How do you classify bad/good music or musicianship?

[ragingflea002]

The title says it all, but in case you click on random threads, I'll do a recap.
How do you classify bad/good music?
Just explain what makes good/bad music in your opinion.
To me, good music has an overall catchiness and the ability to perform just as well live as the band did on the album. Talent can be displayed through any of the members, and to be fair, every band possesses a certain amount of talent, just some aren't at all impressive. The music has to impress me by having good tone and production throughout, and trying new things that actually sound good is a big plus.
Bad music, to me, is a-tonal jazz. It's basically where every member of the band does their own thing and they just mash it all together. It's supposed to sound the way it sounds: like crap.
I also don't like it when a band uses the same theme in their lyrics over and over, with the exception of concept albums. Linkin Park, for example, doesn't have any originality lyrically, in my opinion, because it always focuses on one thing: a person with emotional issues. It gets boring.
Bad music also is reflected in the musician's live performances. If they perform 5 star material on the album, I expect at least a 4 star performance. If the band's music suffers as a result of them not being tight as a band or them concentrating too much on stage presence, I don't think they're successful as musicians, and so their music on the album comes into question. If they can't perform it live, what made it so they could perform on the record? Most likely, excellent production and numerous takes.
So, what makes good music and musicianship, and what makes bad music and musicianship to you?

[ChrisFox]

You're opening a huge can of worms right now! haha..

I've been getting away from lyrical music as of late. Maybe it's because piping has exposed me to a kind of music that needs no lyrics, but I guess I've just lost interest in songs where the musician says what they feel instead of expressing it. (Yeah, lyrics are expressive too, but it's not quite the same thing for me..) There are a few exceptions, though, some with well-written lyrics that have some sort of message that I enjoy... etc.

My views on good musicianship:

First and foremost, you have to know your music. You don't necessarily have to know every little tiny detail of every bit of music ever invented, but the more you know the more you can do with it, and the more you can do with music....you see where this is going.

Second, you have to be able to play your instrument(s) well. Even if you are the most entertaining, have the best possible timing and expression, all of that is lost in bad technique.

Third, but certainly not last or least, you have to be able to entertain your audience. If you're an a-tonal jazz musician and you can entertain your a-tonal jazz music listeners, then you are in the running for good musician. (But PLEASE don't get me started on Rufus Harley!!!)
_________________
"I've got a sticky Darodo!"
"You might want to see a doctor about that."
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v245/kaymando/gandyhands.jpg[/img]

[ragingflea002]

Instrumental music can be difficult to make appealing. Rush's "YYZ", for example, will appeal to people who are proficient in drums, bass, and guitar, but probably not to those who don't understand time signatures or how much skill it takes to play bass, guitar, and drums as Rush do.
Liquid Tension Experiment is similar, only they play instrumental progressive heavy metal, which is really interesting. It's the same concept, however.
Their live musicianship is what really makes it interesting, though. Geddy Lee can make bass look like it's easy and fun or grueling and challenging.
I agree on knowing your music. You at least need to be able to disect your influences in your particular instrument. For instance, my greatest influence on guitar is Tom Morello, who can shred using hyperpicking, and not conventional hammer-ons and pull-offs. He also uses a limited amount of effects, as well as a killswitch that he uses in such songs as "Know Your Enemy" and "Sleep Now in the Fire".
I know a bassist who will disect every single bass influence he's ever had. Jaco Pastorius, Geddy Lee, Tim Commerford, his father, etc.
I think that people will appreciate talent if you can do some nice time signature work. For example, Speria, a band that hails from Syracuse, is alternative emotional hardcore, but with a few twists:
- they focus on happier emotions, as opposed to general emo.
- they are all exceptionally talented in their instruments, especially their guitarist/vocalist who can play complicated riffs and fills while singing. Their bassist is, in a word, insane. Their drummer can drum quite well, and is responsible for the thing that makes them stand out most, which brings me to...
- they will use the weirdest time signatures in a way that makes their sound work 100%. It flows together perfectly.
What makes the best music and musicianship, in my opinion, is the ability to do what Speria does and really do complicated work while having loads of fun. It shows that you, as a musician, are exceptionally talented and you are no n00b. It also shows how tight you are as a band, and that's what matters most for the band in the long run.

[LunaticCrow]

If it sounds bad it's bad. The opposite goes for good.
_________________
[img]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c296/lunaticcrow/goodnight.jpg[/img]

[ChrisFox]

[quote]If it sounds bad it's bad. The opposite goes for good.[/quote]

Personal taste and good music/musicianship are two incredibly different things. If you hear something and it sounds bad to you, that doesn't necessarily mean it's bad music, or that the musician didn't know what they were doing. Same goes for good--if it sounds good to you (or me.. whoever..) it doesn't necessarily mean it's good music.

***
Unfortunately, instrumental music [i]is[/i] hard to make appealing to the great 'unwashed masses,' as they say. But I think that has less to do with the music itself, and much much more to do with the music industry telling people what's good and what isn't.

You don't have to be a musician to appreciate good instrumental music on one level, but being a musician does help to appreciate it on a different level (if that makes any sense at all..). For example, I don't expect a non-piper to be in absolute awe of Roddy MacLeod's playing ability, rock solid tone, expression, and tuning, but I would be a little worried if they (provided they could at least tolerate bagpiping) didn't enjoy one of his recitals.
_________________
"I've got a sticky Darodo!"
"You might want to see a doctor about that."
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v245/kaymando/gandyhands.jpg[/img]

[LunaticCrow]

It's not rocket science, it's organized sound. I think that debating this isn't nessiary at all.

Good music requires talent and skill. The end.
_________________
[img]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c296/lunaticcrow/goodnight.jpg[/img]

[Sephir0th666777]

Or at least pure originality.

Sex Pistols were awful, but they still have a strong following 30 years later.
_________________
[img]http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/Sephir0th666777/mercy.jpg[/img]
Red_Quatre:Who's the guy that says "Get over here!" and then grabs you.
Blad: A rapist

[LunaticCrow]

( ﾟ ヮﾟ) Well, yeah. Faust was original, too. As was Psychic TV. Good is subjective, quality can be considered the same through an individual's interperatation.

You know, the Beatles were good~
_________________
[img]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c296/lunaticcrow/goodnight.jpg[/img]

[ragingflea002]

[quote]Good music requires talent and skill. The end.[/quote]
So do you like all bands that display talent and skill?

[LunaticCrow]

"Personal taste and good music/musicianship are two incredibly different things. "~
_________________
[img]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c296/lunaticcrow/goodnight.jpg[/img]

[ragingflea002]

[quote]"Personal taste and good music/musicianship are two incredibly different things. "~[/quote]
Ah, shit. Overlooked that one. Lemme try...
While they are two incredibly different things, one can determine the other for some people. They may be different, but to some, they are both relevant.
So, in your personal tastes, what do you look for?

[ChrisFox]

My personal taste--good fingers, good expression, and a well-tuned bagpipe!
_________________
"I've got a sticky Darodo!"
"You might want to see a doctor about that."
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v245/kaymando/gandyhands.jpg[/img]

[ragingflea002]

I look for a clear guitar tone, a bassline that doesn't simply echo the guitar chord root note, steady and clean drums, and a singer who knows his/her limits.
Distortion tone on guitar/bass has to be crisp and clear.
Clean tone on guitar has to be determined by the style of music and the guitar used.

[anti_sk8r]

IMO: good music = what sounds good to you. If you're talking about quality than you have to take away all the effects and editing that the Producers do and look at the musician(s) talent-wise. Can they pull a Comfortably Numb solo on a dime-turn or do they use the same three chords over and over again (Green Day, anyone?)
_________________
Smoking cigarettes can reveil hidden laser traps. This message brought to you by Marlboro.

NOT CHANGING THIS SIGNATURE UNTIL THE RELEASE OF NINTENDO WII!...wait. Its here? OMG! SWIIT!

[ragingflea002]

[quote]IMO: good music = what sounds good to you. If you're talking about quality than you have to take away all the effects and editing that the Producers do and look at the musician(s) talent-wise. Can they pull a Comfortably Numb solo on a dime-turn or do they use the same three chords over and over again (Green Day, anyone?)[/quote]
Green Day was good at what they did during their "Dookie" days, though.
Also, Billie Joe can shred. He just doesn't. Live, they're apparently amazing.
Also, your solo thing isn't a good analogy or whatever. No one will care if you can play a "Comfortably Numb" solo. They'll care if you can improvise, which is also an excellent trait of a good musician. Improvisation.

[anti_sk8r]

Improvisation. I assume you mean by creating variations on melody because that's what musical improvisation is. Quality is the excellence of music. That's what I was speaking of. And considering you're argument was "No one cares about solos. People say they play good live. They can improvise." Unfortunately, you can improvise and still have low-quality music. If you play guitar than I assume that you read TABs. If you do that than you can plainly see that Green Day is neither quality nor improvisational. Just because you can play catchy music does not make it improvisational. And thats what Green Day's success is riding on. Because, as I mentioned before, they've been playing the same way since the beggining.

P.S. I've seen Green Day live. It's highly overated.
_________________
Smoking cigarettes can reveil hidden laser traps. This message brought to you by Marlboro.

NOT CHANGING THIS SIGNATURE UNTIL THE RELEASE OF NINTENDO WII!...wait. Its here? OMG! SWIIT!

[ragingflea002]

[quote]Improvisation. I assume you mean by creating variations on melody because that's what musical improvisation is. Quality is the excellence of music. That's what I was speaking of. And considering you're argument was "No one cares about solos. People say they play good live. They can improvise." [/quote]
Excuse me? I never said anything about Green Day improvising.
I said that no one cares if you can play the solo to "Comfortably Numb" or if you can play the solo to "Crazy Train" in the long run. They'll care that you can make your own kickass solo, riffs, fills, basslines, whatever. It shows that you have quality as a musician. The tightness of the band + improv. should feel as though they knew what was going on all along. It shouldn't feel like a bad roller coaster.
[quote]Unfortunately, you can improvise and still have low-quality music. If you play guitar than I assume that you read TABs. If you do that than you can plainly see that Green Day is neither quality nor improvisational. [/quote]
I can read tabs, as well as sheet music. The tabs won't tell you if the song is quality. It'll give you an idea of how the song sounds. Not necessarily quality.

[Zekk]

I qualify good/bad music by my personal tastes. If I like a song, its good in my eyes. I never judge music by the talent of the musician, I mean look at kUrDt KoBaIn (Kurt Cobain, I like the spelling that one record company used better...) His guitar and voclas suck, but its just got something that draw's people in.

[ChrisFox]

[quote] I never judge music by the talent of the musician, [/quote]

And this is why the music industry is killing good music.
_________________
"I've got a sticky Darodo!"
"You might want to see a doctor about that."
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v245/kaymando/gandyhands.jpg[/img]