|
Rocky Road From Classic Rock to Progessive to hip hop to today's hot new tunes! |
|
|
|
Rocky Road From Classic Rock to Progessive to hip hop to today's hot new tunes! |
|
In Reply to: Re: Well, that's typical... posted by regmac on April 26, 2006 at 08:17:42:
Science is not. Bach, Beethoven, et al produced art not science. As such, there is no available metric to conclusively state whose output was "better." Same goes for rock musicians, jazz musicians, etc. They are all artists. Once may express a preference, may even articulate it exceptionally well, but in the end a preference is a preference.You ruminate over who was or will be more "historically important." Well of course "more historically important" does not equate to "better" in any objective sense of the word. Only subjectively. And of course history itself is subjectively filtered through the biases of the people who write it down.
Who was the better painter Raphael or Picasso? Which style is better? Who's the more historically important? Does it even matter?
We can conclusively state that Einstein's general theory of relativity is better than Newton's law of gravitation. But can anyone conclusively state which one was more historically important?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Art is subjective - meisterkleef 12:45:28 04/26/06 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
