what is the difference between good and bad music

I like some of lrsky's ideas, agree good music should reflect who we are, somehow is connected to our soul. But of course we all have different degrees in soul, roughly said. ..."bad music is annoying" Agree, what we claim as bad grates on our nerves. Though I'm strictly a classical listener, with some world folk interest (as is everyone here I'm sure), there are quite a few classical composers that I don't like and a few that I can't stand. As Lrsky said, its not a matter of hate, its that I'm totally indifferent, and hope never to hear a note from several on my strong dislike list.
We should all decide for ourselves what we are attracted to, that in some way relate us to the world we live in, conects us to something greater than ourselves. My 25 fav classical composers do that. Mozart is one. And I am not sure what Lrsky is saying about Mozart..."Think Mozart's work, and though completely disparate..." What are you saying?
Now among my 25 fav, Beethoven is not at all represented. The 4th sym, only via Bruno Walter is OK, but have no intentions of listening to it. The 3 overtures are also OK, but not in my cd collection. . Mahler is also another I have no interest at all.
I get my Mahler via Shostakovich and Schonberg's early works. In that respect I acknowledge Mahler. But as to his works, I'll pass , no thanks.
At the moment I am suggesting simular ideas over at Gramophone's classical forum. ..That is, should we blindly accept historical traditions, or is it better to first know the composers of the 20th century, after which we can decide which historical composers are meaningful to us. There's hardly anything in the 19th century classical that I find of interest.
"the beholder can be vastly over-rated.....the audience"...is the most important element.
Well that may have been true before the dawn of recorded medium, records, now cds. But I'm afraid its the individual that rules. What the group has established in a historical time reference, is now not so important. We now have a choice to hear at home what we want, and are not limited to the concert hall's offerings, as our previous generations were.
Its the individual that is of of highest importance. The group consciousness will always lag in development. They are the last to "get it".
Now as to modern pop culture, I discovered at least one song i love, heard it on KLSU radio here in Baton Rouge last week, purely luck. It was a Indie music type group here from BR, called Blessed Yes, a song called Trace, a real smash hit (60's brit expression).
btw the group lost in the MTVU's(MTV university) contest this week against 20 other college bands. The winner was obviously from california, student population capital of the US, and got the more votes. I heard a few songs from the winning group. Dull stuff. . Hated it....IMHO the wrong band got the win....and so it goes. The majority rules. I'm afraid.

Good music is every CD in our collection. Bad music is what my parents think of it.

Good/bad music has both a subjective and an objective benchmark.

From a subjective point of view, if the music connects with you, it is good. What somebody else thinks is totally irrelevant. As my favourite audiophile company says; "If it sounds good, it is".

From an objective point of view, there is definitely good and bad music. This is the type of thing you study in a formal music school. Composition is but one example. There would certainly be standards against which Mahler's compositions could be judged. However, even here there is room for interpretation, disagreement and debate. Standards change with time. That's why music history consists of distinct eras. Poor composition according to the standard of one era could in fact be the emergence of a new standard, or it could be the poor implementation of an existing standard. There are certainly standards against which you friend's opinion of Mahler can be benchmarked. It is also possible that your friend is simply giving his subjective opinion, and then trying to give it greater legitimacy by cloaking it with reference to an objective standard, i.e. musical composition and its associated theory.

I am sure that Beethoven is probably "good" and the Sex Pistols are probably "bad" having reference to objective standards. From a subjective point of view, it's your own preference as to which is "good" and which is "bad" and nobody call tell you otherwise.

Your ears.

Kthomas:

I could send you the list of my music collection - it's pretty definitive as to what is good music. Some people disagree with me, but they're just idiots.

That made me burst out in laughter, thanks.

Good music moves the soul and engages the mind. Bad music is annoying, or worse, unimportant to the listener--just as hate is not the opposite of love, indifference is the opposite of 'like' or acceptance in this context.
Think Mozart's work,and though completely disparate, Nat King Cole, Cannonball Adderly, Nancy Wilson, Mundel Lowe, Ella Fitzgerald, Dean, when serious, and now, a current favorite of mine Michael Buble, who is not only talented but a great showman to be so young.
Better recordings don't hurt our impressions of what we perceive to be 'good or bad'.
Music is art--Monet is brilliant if you love deep rich colors--some of the Dutch if you like perceived photo like clarity of some of their facial works, (now, though debatably, done with mirrors and 'tracing'. But who cares, it's marvelous to me.
The beholder can be vastly overrated when it comes to relative taste. But the audience makes these decisions with their money. IMHO

I could send you the list of my music collection - it's pretty definitive as to what is good music. Some people disagree with me, but they're just idiots.

Beauty is truly in the eye (or ear) of the beholder. What moves your heart? I enjoy everything from Miles to The Pixies from Delibes to The Beastie Boys. It runs the gamut at our house. Enjoy!

"Wine, women and song" is an expression that goes well together and, to me, beauty is in the senses of the beholder. Can you really set rules for greatness in any of these categories which are not, in the end, subjective? After all, each is entirely too complex to be absolutely defined or measured.

When I was in the USAF back in 73 I remember argueing the merits of rock vs country music with a co-worker from Texas. After a few discussions that went nowhere he said in his Texas drawl, "if don't say anything about my music, I won't say anything about that shit you listen to." That about sums it up for me.

I like good music. I don't like bad music.

Well, one friend is right and the other is wrong.

Good music sounds good, bad music sounds bad.

I hope that clears things up.:-)