sunwolf
-
Posts
329 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by sunwolf
-
-
So basically you're saying that you have no original opinions? That you're a follower and conformist? Well these people usually are lazy, but I personally have no problem spending 2 whole minutes to type up a post which will hopefully lead to higher enlightenment of others who have an open mind.if you just wait long enough on this forum you do not need the time to post your opinion,
in max 48 hours someone will do and you can just quote +1,
-
It is better to hate than to feel nothing at all. :clapping: And no, I don't hate psytrance, but neither does me posting negatively towards certain people or ideas suggest that I do.i think sunwolf is a psytrance/psytrance.org hater
81 posts wasted on negativity! 
-
This analogy is off though. Here:john likes cupcakes. john rates cupcakes from warehouse A 4 stars, cupcakes from warehouse B 3 stars & cupcakes from warehouse C 5 stars. john then gathers alot of recipes for cupcakes & tries them out. out of all these recipes he keeps only his favourites, ofcourse only the ones he rates 5 stars he will share with his friends since he has plenty & sees no need to share the other ones.
frank likes cupcakes. frank rates cupcakes from warehouse A 3 stars, cupcakes from warehouse B 4 stars & cupcakes from warehouse C 3 stars. frank tries out john's cupcake recipes & gives them 3 stars aswell. frank does not understand why john would rate these cupcakes 5 stars & says john should be a bit more consistent in his cupcake-rating 'coz despite taste being fully subjective, you need to be "objective" in your ratings. frank says that eventhough john offered only his favourite cupcakes he is not allowed to call them his favourite 5star cupcakes.
Joe tried making his own muffins and tweaked his recipe for a few months. Joe then baked some muffins and compared them to those from warehouses A, B, and C. Joe was thinking about not releasing his muffins because he thought they were only "mildly good", 2/5. However Fred, another muffin critic, tasted Joe's muffins and really loved them. Fred rated them as 4/5 and convinced Joe to commence mass production. Joe agreed because, after all, there's no reason he should have to produce the greatest muffins on the planet before he released them.
Joe decided that his muffins were only a 2/5 compared with the others because he applied an "objective" or consistent rating system to them, the one that he always used to rate muffins with before he started making them himself. Should he rate his muffins on muffinratings.com as 2/5 or 5/5? The latter may help his sales. Should he apply his subjective muffin rating system "objectively", or should he be biased towards certain muffins (ie. his own) and rate them via different standards (ie. who made them, rather than what they taste like)?
My use of the term "objective" is perfectly valid here and I'm in no way suggesting there's an absolute muffin rating system of the universe, merely that there is an absolute muffin rating system used by Joe.
I hope you can understand this now that we've reduced the scenario to language comprehensible by an eight year old.
-
Learn the subtleties of english language then maybe you won't take my posts out of context.semantics
-
Of course objectivity doesn't exist. Did you not see the quotation marks around it?nice one, are you trying to convince us that objectivity & subjectivity are one & the same? that eventhough our standards are purely subjective we must still be "objective" about them?
it's music man, it's personal. "objectivity" does not exist.
What I meant in that case by "objectivity" is basically consistency.
-
Haha I received my order from this guy from awhile ago...
Apparently to him Mint/Mint and "brain new cd still sealed" = unsealed with multiple scratches on the CD.
-
Everyone has their own standard for music just as they have their own standard for washing machines. Only for washing machines a group of people get together and create international standards that get enforced by law whereas our music standards remain subjective and personal.Being objective and comparing to others? Standards? Well, you can rate a washing machine by a standard, EU has a few standards depending on how much the washing machine spends electricity, how loud it is, how effective it is etc..
There's no such thing as a 'standard' for music.
What a load of shit. A much better example: The artist could think someone else's music is more emotional than his and try to add some more emotion to his. This doesn't involve copying any specific element of the other guy's music, but he is comparing his own to the other guy's via his own standards (emotions). He could be comparing for creativity or complexity or whatever else he values in music.What you're refering to is generalization of music, something which should be avoided. You think other artists and record labels are trying to achieve the same 'standard' as the 'competitor'? What a load of baloney. We're not dealing with cars here, it's music. Sure an artist and a record label will do it's best to improve themselves and their music. But if an artist is making an album and then comparing it to other commercial albums and thinking "that commercial album sounds a bit better, hmmm, what should i do? That album has alot of bass, my doesnt. I know, I'll put more bass in mine too!", then you'll end up with a copycat artist.
I've never advocated anything more than personal ratings. Only consistency amongst your personal ratings if you want to be taken seriously.And stop caring about ratings anyway, there's samples to listen to and ultimately you can buy the album, then make your own opinion about the 'rating' of the music inside.
Good for you, rebel. I happen to think ratings are quite useful sometimes. If I share similar personal rating system on music as person X and they rate music highly I'm probably going to want to check it out. If some unknown person rates something 1/5 or 5/5 that means very little to me.Or just be blind (or better yet, deaf) and follow the ratings system, not taking your own experience into equation. Conclusion: FUCK RATINGS
-
You only listen to the best releases in general I imagine?if an artist doesn't give a 5/5 to his music, i'd rather not hear that release.....my 2 cents
-
If this is true then they shouldn't rate it IMO (or they will look bad for rating it). However I have seen people rate their own releases fairly before, so it is not always true that someone must rate everything 5/5 just because they released it. It is possible to be "objective" about it and compare your releases with others' and rate them according to the same standards you would when comparing two releases by others.oh do shut up already. If a label releases music they do not 100% believe in, then they should stop as a label. And believe me I believe that most labels really do love what they releases, even if its crap to our ears...
-
What an ironic post.....................
-
I've shown you the inconsistencies in his opinion. I have no intention of trying to make you adopt you my superior opinion.Sunwolf, why is your opinion right and Basilisks wrong? convince me (seems like that is your mission and I'm sure you could go on for a few pages).
I don't see any reason why they would only release 5/5 material. Perhaps you could present an argument?Do you think small independent labels release anything that in their view is less then great?
-
They still represent subjective values on a subjective criteria.Once again you are assuming that these ratings represent objective values, that a releases IS a 3/5 or a 1/5 for example. But there isn't one correct answer when it comes to making a value judgement about music. We aren't solving equations here! Ratings are for fun; they are something to talk about, they are a rough guideline to how influential, inspiring, or interesting a release is, or perhaps something else entirely given how the system works.
Right... I quote something by you and your response is basically "no, you said that"?That's your logic, not mine.
You have indeed stated how you "feel". You also tried to back this up but I pointed out how it was irrational. Can you back it up properly or just reassert how you feel?I've already stated that I feel that voting for your own stuff is not at all like trashing the work of your "competitors." On one hand we have enthusiasm... and on the other, vindictiveness.
Ad hominems have no place here.But I can see why a jaded old sod like yourself might confuse the two.
-
Maybe, but this is irrelevant to my point. If I don't like Suntrip I should rate them 1/5 by the aforequoted logic from Basilisk.Rubbish. Labels don't "compete" like that; if you look at any psytrance label's website, chances are you'll find a load of links to other labels which put out similar music. Especially since many of the artists release music under several different labels.
-
Asia 2001 - Ra
-
It is still at the expense of others just to a lesser extent. Rather than yours looking 5/5 and theirs 1/5, yours is 5/5 and theirs, say, 3/5. In reality both may be 3/5 for an easy example.Sure, but it isn't at the expense of anyone else--that's the critical difference.
If I were a competing label I wouldn't like Suntrip's releases and I wouldn't support them... so by this logic I should rate them all 1/5.Look at what ratings are for: they give you an idea of how well people like a release and how much support it has.
Enthusiastic enough to want to rate it fairly, or to try and portray it as a higher rating than you likely think it actually deserves? In other words: enthusiastic to make money or enthusiastic about producing music.Anyone involved in the production of a release is probably going to be quite enthusiastic about it... why put a damper on that?
This is a completely different topic.You think there is some hope that publicly-accessible ratings systems on the web can be an accurate scientific measure of something? That would be absurd.
-
This rationale is quite retarded. By rating your stuff up and everyone else's fairly you're still doing it "just to make your stuff look better".Rating is not a science. For me, the only etiquette that really applies is this: rate your own stuff up if you want, but don't go and rate everything else down just to make your stuff look better.
-
He sends this shit over and over, I have said no thanks & ignored many.
Plus the way he words this, he sounds like a retard trying to flatter me.
"if you are real collector show me....
i can take care good of you[r money]."
...
[here is all my overpriced shit that's on your wantlist]
...
"if you buy all shipping will be free and registrated ....plus i can add some free magazines/nice stickers/free 3 cd's ...." (If I buy all at a huge loss he'll send me some stickers... YAY!)
...
"Big respect"
-
Anoebis makes it clear that 3/5 is good and 4/5 is great to him. It's not that he has to rate it 5/5 or it's shit (some people rate this way mind you!).off course you judge your own cd maximum,
selling a cd and rating it 1/5 would be very stupid
ever seen a store with a sign @ the entrance "this store sucks"
Quoted for stupidity & paranoia (are you a noob?).Quoted for trolling
I agree that rating everything 5/5 that clearly isn't 5/5 makes you look like an dumbass out to inflate your ratings. I've seen people rate their own things properly before though. In this case I'm slightly disappointed as Anoebis' ratings for everything other than his own releases are usually good.My point is you just... don't rate your own releases and creations. 5/5 makes you seem like a dickbag, 1/5 just makes you seem stupid. Better keep your fingers off the rate button.
-
Wait... so he's just listing what was released in what year? Most people here probably know all this and more. It may be useful to someone who doesn't know anything about goa trance though.
-
I got sick of his stupid solicitations, wonder if he'll keep sending them or not.
Re: hello from kagdila records
sent by kagdila74 to ************ on 20-Aug-08 07:31 PM
fuck you as well.
On 08/20/08, 05:30PM, ************ wrote:
Stop sending these me stupid messages I'm not buying your overpriced shit.
Fuck off.
No respect,
************
On 08/19/08, 09:09PM, kagdila74 wrote:
hi there ,
i hope you doing well !!!
i just read your profile and i found i have some things from your want list you might intresting in all of them are rare stuff....
if you buy all shipping will be free and registrated ....plus i can add some free magazines/nice stickers/free 3 cd's ....
if you are real collector show me....
i can take care good of you.
here is the list i found:
Emuna - Emuna (BNE - Brand New Entertainment)
Asia 2001 - Trance (High Note Records)
Various - Fill Your Head With Phantasm Vol. 6 (Phantasm Records)
Joking Sphinx - A La Recherche De La Banane Pyramide (POF Music, Labels)
Various - Psy-Harmonics Vol. 2: Dancing To The Sound Of The Sun (Psy-Harmonics)
Deeper In Zen - Balance (Soular Records)
AΣIA 2001* - Strange World (Trans'Pact Productions)
Slide - Unstable (Transient Records)
Check my discogs: http://www.discogs.com/user/kagdila74
Big respect
Shu-ki@kagdila
-
I rated this 4/5. Nice acidic melodies. The Japan EP with the original Zoa and the Zoa remix is 5/5 IMO. Zoa 1996 is still good but doesn't compare.
-
I love the track Gummi. Yes, it's somewhat minimal, but so what -- this automatically means it's crap?!
I'm sure I've heard tracks with less layers before, these ones are just well concealed! Unfortunately I've never heard the original of Kante so I can't comment. -
Transwave - Code S9
Dimension 5 - Omega Centaurus
Brain Accent - Orange Acid
...
..
.
-
Tripticon - The 7th Portal
Someone seems a Suntrip hater
in General Psytrance
Posted
PS - Sorry for quadruple post.