In 2006 CBC knew how to appeal to the greaser fans with their Savin Me tribute to the Oilers. I will never get those images out of my head and I will likely never get Nickelback out of my head. Did they ever make it to the airwaves of Guantanamo Bay? Such titles are ridiculous but not all that surprising...home made wine...
I think it would be interesting to try and understand who the Nickleback demographic is...is it young teens who are beginning to make their first forays into buying their own music? (do teens buy music anymore?) Is it 40 something cougars with a thing for the Chad? Is it a mostly blue collar crowd or is Nickleback a white collar band?
I'm sure there are people in the world who think the best meal ever is a super-sized Big Mac combo. Do you really believe their opinion is equally as valid as that of a professional restaurant critic?
That's more or less the type of thinking that almost made Sarah Palin vice president. Every joe is qualified to do anything as well as the expert because we hate all those darn tooting elitists and their incessant need to know about stuff. In fact, the less you know about the subject matter, the more trustworthy you are! Experts are no longer to be trusted, everyone is special and needs to be listened to.
I think it would be interesting to try and understand who the Nickleback demographic is...is it young teens who are beginning to make their first forays into buying their own music? (do teens buy music anymore?) Is it 40 something cougars with a thing for the Chad? Is it a mostly blue collar crowd or is Nickleback a white collar band?
Curtis Glencross said his favorite band is Nickleback!?
From what I see, I think they're a big time blue collar band...and I know back in the day I bought Silver Side Up. Still have it actually. That and Creed's Weathered. So I'd say they're hitting up the middle-ish teenagers and rig pigs.
__________________
Let's get drunk and do philosophy.
If you took a burger off the grill and slapped it on your face, I'm pretty sure it would burn you. - kermitology
That's more or less the type of thinking that almost made Sarah Palin vice president. Every joe is qualified to do anything as well as the expert because we hate all those darn tooting elitists and their incessant need to know about stuff. In fact, the less you know about the subject matter, the more trustworthy you are! Experts are no longer to be trusted, everyone is special and needs to be listened to.
Yeesh. Not to totally derail the thread, but Palin was picked because the Republican'ts didn't have anyone else. Uninformed opinion had nothing to do with it.
__________________
If you don't pass this sig to ten of your friends, you will become an Oilers fan.
Yeesh. Not to totally derail the thread, but Palin was picked because the Republican'ts didn't have anyone else. Uninformed opinion had nothing to do with it.
Oh please, out of 300 million people, that snow yokel was the only choice? Palin was picked for a very specific reason, because she played up to the same "i want my president to be just like me" citizen who voted for George Bush (that and she was a semi attractive woman), something that Mccain was lacking.
Not that my previous post was meant to take this thread in a political direction, but I guess that's what happens when you bring her up.
Yeesh. Not to totally derail the thread, but Palin was picked because the Republican'ts didn't have anyone else. Uninformed opinion had nothing to do with it.
Actually Table5 is pretty on point. Palin was picked in part for her ability to appeal to the common person. There's a reason she was sold as a simple hockey mom, and spent a considerable amount of time criticizing her detractors as nothing more than elitists. People who called her out on policy issues were similarly painted.
In a very weak attempt to tie this to the thread, it's kind of like Nickleback fans calling detractors indie music snobs whose opinion doesn't matter. It's a totally different subject matter though, so a massive reach of a tie-in.
The Following User Says Thank You to valo403 For This Useful Post:
Not being able to define the "true" value of music doesn't mean that false values cannot be discarded. There can be multiple valid and different opinions about something without ALL opinions being valid.
It is a mistake to think that because you cannot definitively choose criteria by which to judge a thing's quality, all judgments are equal. There is such a thing as "informed" opinion and "uninformed" opinion. If I want to buy a "good" car, for example, should I consult my friend the mechanic, or my friend the fashion designer? Surely "good" is subjective, but unless I am only interested in the appearance of the car, the mechanic's opinion is the one that any reasonable person would trust if forced to choose between the two.
In music, "good" is similarly a fuzzy value, but the opinion of a trained musician, critic, or serious student has far more value than your average person on the street. Consensus amongst informed opinion is a good indicator of where truth likely lies; consensus among the uninformed means nothing.
wow, outstanding post. Thanking it simply wasn't enough. Love the notion of 'informed opinion' as a measure of aesthetic value as one way of undercutting the relativist or populist position. I will be sure to use it next time I get into this kind of a discussion.
__________________
The great CP is in dire need of prunes!
"That's because the productive part of society is adverse to giving up all their wealth so you libs can conduct your social experiments. Experience tells us your a bunch of snake oil salesman...Sucks to be you." ~Calgaryborn 12/06/09 keeping it really stupid!
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchHare
It was Resolute, not me, that brought up the hockey analogy.
Clearly some people are better at evaluating hockey players than others, thus we should give their opinions more weight. Likewise, there are people who have more informed and valuable opinions when evaluating the merits of art or music or films or food or anything else "subjective".
You totall missed my point.
Hockey skill is something that can be objectively quantified.
Iginla scores more goals than Glencross, so he's a better player. When players are young it takes a lot of information and experience to figure out what indicates who will be an objectively better hockey player later in their career. So yeah, a pro scout is going to have a much more valuable opinion than me.
As for music, there is no agreed upon objective qualithy that makes one band better than another.
Technical proficiencey is certainly something you could measure, and in that instance, yes someone with more knowledge or experience certainly has a more valuable opinion, but we're not talking about that, we're talking about he subjective quality of "good" music, something that does not always correspond to technical proficiency.
Sure you can say that such and such band can play more challenging pieces, and thus are better, but that is your subjective opinion.
One peson decides that what they think is good music is something that is technically challenging, while others may decide that what they think is good music is something you can tap your toes to, why is one more valuable than the others.
For the record, I hate Nickleback, and listen to a lot of different things that a lot of different people who listen to just as much if not more than me would classify as bad music, that's what makes it subjective.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
Last edited by Bring_Back_Shantz; 12-16-2009 at 05:04 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Bring_Back_Shantz For This Useful Post:
In a very weak attempt to tie this to the thread, it's kind of like Nickleback fans calling detractors indie music snobs whose opinion doesn't matter. It's a totally different subject matter though, so a massive reach of a tie-in.
While a reach, I think its a has been somewhat of a movement in society over the last few years....that the little guy is now just as important as the expert. CNN trusts iReporters and twatters to present their news as much as the seasoned journalist....American Idol contestants are now just as revered as a musician who actually knows how to play an instrument...anyone with access Photoshop can do my job (ok, maybe that's just a personal gripe!). These days the expert has been supplanted by the en-masse knowledge base.
The Following User Says Thank You to Table 5 For This Useful Post:
Oh please, out of 300 million people, that snow yokel was the only choice? Palin was picked for a very specific reason, because she played up to the same "i want my president to be just like me" citizen who voted for George Bush (that and she was a semi attractive woman), something that Mccain was lacking.
Not that my previous post was meant to take this thread in a political direction, but I guess that's what happens when you bring her up.
Yeesh again. Yes, she was the only choice. Please tell me the alternatives. Even the crazy-cons I regularly read couldn't think of a potential VP that had enough cajones to put their political career on the line for McCain.
And please give the "common" man some credit. They didn't vote that imbecile in.
What happens in your world when experts make a wrong decision?
__________________
If you don't pass this sig to ten of your friends, you will become an Oilers fan.
Music is one of the hardest subjective things to judge. Far moreso than movies IMO.
Take Nirvana. They had very little skill in terms of technical guitar abilities or singing abilities, but they sure could write some great music. Even the Beatles in many ways were incredibly simple. Then there are bands like Nickleback that play simple music and suck (at least IMO).
Then take Zeppelin, they had incredibly skilled members who also wrote good music. Then you have Dreamtheater who are skilled but IMO suck at writing good music. Technically skilled music maybe but IMO Nirvana, no matter how much simpler are about 1000x better than Dreamtheatre.
So personally I do believe the hockey analogy fails because skill is not the same as good art.
I also somewhat disagree with Jammies that music students and trained musicians know more about good music than your average Joe. Well, at least I disagree why you think they know good music better.
To me the real difference, and the reason why I think many critics as well as musicians and such, are better at identifying good music is all about experience.
Many people who only listen to Lite 96 or Vibe or even CJ have such a narrow vision of what good music is. They have only experienced the top 40 artists and have no musical horizons.
I think the more understanding of musical history and the more experience a person has with different types of music or different genres is better suited to say whether or not something is a good piece of music.
While a reach, I think its a has been somewhat of a movement in society over the last few years....that the little guy is now just as important as the expert. CNN trusts iReporters and twatters to present their news as much as the seasoned journalist....American Idol contestants are now just as revered as a musician who actually knows how to play an instrument...anyone with access Photoshop can do my job (ok, maybe that's just a personal gripe!). These days the expert has been supplanted by the en-masse knowledge base.
I definitely didn't come up with twatters.....but then I doubt Colbert did either. I'm sure someone though of it about 10 seconds after the site came out.
I definitely didn't come up with twatters.....but then I doubt Colbert did either. I'm sure someone though of it about 10 seconds after the site came out.
Either way, the fact that twatters came up in a Nickleback discussion seems all too fitting.
I think a lot of the hate comes from the fact that we probably hear them more than any other market. Part of the CRTC rules for Canadian music and partly because they are in our own back yard. I know I've been turned off of a lot of stuff because it's been horribly overplayed.
For example, ''Summer of '69'' makes me wanna fill my ear canals with alcohol soaked cotton balls and then light a match.
It's not that any of it is BAD per se. It may not be the most original, and it may be on the poppy end of rock music, but it isn't horrible.
I look at Nickleback as I look at some other rock / Nu Metal bands that are kinda poppy. Disturbed, Linkin Park, etc. Can be fun if your in the mood. Not the most cerebral choice but it has it's place.
I seriously doubt all this hate would be here though if we lived in say Australia or Britain. It's kinda like ripping on your home team. Lots of people find it cathartic, or a way to disassociate themselves from the pack. Like that one grumpy guy you always end up sitting beside who is complaining about the way this person shoots, or that person passes, or the damn PP, but won't get up to cheer a goal or doesn't look happy at the end of a 3-2 win.
Doesn't always make sense, but there's lots of people like that.
The Following User Says Thank You to Daradon For This Useful Post:
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
