Mr. Wonder Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Obviously.. Depth ain't black and white sis. I need you to understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyna ♔ Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Depth ain't black and white sis. I need you to understand that. Yes it is, sis. Depth meaning emotional root and value. Long lasting. It also depends on how much of the catalog is filled with candy and how much is filled with truth. What may help your argument is that people can approach it different ways. Personal situations versus global situations. "Special" versus "State of the World". But regardless, there are cases where it's a unanimous vote and some just don't have depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janet.1814 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Yes it is, sis. Depth meaning emotional root and value. Long lasting. It also depends on how much of the catalog is filled with candy and how much is filled with truth. What may help your argument is that people can approach it different ways. Personal situations versus global situations. "Special" versus "State of the World". But regardless, there are cases where it's a unanimous vote and some just don't have depth. it's not depth if ur told what to sing and how to sing it. since when is candy not depth? Son of a Gun, Trust A Try, You, Together Again....those are all pop and touch on serious subjects Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyna ♔ Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 it's not depth if ur told what to sing and how to sing it. since when is candy not depth? Son of a Gun, Trust A Try, You, Together Again....those are all pop and touch on serious subjects Let go of the Britney/Whitney ish. You won't win that. If anybody, Brit is told what to do more than anybody in the business. You mistake candy for genre. Pop/face-paced songs can have just as much depth as a slow/orchestral song. The depth is in the lyrics and the delivery, not in the instrumental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janetDAYZ Posted July 26, 2011 Author Share Posted July 26, 2011 Let go of the Britney/Whitney ish. You won't win that. If anybody, Brit is told what to do more than anybody in the business. You mistake candy for genre. Pop/face-paced songs can have just as much depth as a slow/orchestral song. The depth is in the lyrics and the delivery, not in the instrumental. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The fucking nerve +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*~WhitePicketDreams~* Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I'm still hung up on sis saying Brit has dept.....and more than Whitney....and she writes her own songs...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janetDAYZ Posted July 26, 2011 Author Share Posted July 26, 2011 I'm still hung up on sis saying Brit has dept.....and more than Whitney....and she writes her own songs...... RIGHT! help that child Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Yes it is, sis. Depth meaning emotional root and value. Long lasting. It also depends on how much of the catalog is filled with candy and how much is filled with truth. What may help your argument is that people can approach it different ways. Personal situations versus global situations. "Special" versus "State of the World". But regardless, there are cases where it's a unanimous vote and some just don't have depth. One's taste in music differs from one person to the next. There is no definite perception of a song that's widely accepted. And to prove my point, Kenny and I just had a small discussion about TA in the "True Life" thread: As you can see Kenny's perception of the TA(DR) is "mourning-in-the-heat", while my perception of the song is more so of the song being a coming to terms with grief (and I believe has more depth that the original track). Clearly the two opinions of the song contrast one another, which is a direct result in different perceptions of a song. Therefore, trying to unify opinions as one in regards to one having depth and another not will never work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyna ♔ Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 One's taste in music differs from one person to the next. There is no definite perception of a song that's widely accepted. And to prove my point, Kenny and I just had a small discussion about TA in the "True Life" thread: As you can see Kenny's perception of the TA(DR) is "mourning-in-the-heat", while my perception of the song is more so of the song being a coming to terms with grief (and I believe has more depth that the original track). Clearly the two opinions of the song contrast one another, which is a direct result in different perceptions of a song. Therefore, trying to unify opinions as one in regards to one having depth and another not will never work. No offense, sis. But that's a pretty bad point. You're comparing instrumentals, not different songs. One version is fast-paced, the other is slow. Yet the lyrics are the same. Both of you still mean Together Again, just which instrumental you preferred. If the instrumental is stripped, you'd both still agree that the song has depth and meaning based on the song itself. You'd also still both agree that Janet has depth as an artist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 No offense, sis. But that's a pretty bad point. You're comparing instrumentals, not different songs. One version is fast-paced, the other is slow. Yet the lyrics are the same. Both of you still mean Together Again, just which instrumental you preferred. If the instrumental is stripped, you'd both still agree that the song has depth and meaning based on the song itself. You'd also still both agree that Janet has depth as an artist. All the more reason why the songs are comparable, coupled with the fact that we weren't discussing two different songs (the TA (DR) ONLY), is all the more reason why the argument is valid. Kenny and I demonstrating contrasting opinions of one song only supports my argument that depth of a song/artist is measured by the listener, not the artist/music themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotboy06 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 :lmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyna ♔ Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 All the more reason why the songs are comparable, coupled with the fact that we weren't discussing two different songs (the TA (DR) ONLY), is all the more reason why the argument is valid. Kenny and I demonstrating contrasting opinions of one song only supports my argument that depth of a song/artist is measured by the listener, not the artist/music themselves. That was one of the most contradictory...nevermind. My argument is that an artist's depth is based on the emotional root and value of their words and how effective they are. Comparing with the same lyrics doesn't prove your case here. It weakens it, because the only thing different is the instruments behind it. Take any candy song like, I'll say, Run the World, since you're very familiar with it. Whether she sang that song, with the same lyrics, in a ballad-tone or the way she did, it would still be a candy song. Together Again isn't a candy song regardless of how you spin it. So it's depth can't be debated. It is a very emotional song, whether it's fast-paced or ballad-tone. Your argument doesn't stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Diva Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 That was one of the most contradictory...nevermind. My argument is that an artist's depth is based on the emotional root and value of their words and how effective they are. Comparing with the same lyrics doesn't prove your case here. It weakens it, because the only thing different is the instruments behind it. Take any candy song like, I'll say, Run the World, since you're very familiar with it. Whether she sang that song, with the same lyrics, in a ballad-tone or the way she did, it would still be a candy song. Together Again isn't a candy song regardless of how you spin it. So it's depth can't be debated. It is a very emotional song, whether it's fast-paced or ballad-tone. Your argument doesn't stand. SNATCH him out the game, sis! :excited: +1 :lmao: :lmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyna ♔ Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 SNATCH him out the game, sis! :excited: +1 Thank you, bro! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 That was one of the most contradictory...nevermind. My argument is that an artist's depth is based on the emotional root and value of their words and how effective they are. Comparing with the same lyrics doesn't prove your case here. It weakens it, because the only thing different is the instruments behind it. Take any candy song like, I'll say, Run the World, since you're very familiar with it. Whether she sang that song, with the same lyrics, in a ballad-tone or the way she did, it would still be a candy song. Together Again isn't a candy song regardless of how you spin it. So it's depth can't be debated. It is a very emotional song, whether it's fast-paced or ballad-tone. Your argument doesn't stand. Nothing in my argument was contradictory, but +1 for trying. Also, Kenny and I weren't discussing tow diferent songs, we were only talking about the "Deeper Remix" of TA. We weren't comparing TA and the DR. So that's where you fumbled on the play. The fact that you continue to use the phrase "emotional root and value" is counterproductive to your entire argument and essentially reinforces mine. The emotional value of a song, once again, is contingent upon the listener. What one perceives as a whiny ballad, someone else will perceive the same song as heartfelt and full of depth. The fact that your argument suggests that the musical tastes of a population is a plateau leads me to believe that you will never understand what I'm saying. Another example: I posted THIS video, and asked if Coldplay's music is whiny bullcrap (as stated in the video). Peter "thinks" Coldplay's music is whiny bullcrap. However, TE responds with: Not at all, but I can see how people could perceive them as gloomy or soft. His opposing opinion supports my claim that depth (or music in general) is contingent upon the listener, and the interpretation of the lyrics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Thank you, bro! Poor Austineisha...always getting SNATCHED by one of us. That is when we aren't playing tug of war with his wig... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyna ♔ Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Nothing in my argument was contradictory, but +1 for trying. Also, Kenny and I weren't discussing tow diferent songs, we were only talking about the "Deeper Remix" of TA. We weren't comparing TA and the DR. So that's where you fumbled on the play. The fact that you continue to use the phrase "emotional root and value" is counterproductive to your entire argument and essentially reinforces mine. The emotional value of a song, once again, is contingent upon the listener. What one perceives as a whiny ballad, someone else will perceive the same song as heartfelt and full of depth. The fact that your argument suggests that the musical tastes of a population is a plateau leads me to believe that you will never understand what I'm saying. Your claims actually re-enforce mine. You're tap dancing around what I'm saying without committing to agreement. TA(original) and the Deeper Remix are THE SAME SONG. Just a different instrumental. Like I said to janet.1814, regardless of whether a song has a pop/fast-paced instrumental or is sung in a ballad-style, if the lyrics and artist's passion in it have depth, then the song will have depth. Rhythm Nation versus Heal the World-one is slower yet both have depth; Freakum Dress versus Kitty Kat-one is slower yet neither have depth; then the obvious when the SAME SONG but DIFFERENT INSTRUMENTALS are compared with Together Again, the song STILL has depth, regardless. There are SOME songs where emotional meaning can be debated, like the argument I had with Art a while back over Michael's song "The Lost Children". She saw no depth, I did. But the truth is, if the majority of an artist's work has depth and they continue to show depth in at least a solid portion of their music, then the artist has depth. If not, then the artist HAS NO DEPTH. Opinions in SOME cases can differ, but with the majority of cases, there IS unanimous vote. Also, Seth Green is your go-to guy for that? He is always fucking with people. Really? I'm sorry, honey. This won't end in your favor. Poor Austineisha...always getting SNATCHED by one of us. That is when we aren't playing tug of war with his wig... He's gonna get you for that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Your claims actually re-enforce mine. You're tap dancing around what I'm saying without committing to agreement. TA(original) and the Deeper Remix are THE SAME SONG. Just a different instrumental. Like I said to janet.1814, regardless of whether a song has a pop/fast-paced instrumental or is sung in a ballad-style, if the lyrics and artist's passion in it have depth, then the song will have depth. Rhythm Nation versus Heal the World-one is slower yet both have depth; Freakum Dress versus Kitty Kat-one is slower yet neither have depth; then the obvious when the SAME SONG but DIFFERENT INSTRUMENTALS are compared with Together Again, the song STILL has depth, regardless. There are SOME songs where emotional meaning can be debated, like the argument I had with Art a while back over Michael's song "The Lost Children". She saw no depth, I did. But the truth is, if the majority of an artist's work has depth and they continue to show depth in at least a solid portion of their music, then the artist has depth. If not, then the artist HAS NO DEPTH. Opinions in SOME cases can differ, but with the majority of cases, there IS unanimous vote. Also, Seth Green is your go-to guy for that? He is always fucking with people. Really? I'm sorry, honey. This won't end in your favor. His poor wig... Why must you snatch it so ruthlessly each time? :lol: He's gonna get you for that I'm not scared of Austineisha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyna ♔ Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 His poor wig... Why must you snatch it so ruthlessly each time? :lol: I'm not scared of Austineisha. :lol: Well..I don't like being looked down on. Gotta do what I gotta do. He might debate that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 :lol: Well..I don't like being looked down on. Gotta do what I gotta do. He might debate that I understand... I just feel bad for his bald scalp having to be exposed over and over again. :lol: He can debate it, but it won't change the fact that I'm not scared of Austineisha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyna ♔ Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I understand... I just feel bad for his bald scalp having to be exposed over and over again. :lol: He can debate it, but it won't change the fact that I'm not scared of Austineisha. He'll be alright :lol: Well we'll see what he responds to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 He'll be alright :lol: Well we'll see what he responds to that. I'll buy him some more wigs ... for you to snatch off. He won't respond. He knows his place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Your claims actually re-enforce mine. You're tap dancing around what I'm saying without committing to agreement. There is no agreement, though. TA(original) and the Deeper Remix are THE SAME SONG. Just a different instrumental. Understand something, Kenny and I were NOT discussing two different songs when I made that quote. The only song we were discussing was the "Deeper Remix". And I highlighted that sub-argument to illustrate the two opposing perceptions of the song. This is where you keep fumbling on the play sis. Like I said to janet.1814, regardless of whether a song has a pop/fast-paced instrumental or is sung in a ballad-style, if the lyrics and artist's passion in it have depth, then the song will have depth. Once AGAIN, perception of depth are contingent upon the listener. What someone believe is depth, someone may not. Why do you REFUSE to accept this fact??? Rhythm Nation versus Heal the World-one is slower yet both have depth; Freakum Dress versus Kitty Kat-one is slower yet neither have depth; then the obvious when the SAME SONG but DIFFERENT INSTRUMENTALS are compared with Together Again, the song STILL has depth, regardless. This is all OPINION. And opinions differ. There are SOME songs where emotional meaning can be debated, like the argument I had with Art a while back over Michael's song "The Lost Children". She saw no depth, I did. You just contradicted your ENTIRE argument with this line! DEPTH. OF. A. SONG. IS. CONTINGENT. UPON. THE. LISTENER. WHAT. ONE. BELIEVES. IS. DEPTH. ANOTHER. MAY. NOT. Consequently, all of this: But the truth is, if the majority of an artist's work has depth and they continue to show depth in at least a solid portion of their music, then the artist has depth. If not, then the artist HAS NO DEPTH. Opinions in SOME cases can differ, but with the majority of cases, there IS unanimous vote. is irrelevant. Also, Seth Green is your go-to guy for that? He is always fucking with people. Really? I'm sorry, honey. This won't end in your favor. Him fucking with ppl has no bearing on this discussion. And in fact, is an ad hominem fallacy. "This won't end in your favor." Please, you haven't earned your rights to boast sis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyna ♔ Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I'll buy him some more wigs ... for you to snatch off. He won't respond. He knows his place. :lol: I don't think that'll be happening again anytime soon. I think we're on good terms now Oooo control Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.