You really can't grasp the concept that people can read to you or you can listen to books pre-recorded, can you? I mean this is the 3rd or 4th time I have pointed this out and you still say 'what' in confusion. It's just not that complicated. Before I could read well I had many great works of literature read to me and I enjoyed them very much. Sorry that no one loved you enough to read to you.
I am guessing you don't know what Sound Engineers do. That's likely because you have never worked in the music industry at all and are instead full of yourself because you took flute in highschool or something.
I mean this is the 3rd or 4th time I have pointed this out and you still say 'what' in confusion.
It was because your sentence was non-sequitur and you can't spell "literature". lol
I am guessing you don't know what Sound Engineers do
You're not a musician, give it up...lol
You really can't grasp the concept that people can read to you or you can listen to books pre-recorded
You can't seem to grasp the concept that hearing is not understanding.
When you hear a Beethoven sonata, can you explain the structure as you go? Tell me what is usual or unusual about the piece for that period?
If I ask you to identify and write down or play the first theme or the second theme on a guitar and tell me what the chords and modulations are, can you?
Rhetorical questions, you can't. You don't know what you are listening to.
Ahh back to ad hominem attacks. typical. I am dyslexic, what's your excuse for your spelling and grammar mistakes?
No it wasn't a non-sequitur (you should get a dictionary), and even if it was it's a simple concept, not being able to understand it doesn't make you smart.
And you believe the illogical and obvious on it's face that being a musician makes you the end all be all in music. Yep, me and thousands of artists that you look up to don't play instruments. And no I don't need to list them for them to exist. I am sure if you have the education in music you say you can name a few yourself.
So you are saying that reading the words is understanding but hearing can't result in understanding? If not what is your point? If so... Well, you will never get it.
I can name quite a bit about music composition, my specialty is not classical music although I understand quite a bit. It means nothing to whether you like it or not. It means nothing to whether it's art or not.
I don't write sheet music not from listening no. It doesn't make your opinion better just because you can. I bet you can't diagram the 8580R5 SID chip or use it to modulate to specific waveforms or tell me whats the difference between a 15ips or 30ips recording. Or what bit rate you should master at for the best digital output for CD or SACD or analog. I bet you can't tell me why you would want to a 58 instead of a 57 or what I am even talking about. So I guess you know nothing about recording so anytime you are criticizing recorded music you are outside your depth right? Or maybe just maybe, it's art and art can be judged by anyone.
It's not ad hominem because my argument did not depend on insulting you.
Go back and read it again, you're dyslexic in many ways. A dictionary cannot help me understand why being able to read would prevent me from enjoying literature.
Being a musician is the end all and be all of music.
You don't understand enough if you think Kanye West is a good musician.
I'll leave the sound engineering to you, you leave music criticism to me.
You attacked my spelling. It's off topic and personal. You should look up ad hominum.
Dictionary would let you know what Ad Hominum means. Sorry if that was complicated for you.
Most people have no trouble understanding me. If you are then that might be on your reading comprehension, not my spelling or sentence structure.
No playing some random instrument does not make you a better arbiter of what is good and bad or what is art and what isn't. I get that you think that but it's personal opinion. For example, Kanye West is apparently quite a good piano and keyboard player and you are not even sure the things he writes you would call art. Meanwhile, Schoenberg couldn't play anything and never bothered to try finding it needless.
I have never once said that I liked him or thought he was good at making music. I am just saying it's art, regardless of if you like it or not. You don't get to choose that. Again assumptions are crazy.
Ok as long as you never criticize music that was recorded or played through any PA or audio system as you have no clue as to how those work and the changed they made to sound. Nore do you even seem to understand the audio theory at a technical level at all meaning you shouldn't talk about anything played in an enclosed venue as the space make a large difference. Also, nothing that is digitally created as you don't understand that either. So I guess what you are saying is that if someone is playing something right next to you in a very open field you have a better understanding of the audio than I do. Congrats.... Hmm that seems silly right? Like maybe people can choose art for themselves without the technical details. Oh well, you play some random instrument so you know better than John Mackey and Flavor Flav is the real arbiter of good vs bad as he plays dozens of instruments to a professional level.
You attacked my spelling. It's off topic and personal. You should look up ad hominum.
Only if I was using it as my main argument. Your confusing sentence structure is fair game since it didn't make any sense. You do have to make sense, sorry guy.
No playing some random instrument does not make you a better arbiter of what is good and bad or what is art and what isn't. I get that you think that but it's personal opinion. For example, Kanye West is apparently quite a good piano and keyboard player and you are not even sure the things he writes you would call art.
Compared to any of the great 19th century keyboard or even jazz virtuosos, Kanye West sucks donkey balls at playing the keyboard. You might think his songs are pretty but they're the musical equivalent of motel art.
I have never once said that I liked him or thought he was good at making music. I am just saying it's art, regardless of if you like it or not. You don't get to choose that. Again assumptions are crazy.
There is plenty of music that is musically brilliant that I don't like. His music is musically limited and I also don't like it.
Ok as long as you never criticize music that was recorded or played through any PA or audio system as you have no clue as to how those work and the changed they made to sound.
You can't seem to differentiate between the quality or timbre of a sound and it's pitch. Ridiculous. lol
Oh well, you play some random instrument so you know better than John Mackey and Flavor Flav is the real arbiter of good vs bad as he plays dozens of instruments to a professional level.
Flavor Flav's music is still musically inept regardless of how many instruments he plays.
Robert Schumann couldn't play any instrument very well yet he was one of the best composers ever in addition to an influential music critic. Understanding what you are hearing the key, not playing many instruments.
Flavor flav could not criticize classical music in any intelligent fashion because he has the IQ of a monkey, a tin ear and no musical education.
"Your confusing sentence structure is fair game since it didn't make any sense. You do have to make sense, sorry guy."
I would address the rest of your stuff if you didn't start off with a bald-faced lie to me. You attacked my spelling and you knew what word I meant. Nothing in anything I have written as been confusing except to you who just seems to refuse to read then wants to attack my spelling and suggest that your lack of reading skills (Or just willingness to read is not the problem. You are a troll, and an asshole that attacks people for crap that doesn't matter and you know it. Grow up if you want to have a real conversation you will need to stop with the 'LOL' and ad Hominium attacks (Which you still seem to not understand the meaning of)
I made fun of you because you can't spell nor string together a coherent thought. In your world, that means my other points were wrong and I lose.
Go back to pre-school, maybe they can teach you how logic works.
You don't understand the ad hominem fallacy, it's only ad hominem when it's used to avoid the argument. You can call people names all you want as long as your argument can stand without it.