alright, here's the deal guys: as i type this post, i hold high hopes that some of you might actually think twice about what i'm saying. the internet is destroying one of the greatest parts about music (not to mention all forms of art in general), which is the subjectivity of its appeal. every single youtube video of a song turns into a massive war of comments between those who compare the artist to other "better" artists, those who think the artist is "the best ever!," and those who are on somewhat of a middle ground or feel similarly to me on this subject. what the fuck is up with this? when a musician creates a song, or an artist a piece... it isn't meant to be enjoyed and revered by everyone. the artist might aspire to appeal to everyone, but the reality is that it'll never happen. the point is, music isn't a god damn game. there isn't supposed to victory, triumph, or defeat involved. while some musicians may achieve levels of talent, originality, and creativity that some will never reach, it doesn't need to be recognized so blatantly and so frequently. sure, eric clapton is better than *insert crappy guitarist here*. fine. as long as the difference in musical ability between two artists being compared is immediately obvious to literally 100% of the population, then maybe there's a reason to argue with somebody (if they're making a ridiculous claim). but what i'm seeing, more and more all the time, is people getting into these massive, lengthy, drawn out, ultimately INSOLVABLE arguments about whether Jimi Hendrix is better than Eric Clapton. whether Tupac Shakur is better than Notorious B.I.G. My point is, once you reach a certain level of blatantly recognizable talent in music, why argue? Why can't everybody just appreciate that an artist is extremely talented? it has to turn into a competition. and thus, one of what i consider to be the most important parts of art is being slowly destroyed. art is expression. expression should not, and cannot be compared. like i said though, it's only fair to tolerate some level of comparison between artists and such-- because it's only natural. but the more of these petty arguments i saw, and the hostility that came from its opposing sides, the more i couldn't help but think: "What dumb fucks. endlessly arguing over something that is entirely a matter of opinion." and i'm sure some of you are reading this, thinking "Well to a certain extent, talent can be measured. technical ability, etc etc." And to you i say this: yes, you are correct. to some extent, talent can be measured. but it's never a calculation. nothing is ever exact. plus, most of the time, when someone claims "X artist is better than Y artist," they are merely taking into account their own interest in X, against their diminished interest in Y, and concluding that therefore X must be better than Y. i don't know. there are a million things someone could say to refute a great many of the points i've made here. but the point of this thread is basically to say: when it comes to music... stop arguing. unless it's absolutely rational, necessary, and called for. for example, if someone claims something like "Blink 182 is better than Led Zeppelin," then there might be some debate in order. but even then... if somebody loves Blink 182 so much that they think they're better than Led Zeppelin... what the hell. let em be. anyway... i could ramble on endlessly about all this stuff... but I think i've gotten my main points across. /end rant.