Funnily enough that’s exactly why I think the Beatles are just mediocre. Literally sticking out was all they needed to do, since literally nothing was good. In this day and age it’s just not good music, even if it might be a classic.
According to my Spotify wrapped I listened to over 400 genres, and 1200 artists last year, so no, I’m pretty positive I don’t have narrow taste, even in the slightest.
Maybe it’s just in this specific case, but if you can’t find any enjoyable music from an entire decade, that’s on you. Unless you want to try and make the case that you’re the only one with good taste and the rest of us are just lowly rubes, which is obviously ridiculous (though I’d probably enjoy the attempt).
But you’re allowed to have narrow taste and it’s not an insult. No need to get offended.
Has nothing to do with narrow taste. And has nothing to do with that decade either. 70s and 50s were terrible as well. When your artist pool is only a few thousand artists that’s what happens. Like, seriously, there’s so few of them that wikipedia has an article of the majority of them.
I’m just trying to understand, do you think that with such a small number of artists that it was even slightly statistically possible that there was a artist from the 60s and 70s that is comparable to a single artist in the top thousand artists in the past 30 years? Like it just doesn’t even make statistical sense, much less any sense if you listen to a lot of music.
I’m not making an argument on taste. I’m making a statistical argument that is backed up by listening.
Funnily enough that’s exactly why I think the Beatles are just mediocre. Literally sticking out was all they needed to do, since literally nothing was good. In this day and age it’s just not good music, even if it might be a classic.
No music in the 60s was good? I think you might just have some very narrow taste.
According to my Spotify wrapped I listened to over 400 genres, and 1200 artists last year, so no, I’m pretty positive I don’t have narrow taste, even in the slightest.
Maybe it’s just in this specific case, but if you can’t find any enjoyable music from an entire decade, that’s on you. Unless you want to try and make the case that you’re the only one with good taste and the rest of us are just lowly rubes, which is obviously ridiculous (though I’d probably enjoy the attempt).
But you’re allowed to have narrow taste and it’s not an insult. No need to get offended.
Has nothing to do with narrow taste. And has nothing to do with that decade either. 70s and 50s were terrible as well. When your artist pool is only a few thousand artists that’s what happens. Like, seriously, there’s so few of them that wikipedia has an article of the majority of them.
I’m just trying to understand, do you think that with such a small number of artists that it was even slightly statistically possible that there was a artist from the 60s and 70s that is comparable to a single artist in the top thousand artists in the past 30 years? Like it just doesn’t even make statistical sense, much less any sense if you listen to a lot of music.
I’m not making an argument on taste. I’m making a statistical argument that is backed up by listening.
The rubes argument was less fun than I expected.