Do you differentiate between favourites and bests?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

That is, if you have a favourite album by a band, do you also go as far as saying that it's their best album as well? Or do you make a distinction between the two?

For instance: I feel that Pet Sounds is the Beach Boys' best album, but my favourite is, uh, let's say Surf's Up. I wouldn't say Surf's Up is their "best" album because, while I might enjoy listening to it more, musically and historically speaking, it's just not as important as Pet Sounds. It never had the same far-reaching impact and isn't going to matter much to anyone in the long run.

I've mentioned this sort of thing to people before and I don't think they ever really understood what I meant. I think most people probably just assume their favourite album is by default the best album, which means you'll occasionally have people say things like "Don't Tell a Soul is the best Replacements album" when in actual fact, it's probably the worst album they ever put out, and the only reason they're saying that it's their "best" is because it reminds them of that time they got in on with some chick in highschool. See.. I'd hate for something like that to come out of my mouth.

If I'm going to tell you what the best of something is, it's not going to be based on some silly sense of nostalgia. It's going to be based on years of studying books put together by dodgy journalists and people who used to write for Rolling Stone, dammit!

Is it just some knee-jerk rockist reaction to think this way or should I just cave in and stop giving out two album titles whenever someone asks the question "what's your favourite album by "?

― may pang (maypang), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:20 (twenty-two years ago)

haha, this is a question.

― RJG (RJG), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:21 (twenty-two years ago)

It's been burning up inside of me for a long time now.

― may pang (maypang), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:22 (twenty-two years ago)

May - see the following threads for possible elucidation:

Taking sides; 'best' vs 'favourite'.
Your Favourite Band vs The Best Band Ever
"It's good... but I don't like it"

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh, and :

'"I like it" and "it's good" are 1) not equivalent statements and 2) not necessarily good partners, even.'
Taking Sides: Objective vs. Subjective

for good measure

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Go on, you know you want to:

Does subjectivity really have a place in a serious argument concerning music?
Are any records better than other records?

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:30 (twenty-two years ago)

This is an important thought to go through any critics mind.
My tastes and my knowledge (or feel) of what quality is are not in total correlation with each other. They do relate somewhat. If I like something a lot it has some sort of quality to it for at least one individual (but almost everything fits in this category). Actual quality is something that is more universal (or cultural).

― A Nairn (moretap), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Define how and why, because I have pursued many avenues of understanding concerning this and all of them lead back to subjectivity. (Not that everything leads back to subjectivity, just aesthetic tastes.)

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Genesis is my favourite band ever (subjective)
Beatles is the best and most important band ever (objective)

Certainly a distinction here ;)

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Geir is insane (objective)
Geir is entertaining (subjective)

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes but Geir, you give no indication of having thought about the issue and specifially your own assumptions. When pushed, you immediately resort to supposedly more explicitly objective words like 'important', 'influential' or 'melodic' and leave no room for the idea that these might not be synonyms for 'best'.

The best I can come up with is that objectivity about such matters is obv. completely unattainable, but that one's best attempt at objectivity is not completely useless, yielding interestingly different value judgements to that obtained by one's idea of pure subjective appraisal.

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 14 January 2004 23:53 (twenty-two years ago)

For example, clearly Nirvana might be the most "important" pr "influential" band of the '90s in many respects, but are they the best? Hell no.

― Gear! (Gear!), Thursday, 15 January 2004 00:04 (twenty-two years ago)

This is a good point which has been discussed at length before but it's always good to keep this distinction fresh in peoples' minds.

― J-rock (Julien Sandiford), Thursday, 15 January 2004 06:56 (twenty-two years ago)

The distinction often comes down to 'enjoyable' vs 'important', doesn't it? People always put their amateur historian's hat on and get thoughtful when thinking about 'importance' cos it neccessarily involves other peoples tastes and also a notion of historical context (influence etc.). One problem I have is that I've never read a 'history of pop' that has remotely convinced me.

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Thursday, 15 January 2004 10:38 (twenty-two years ago)

I remember at school one of the music teachers said that Weather Report were the best band, because they had the best musicians.

But not the most important. And not the most enjoyed.

(Is that what you mean?)

― mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 15 January 2004 10:41 (twenty-two years ago)

The only time I make any distinction is when I'm writing about a record I really like and I know for certain that the reason I like it has to do with a personal tic that doesn't necessarily apply to anyone else. Certain kinds of sounds make me ga ga for very personal reasons & I feel I have a duty to acknowledge my biases in some way.

― Mark (MarkR), Thursday, 15 January 2004 11:18 (twenty-two years ago)

"best" could be fairly specific:
like best looking band, fastest fingered band, most music released band, most sold music, most interesting feeling it give the listener. Some of these are completely calculatable, while others are very subjective. I think absolute quality is something that exists but it is very nebulous for an individual. If some way we could mind meld everyone's minds we could find out. There is the human nature quality and the nurture quality (which depends on what culture one was brought up in)

human nature quality would have to deal with the general psychological effects that the average person would experience, the other is cultual dependant.

e.g. a nice sine wave can be very pretty to everyone.
e.g. going out of tune in a vocal melody could be a very subtlely beautyful move or a awful mistake.

― A Nairn (moretap), Thursday, 15 January 2004 16:15 (twenty-two years ago)

I think that some of the best music criticism I've read deals with reconciling the objective with the subjective. When it comes to pop music, they're irreversibly intertwined. The challenge is to confront a piece of music subjectively, but write about the subjectivity objectively.

Like, I love the Kinks' "Village Green Preservation Society." So fuck you and the "Lola" you rode in on.

― Luigi Vampa (Horace Mann), Thursday, 15 January 2004 16:20 (twenty-two years ago)

But Village Green Preservation Society is the critics favourite!

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 15 January 2004 16:24 (twenty-two years ago)

What?
Okay, I love Face to Face so fuck all y'all.
(eyes shift back and forth, lump grows in throat, as Luigi Vampa comes to grips with the fact that, aside from his self-endowed name, he is not at all the rogue he imagines himself to be.)

― Luigi Vampa (Horace Mann), Thursday, 15 January 2004 16:31 (twenty-two years ago)

When you get down to it "best" in music writing is shorthand for either:

"my personal favorite"

"the personal favorite of most critics"

― Mark (MarkR), Thursday, 15 January 2004 16:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Or better yet, write about music objectionally! Har, har.

― Luigi Vampa (Horace Mann), Thursday, 15 January 2004 16:51 (twenty-two years ago)

or objectionably!

― Luigi Vampa (Horace Mann), Thursday, 15 January 2004 16:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Or objects writing about pop!

Fence Post: "I hate The Strokes"

Lego Spider-man: "I like gabba!"

Kitchen sink: "Oasis are past it!"

― Llahtuos Kcin (Nick Southall), Thursday, 15 January 2004 17:01 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.