, change my mind, or didn't really mean what I said lol.

On February 11 2012 10:22 palak wrote: Show nested quote + Science cannot tell us a word about why music delights us, of why and how an old song can move us to tears. It can now, just wasn't advanced enough in his day   But the quality of an instrument is not the same as that. Every objective study attempted has come the the conclusion that it is the same, they are both overpaying for an object they are fooling themselves into believing produces a higher quality.   There really isn't anything to argue here. If you think Limp Bizkit is more beautiful than Bach, there is no way around it, you are an undeveloped person with an undeveloped intellect. You don't find great minds appreciating that kind of crap for a reason. Not all art is equal simply because it is subjective. People who argue like that about art are complete fools. Bach's objectively the best composer of all time, there's no denying that (every survey or list i've ever seen from musicians listing composers always has Bach #1. At that kind of unanimity it becomes objective). Ignoring other aspects of a person and saying they have an undeveloped intellect for not appreciating Bach is narrow minded.   How are your favorite basketball players helping humanity? What about all the money going into making all those games possible? Shouldn't they all be ashamed, stop and feed the poor instead? Besides the hundreds of hours of community service they are basically required to do under the "NBA cares" banner. They provide more enjoyment for ppl watching due to their skill level. Yes they are horrifically overpaid and many millions of those dollars should be going to better causes.   it is widely accepted that there is very little if any difference in sound quality between the best modern copies of strads and the originals themselves. i don't know anything about the "1976 british violin" or the swiss violin maker whose instruments were used in the two tests from your wikipedia article I've literally never heard a music lover say that. Its nice to hear. I've always just heard them go on and on about strads being way better then any other violin. U nailed the price on the swiss violin they used. Price is $30k. Sure some people can tell a difference between a $10k and a strad. I sure as hell can't since i have horrific hearing. But if ppl can no longer tell the difference between a $30k violin and a strad then the strad isn't worth the damn 3.6mil. Even if you grant that the older violins at the time revolutionized the music, we have gotten to the point that we can reproduce the quality of music they produce at 1/10000 the price.(obv exaggeration since its only 1/120th the price)

woops didn't see this post. just want to point out that it's still possible that a strad still sounds noticeably better than a $30k copy in the situation i mentioned before, comparing how their sound carries to the back of a large performance hall (i don't know where the sound test experiments were done). it's not uncommon for other violins that otherwise sound similar to each other to be "set apart" this way. like i said i've never specfically heard a strad and a high-end copy next to each other in this situation so i can't say if they would be different, but it's a pretty important litmus test for judging any violin. i'm honestly not trying to argue for the strad here, just pointing out the very real possibility that for all we know it can still be accurately distinguished from a high-end copy. i know it won't convince you that a strad is worth 100x the price, but it's important to take into account before declaring that there's no difference.

about your encounters with musicians...i don't know how the conversations have gone of course, but it's important to keep in mind that "good" is a relative term. a violin that's worth $3-4k based on the merits of its sound and not other things is a very good instrument, much better than most. i don't know the exact price-% breakdowns but it's very safe to say that 99% of violins are worth <$3k. and a $10k violin is a significant improvement on that, and a $30k violin is yet another step up. if someone asked me if i could tell the difference between a strad and a really good modern violin and i was forced to give a one-word answer, "yes" would be more accurate than "no" because i can tell the difference between a strad and nearly all really good modern violins.

if you take someone who's listened to a thousand hours of classical music, it's guaranteed that they will have heard a strad at some point because a lot of famous violinists like joshua bell play a strad or have made recordings using a strad (and the ones that don't usually use another old very expensive instrument such as a Guarneri or Guadagnini or Amati because they prefer the sound over the strad for whatever reason). assuming the person didn't spend the entire thousand hours listening to just the elite 20 or so violinists in the world, they will also have heard many other instruments. like if they went to a Julliard or Eastmann graduate recital there's a good chance they would hear a $7-15k violin for example. but it's very possible that they would never hear a $30k-ish strad copy. they're not going to hear it from someone with prominent recordings like Bell because they would just use a strad. there's probably some people sitting in the middle of the new york philharmonic, chicago symphony, etc. who have one but you don't hear them individually. and for conservatory students and really good amateurs/"semi-pros" it's just hard to justify spending the extra $20k or whatever.

anyway i probably could have put that more succinctly but my point is that the above hypothetical person has listened to a lot of violin music, they have listened to a strad and many other good violins that aren't a strad. out of what they've listened to, they can identify what is a strad and what isn't. it doesn't seem so unreasonable that they would believe they can tell the difference between a strad and any other violin, even if that's not quite the case.

with all that said, i do admit that part of the classical music community does tend to come off as snobbish. for what it's worth none of Loco's posts seemed snobbish to me and i hope mine don't either. i will say that of all the people i've known, musicians on the whole seem to be the kindest and least pretentious people overall, but there is a portion of people who get into classical music for the wrong reasons and give it a bad name.

Kinda a like 2pac and dre gave rap a bad name

On February 12 2012 15:09 Mariuslol wrote: LOL, you're crazy xD, I love it, and you, even though I disagree with almost everything you have written lately, in this post and in all your crazy attacks towards Wobbly lol. My whole agenda lol, but interesting and cute seeing how you perceived/responded to it xD + Show Spoiler + Show nested quote + Anyway, this has gone far enough and I'm done with this topic. Cheers. AND I WAS ANGRY YOU CHOOSE TO ONLY REPLY TO PEOPLE YOU'RE ARGUING WITH, AND NOT A LONG SERIOUS REPLY TO SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY READ YOUR POSTS 2-3 TIMES AND DID SOME THINKING BEFORE REPLYING *Gaaaasps for breath* Hmmm... Now I'm wondering if I should remove the "cute", my spider senses are telling me you might find it patronizing.... Fuck it, I'll risk it xD

I didn't reply because it was mostly just completely incoherent and filled with opinions (quite strange ones, I might add) that don't give me anything to respond to. It's easy to respond to an argument, but when someone just unloads all the things he's been thinking about in the past hour almost in a stream-of-consciousness way resulting in a big incoherent mush it's not easy, and it probably suits a personal journal better than a public forum.

So you wanted to get my attention and make me post because I said I was done (I meant done discussing the particular topic argument btw), and that was the sole purpose of you making a snarky insulting comment... brilliant.

Thanks

(Wasn't ment insulting, your own lenses to blame for that xD)


Word of the day, mush:

- A thick porridge or pudding of cornmeal boiled in water or milk.
- Something thick, soft, and pulpy.
- Informal Mawkish sentimentality, affection, or amorousness.

You asked me out of the blue if I ever saw this:

+ Show Spoiler +

What else could you mean other than you thinking it applies to me? I'm pretty sure if I made a poll everyone would agree that there's no other meaning to get from it. Maybe you just don't understand the point of this meme at all. It applies to a bunch of self-absorbed adolescents, generally hipsters, who get into arguments on the internet all the time to prop up their own egos. They don't actually know much of anything, but just like to think they do. Basically, a large percentage of people on tumblr and 4chan.

Don't be such a negative nancy, you're giving it around 98% more attention than it deserves and the effect it was ment to have lol. Try and scaling it down, pretend you're hovering above it, zoom out. I only wrote it because I was updating poker hands from longple in the other window and I saw it whilst pondering why you seem to be so gloomy/serious all the time, cracked a smile and thought, hey... Wait a minute, this kinda in a way fits lol. And I hurried and wrote it down without giving it much more thought than that lol.

Okay!! Not a loco poll, since I feel you'd cheat a little bit, so I made one without tempering with the original question xD



Poll: What do you think was Mariuslol's meaning with the comment ? ?
(Vote): He was probably still moody Loco kept ignoring him only replying to insults/arguments
(Vote): He feels Loco is a peseudo-intellectual and feels the actual meme represents Loco 100%
(Vote): He probably didn't even know it was a meme and it was written in the moment without much thought
(Vote): LOL, WHO GIVES A FUCK
(Vote): I'm pretty sure Mariuslol is hung like a Rhinocerus
(Vote): I'm pretty sure Loco would beat Wobbly in a fistfight

If anyone still checks this shitty thread I'm predicting "LOL, who gives a fuck" by a landslide.

Yeah, that gets my vote. I can make polls too.


Poll: How would you describe mariuslol here?
(Vote): He's spastic. Most likely suffers from information overload; can't piece ideas together coherently.
(Vote): He's a freak and a very weird dude.
(Vote): He's immature and gets upset easily when not paid attention to.

I still have my hopes up pretty high for #5

Mariuslol gtfo with your anime links (that proabably was a good 3 minutes worth of youtubing). Whatever you say after posting such garbage doesn't matter because that shit doesn't belong here and can not be unseen. Your arguments are invalid. Also learn to pick your opponents. For me it appears Loco is well spoken and you are just trying hard to make sense to yourself and others.

On February 13 2012 14:39 cariadon wrote: Mariuslol gtfo with your anime links (that proabably was a good 3 minutes worth of youtubing). Whatever you say after posting such garbage doesn't matter because that shit doesn't belong here and can not be unseen. Your arguments are invalid. Also learn to pick your opponents. For me it appears Loco is well spoken and you are just trying hard to make sense to yourself and others.

I spent 2 hours listening to everything I could find on Bach, 3 minutes...

Hate all you want, I don't see it as garbage, I feel it do belong here and my arguments are valid. And it wasn't an "oponent" I chose, I wanted to have a dialouge, not an argument, I didn't want to win or lose, I wanted to find a new answer and this isn't me trying hard, it'z free-flowing <3


3 minutes... lol

And that anime music is godlike, FYI (not 100% sure what fyi means but I feel it fits here).

Ps, Loco... That's low, at least add a few more options that'll make me look better (like I did for you).

T_T

What is it you are trying to say or prove here Mariuslol ?

On February 13 2012 18:51 cariadon wrote: What is it you are trying to say or prove here Mariuslol ?

I'm not trying to say anything, I've writing stuff, and I've already said it + I've also already said/shared my view on the topic in this thread on page 3, close to the bottom. And what am I trying to prove...
That awesome, inspirational music, like Bach, might just hit a 4 on a scale from 1 - 10 in someone's ear, and another form of music might hit a 9. What's beatiful and awe inspiring to some doesn't have to be it to someone else. And what's "deep" and not deep depends on the ear of the beholder.

To an idle bystander, some of the things Flash does might seem trivial, non-important and retarded, but to someone who's studied the game, followed the scene for 10 years and seen as hand speed just kept increasing, strategy, meta game, blablabla, a move he makes at a critical juncture in an important game might be as breath taking as watching someone swim upstream a steep river, uncomprehensible. But most of that beauty is lost, to a noob. (Not sure how this last analog is relevant, but I feel it's semi-relevant).