"My taste in music is better than yours"

[QUOTE="ROFLCOPTER603"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] I simply state that there is both an objective and subjective basis for deciding what music is "good" for lack of a better word. Though it appears there are some individuals that cannot distance their subjective opinion to look at a work dispassionately and objectively.GreySeal9

People have opinions on everything, including what is opinion and what is fact. You can never change that, especially on the internet,so why bother? On something like art or music it is almost impossible to change someone's opinion.

But this not about opinion. It is a fact that objectivity is limited to facts and not judgments.

But you're saying that we can judge music objectively, right?That's your opinion, which clearly some other people disagree with.So it is about opinions.They're never going to agree with you so why would you continue arguing. It's better to just walk away and stop wasting your and their time.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="ROFLCOPTER603"]

People have opinions on everything, including what is opinion and what is fact. You can never change that, especially on the internet,so why bother? On something like art or music it is almost impossible to change someone's opinion.

ROFLCOPTER603

But this not about opinion. It is a fact that objectivity is limited to facts and not judgments.

But you're saying that we can judge music objectively, right?That's your opinion, which clearly some other people disagree with.So it is about opinions.They're never going to agree with you so why would you continue arguing. It's better to just walk away and stop wasting your and their time.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="ROFLCOPTER603"]

People have opinions on everything, including what is opinion and what is fact. You can never change that, especially on the internet,so why bother? On something like art or music it is almost impossible to change someone's opinion.

ROFLCOPTER603

But this not about opinion. It is a fact that objectivity is limited to facts and not judgments.

But you're saying that we can judge music objectively, right?That's your opinion, which clearly some other people disagree with.So it is about opinions.They're never going to agree with you so why would you continue arguing. It's better to just walk away and stop wasting your and their time.

Judgments can never be objective because judgments are subjective by their very nature. That is what I am saying.

[QUOTE="ROFLCOPTER603"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

But this not about opinion. It is a fact that objectivity is limited to facts and not judgments.

Nibroc420

But you're saying that we can judge music objectively, right?That's your opinion, which clearly some other people disagree with.So it is about opinions.They're never going to agree with you so why would you continue arguing. It's better to just walk away and stop wasting your and their time.

Exactly. I don't get WTF is so hard to understand about this.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="ROFLCOPTER603"]

But you're saying that we can judge music objectively, right?That's your opinion, which clearly some other people disagree with.So it is about opinions.They're never going to agree with you so why would you continue arguing. It's better to just walk away and stop wasting your and their time.

GreySeal9

Exactly. I don't get WTF is so hard to understand about this.

I found it hard to understand because I read the wrong post and thought you said something that you didn't. But like I said before,some otherpeople don't "understand" this because they have their own opinions, and believe it or not, they are different from yours. Some people will believe exactly what you do, but most won't.If you ignore what I saidabout objectivity, I'mjust trying to say that arguing about something as vague as music is justdumb.

[QUOTE="superfluidity"]

[QUOTE="poptart"]

One person can dismantle a piece of music to the nth degree and critique in a different manner than one who appreciates music on face value, but this appreciation of music on differing levels doesn't devalue the opinion of the latter.

If an artist can only appreciate a high-brow analysis of their work and ignore appreciation solely on the basis of some an intangible 'feel-good' factor, then it sounds to me a typical case of an artist disappearing up their own arse.

poptart

This is truly an anti-intellectual argument. If all opinions about art are equal, you would have to believe that it's an artist's job to communicate clearly to everyone rather than every individual's job to try and reach a greater level of understanding. That's completely backwards in my view and again devalues the work of artists and turns them into mere entertainers.

People who don't really care about art (in terms of how much time and effort they put into experiencing it and learning about it) can have an opinion, and it holds value, but it is (clearly to me) of a lesser value than someone who cares more about art.

I think you're the one intellectualising music as if it's some kind of conceptual art. That's not to say some musicians may attempt to intellectualise their own work and thus expect to garner the kind of critique you so enjoy doing, but really music generally isn't like Tracey Emmett's soiled bed. Do you really thinking music demands a higher level of understanding to be appreciated? Do you think an artist hearing that a person is their greatest fan because all they want to do is get up and dance whenever they hear their music? I doubt it – I think if they can connect on a soulful rather than artistic level then a goal may well have been achieved – it certainly isn't of lesser value because some notion of anti-intellectual superficiality which you seem to think.

The problem with intellectualising and over-analysis is pretty transparent when looking at the variance you see in music reviews. The same goes for art in general. Aphex Twin might be standing behind the decks spinning some sand paper in jest, only for the high-brow audience to turn around and say 'hey man – that was great'. Sure apply whatever depth of analysis you enjoy, but don't be one of those guys that hang around the decks over-intellectualising the latest micro-niche NBT that'll be lucky to shift 500 copies. Don't fight it – just feel it baby :P

I think you would make a good music critic. Your writing is really colorful and you seem to have a good knowledge about music without being rigid about it.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] You cannot make a judgement and call that judgement "objective", it is subjective because your personal opinion comes into play. As such for someone to say "Nickelback is bad" is a subjective statement, simply because it's your personal opinion, and not a fact.ROFLCOPTER603

Exactly. I don't get WTF is so hard to understand about this.

I found it hard to understand because I read the wrong post and thought you said something that you didn't. But like I said before,some otherpeople don't "understand" this because they have their own opinions, and believe it or not, they are different from yours. Some people will believe exactly what you do, but most won't.If you ignore what I saidabout objectivity, I'mjust trying to say that arguing about something as vague as music is justdumb.

It's not vague though. Objectivity has a very clear definition.

BTW, I wasn't talking about you when I said "WTF is so hard to understand about this" since you were not really part of this argument.

[QUOTE="ROFLCOPTER603"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

But this not about opinion. It is a fact that objectivity is limited to facts and not judgments.

Nibroc420

But you're saying that we can judge music objectively, right?That's your opinion, which clearly some other people disagree with.So it is about opinions.They're never going to agree with you so why would you continue arguing. It's better to just walk away and stop wasting your and their time.

Therein lies the problem for if one is critiquing music they are not using personal opinion to judge music.LJS9502_basic

That is impossible. Judgements such as good or bad areopinions by their very nature.

There are standards in music as to what is good and what is not good.LJ

Different people have different standards for what is good or bad, which makes thems subjective. Standards cannot me objective as they are not set in stone and unmoving.

Otherwise the ten year down the street banging on his drums is....by your definition...just as good as a well respected professional drummer.LJ

He never said that. We all think that the well respect drummer is better, but that doesn't mean things that are subjective in nature become objective.

And like I said, whether something is "good" or not is a subjective judgment.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="ROFLCOPTER603"]

But you're saying that we can judge music objectively, right?That's your opinion, which clearly some other people disagree with.So it is about opinions.They're never going to agree with you so why would you continue arguing. It's better to just walk away and stop wasting your and their time.

LJS9502_basic

Good, and Bad are Subjective.

Nothing can be proven to be "Good" or "Bad", those are qualifiers we use to say "i like this" "i dont like this" or in situations where laws are involved "Society deems this as ok" or "Society deems this as wrong"

It's "Good" because people say it is, they say it is because they like it.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"] You cannot make a judgement and call that judgement "objective", it is subjective because your personal opinion comes into play. As such for someone to say "Nickelback is bad" is a subjective statement, simply because it's your personal opinion, and not a fact.Nibroc420

Good, and Bad are Subjective.

Nothing can be proven to be "Good" or "Bad", those are qualifiers we use to say "i like this" "i dont like this" or in situations where laws are involved "Society deems this as ok" or "Society deems this as wrong"

It's "Good" because people say it is, they say it is because they like it.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Therein lies the problem for if one is critiquing music they are not using personal opinion to judge music. There are standards in music as to what is good and what is not good. Otherwise the ten year down the street banging on his drums is....by your definition...just as good as a well respected professional drummer.LJS9502_basic

Good, and Bad are Subjective.

Nothing can be proven to be "Good" or "Bad", those are qualifiers we use to say "i like this" "i dont like this" or in situations where laws are involved "Society deems this as ok" or "Society deems this as wrong"

It's "Good" because people say it is, they say it is because they like it.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

Good, and Bad are Subjective.

Nothing can be proven to be "Good" or "Bad", those are qualifiers we use to say "i like this" "i dont like this" or in situations where laws are involved "Society deems this as ok" or "Society deems this as wrong"

It's "Good" because people say it is, they say it is because they like it.

Nibroc420

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Good and bad are adjectives and they are not always subjective. LJS9502_basic

Classic dodging.

If your statement is true, you should be able to prove it, no?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] Prove it.GreySeal9

Classic dodging.

If your statement is true, you should be able to prove it, no?

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Right after you prove your statement first....

LJS9502_basic

Classic dodging.

If your statement is true, you should be able to prove it, no?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Classic dodging.

If your statement is true, you should be able to prove it, no?

chrisPperson

Brain surgery does not have inherent subjectivity as do opinions on music, so it's a false analogy.

GreySeal9

It isn't a false analogy in the sense that the more one cares about and learns about each subject, the more their opinion about it should matter. The lack of a quantifiable measure of quality doesn't arbitrarily change this.

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] He made the initial statement first so I need his proof before I counter. And if he cannot I have nothing to counter. Bye,LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] He made the initial statement first so I need his proof before I counter. And if he cannot I have nothing to counter. Bye,LJS9502_basic

Good and bad are subjective terms because they are a judgment that can vary among people. Whether something is good depends on whether someone thinks it is good whereas the sun will always rise no matter what someone thinks about it.

Objectivity only deals in facts and fats are impervious to any judgments of any kind. They simply are.

Now why don't you tell me why you think good or bad can be objective terms?

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] He made the initial statement first so I need his proof before I counter. And if he cannot I have nothing to counter. Bye,LJS9502_basic

While there is no universally accepted articulation of objectivity, a proposition is generally considered to be objectively true when its truth conditions are met and are "mind-independent"-that is, not met by the judgment of a conscious entity or subject

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Brain surgery does not have inherent subjectivity as do opinions on music, so it's a false analogy.

superfluidity

It isn't a false analogy in the sense that the more one cares about and learns about each subject, the more their opinion about it should matter. The lack of a quantifiable measure of quality doesn't arbitrarily change this.

It absolutely does change it.

Brain surgery is a concrete prodecure, a musical opinion is abstract. There is no "correct" way to form a musical opinion (no matter how much some people would like to think so), but there's a tanigbly correct way of doing brain surgery.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] That made no sense whatsoever. He wanted you to prove that what is "good" and "bad" is not always subjective. That requires no further context.chrisPperson

While there is no universally accepted articulation of objectivity, a proposition is generally considered to be objectively true when its truth conditions are met and are "mind-independent"-that is, not met by the judgment of a conscious entity or subject

I'd go as far as to say "good" or "bad" are the most subjective terms out there.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] That made no sense whatsoever. He wanted you to prove that what is "good" and "bad" is not always subjective. That requires no further context.Nibroc420

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] He said....."Good, and Bad are Subjective."....and I would like him to prove that first....since he made the initial statement.

LJS9502_basic

This is still an opinion. As such it is subjective.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"] That made no sense whatsoever. He wanted you to prove that what is "good" and "bad" is not always subjective. That requires no further context.chrisPperson

While there is no universally accepted articulation of objectivity, a proposition is generally considered to be objectively true when its truth conditions are met and are "mind-independent"-that is, not met by the judgment of a conscious entity or subject

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] He said....."Good, and Bad are Subjective."....and I would like him to prove that first....since he made the initial statement.

LJS9502_basic

Are you serious?

Of course it is making a judgment. If one says "it was good he wasn't harmed", they are are making a judgment that the outcome was good. One of the guy's enemies might not think that was a good outcome because they don't like the guy.

What if Bin Laden was in the car? One could reasonably say that it was not a good outcome that he wasn't harmed.

The only objective statement would be this "He got into a car accident and wasn't harmed" because it is the only FACT. Thinking that someone not getting harmed is a good thing is not a fact, it is an opinion about what happened.

Just to clarify, I am personally very ignorant about many genres of music. For example, I know very little about classical music, though I do enjoy it. I would never put forward an opinion about what is very good classical music (relative to other classical music) because I simply don't have enough exposure to it to make an informed statement. It would be rediculous and I acknowledge that.

Many people don't show this kind of restraint. Anyone can say they like a particular piece of music, but when one starts stating opinions on quality, they should actually know what they're talking about.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"] They are subjective by definition :| good/go͝od/ Adjective: To be desired or approved of. Approval requires judgement, and we've already determined that judgements cannot be objective.Nibroc420

This is still an opinion. As such it is subjective.

Now I'm starting to think he doesn't even know what an opinion is. :?

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]No. Being good can be objective as well. It is good that he didn't get harmed in the car accident. That is not making a judgment but allowing for a positive or desired outcome. GreySeal9

This is still an opinion. As such it is subjective.

Now I'm starting to think he doesn't even know what an opinion is. :?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"]No. Being good can be objective as well. It is good that he didn't get harmed in the car accident. That is not making a judgment but allowing for a positive or desired outcome. GreySeal9

This is still an opinion. As such it is subjective.

Now I'm starting to think he doesn't even know what an opinion is. :?

[QUOTE="chrisPperson"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] He said....."Good, and Bad are Subjective."....and I would like him to prove that first....since he made the initial statement.

LJS9502_basic

While there is no universally accepted articulation of objectivity, a proposition is generally considered to be objectively true when its truth conditions are met and are "mind-independent"-that is, not met by the judgment of a conscious entity or subject

Do you have a theory that speaks to music since you insist that good or bad is objective in the context of music?

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

This is still an opinion. As such it is subjective.

LJS9502_basic

Now I'm starting to think he doesn't even know what an opinion is. :?

I wasn't talking about your own opinion. Obviously.

I was talking about the fact that you didn't seem to realize that "It's a good thing he wasn't harmed" is an opinion, thereby making it reasonable to assume that you're not clear on what an opinion actually is.

Just to clarify, I am personally very ignorant about many genres of music. For example, I know very little about classical music, though I do enjoy it. I would never put forward an opinion about what is very good classical music (relative to other classical music) because I simply don't have enough exposure to it to make an informed statement. It would be rediculous and I acknowledge that.

Many people don't show this kind of restraint. Anyone can say they like a particular piece of music, but when one starts stating opinions on quality, they should actually know what they're talking about.

superfluidity

It is helpful for them to know what they're talking about. No doubt about that. But I think that if one puts forth a reasonable argument, that should be enough. Any ignorance will show up in the argument they make and then that can be shot down.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

This is still an opinion. As such it is subjective.

LJS9502_basic

Now I'm starting to think he doesn't even know what an opinion is. :?

It absolutely does change it.

Brain surgery is a concrete prodecure, a musical opinion is abstract. There is no "correct" way to form a musical opinion (no matter how much some people would like to think so), but there's a tanigbly correct way of doing brain surgery.

GreySeal9

The quality of art is abstract, but the time and effort that a person puts into learning about it is essentially quantifiable. I've been discussing an individual's ability to judge art, not whether or not correct judgements about art can be made (impossible to know).

What I'm saying is, given a lack of knowledge, one can safely assume that their own qualitative opinion on art is probably wrong, simply due to a lack of information.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

It absolutely does change it.

Brain surgery is a concrete prodecure, a musical opinion is abstract. There is no "correct" way to form a musical opinion (no matter how much some people would like to think so), but there's a tanigbly correct way of doing brain surgery.

superfluidity

The quality of art is abstract, but the time and effort that a person puts into learning about it is esentially quantifiable. I've been discussing an individual's ability to judge art, not whether or not correct judgements about art can be made (impossible to know).

What I'm saying is, given a lack of knowledge, one can safely assume that their own qualitative opinion on art is probably wrong, simply due to a lack of information.

But how do you determine whether an opinion on art is wrong? If someone says, "I think this song is good," how do you objectively prove that it's not a good song?

I do agree with the some of what you're saying. If I wanted an opinion on music, I would probably go to someone who knows something about music. But that doesn't mean their opinions are always more valid, just that they are more likely to be well-supported.

[QUOTE="poptart"]

[QUOTE="superfluidity"]

This is truly an anti-intellectual argument. If all opinions about art are equal, you would have to believe that it's an artist's job to communicate clearly to everyone rather than every individual's job to try and reach a greater level of understanding. That's completely backwards in my view and again devalues the work of artists and turns them into mere entertainers.

People who don't really care about art (in terms of how much time and effort they put into experiencing it and learning about it) can have an opinion, and it holds value, but it is (clearly to me) of a lesser value than someone who cares more about art.

GreySeal9

I think you're the one intellectualising music as if it's some kind of conceptual art. That's not to say some musicians may attempt to intellectualise their own work and thus expect to garner the kind of critique you so enjoy doing, but really music generally isn't like Tracey Emmett's soiled bed. Do you really thinking music demands a higher level of understanding to be appreciated? Do you think an artist hearing that a person is their greatest fan because all they want to do is get up and dance whenever they hear their music? I doubt it – I think if they can connect on a soulful rather than artistic level then a goal may well have been achieved – it certainly isn't of lesser value because some notion of anti-intellectual superficiality which you seem to think.

The problem with intellectualising and over-analysis is pretty transparent when looking at the variance you see in music reviews. The same goes for art in general. Aphex Twin might be standing behind the decks spinning some sand paper in jest, only for the high-brow audience to turn around and say 'hey man – that was great'. Sure apply whatever depth of analysis you enjoy, but don't be one of those guys that hang around the decks over-intellectualising the latest micro-niche NBT that'll be lucky to shift 500 copies. Don't fight it – just feel it baby :P

I think you would make a good music critic. Your writing is really colorful and you seem to have a good knowledge about music without being rigid about it.

Oh you flatterer :oops:

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="poptart"]

I think you're the one intellectualising music as if it's some kind of conceptual art. That's not to say some musicians may attempt to intellectualise their own work and thus expect to garner the kind of critique you so enjoy doing, but really music generally isn't like Tracey Emmett's soiled bed. Do you really thinking music demands a higher level of understanding to be appreciated? Do you think an artist hearing that a person is their greatest fan because all they want to do is get up and dance whenever they hear their music? I doubt it – I think if they can connect on a soulful rather than artistic level then a goal may well have been achieved – it certainly isn't of lesser value because some notion of anti-intellectual superficiality which you seem to think.

The problem with intellectualising and over-analysis is pretty transparent when looking at the variance you see in music reviews. The same goes for art in general. Aphex Twin might be standing behind the decks spinning some sand paper in jest, only for the high-brow audience to turn around and say 'hey man – that was great'. Sure apply whatever depth of analysis you enjoy, but don't be one of those guys that hang around the decks over-intellectualising the latest micro-niche NBT that'll be lucky to shift 500 copies. Don't fight it – just feel it baby :P

poptart

I think you would make a good music critic. Your writing is really colorful and you seem to have a good knowledge about music without being rigid about it.

Oh you flatterer :oops:

Well, what can I say? When I think somebody might be good at something, my instict is to tell them about it. Who knows? I might have started a successful career. :P

[QUOTE="poptart"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I think you would make a good music critic. Your writing is really colorful and you seem to have a good knowledge about music without being rigid about it.

GreySeal9

Oh you flatterer :oops:

Well, what can I say? When I think somebody might be good at something, my instict is to tell them about it. Who knows? I might have started a successful career. :P

Well that's very kind of you Greyseal9 :P

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Now I'm starting to think he doesn't even know what an opinion is. :?

GreySeal9

I wasn't talking about your own opinion. Obviously.

I was talking about the fact that you didn't seem to realize that "It's a good thing he wasn't harmed" is an opinion, thereby making it reasonable to assume that you're not clear on what an opinion actually is.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] I did not give my opinion in that statement. So I wouldn't be stating another doesn't know what an opinon is FYI.

LJS9502_basic

I wasn't talking about your own opinion. Obviously.

I was talking about the fact that you didn't seem to realize that "It's a good thing he wasn't harmed" is an opinion, thereby making it reasonable to assume that you're not clear on what an opinion actually is.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] I did not give my opinion in that statement. So I wouldn't be stating another doesn't know what an opinon is FYI.

LJS9502_basic

I wasn't talking about your own opinion. Obviously.

I was talking about the fact that you didn't seem to realize that "It's a good thing he wasn't harmed" is an opinion, thereby making it reasonable to assume that you're not clear on what an opinion actually is.

I hope you realize how many times you have contradicted yourself in this thread.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] I did not give my opinion in that statement. So I wouldn't be stating another doesn't know what an opinon is FYI.

LJS9502_basic

I wasn't talking about your own opinion. Obviously.

I was talking about the fact that you didn't seem to realize that "It's a good thing he wasn't harmed" is an opinion, thereby making it reasonable to assume that you're not clear on what an opinion actually is.

I didn't SAY it was your opinion. Why are you so insistent on putting words into my mouth/getting my arguments wrong. I really cannot understand why you keep doing that.

I didn't say that it was your opinion, I said that it is "an opinion", not yours. Are we clear on that?

Just because it can't be attributed to a specific person does not mean it's not an opinion. The very act of saying "it's good that that person was not harmed" in an opinion. After all, who else would say that but a person, even if only in theory? And whoever said it would be giving an opinion. It is an opinion because it is their judgment of the outcome.

I could easily disagree and say, "it sucks that that person was not harmed." That would be another opinion.

Conversely, there can only be one fact and that someone got into a car accident and was not harmed.

But how do you determine whether an opinion on art is wrong? If someone says, "I think this song is good," how do you objectively prove that it's not a good song?

I do agree with the some of what you're saying. If I wanted an opinion on music, I would probably go to someone who knows something about music. But that doesn't mean their opinions are always more valid, just that they are more likely to be well-supported.

GreySeal9

I don't think you can prove someone is wrong in their opinion about music. You could try to persuade them to change their own opinion by providing them with more information that would give them a broader perspective.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

But how do you determine whether an opinion on art is wrong? If someone says, "I think this song is good," how do you objectively prove that it's not a good song?

I do agree with the some of what you're saying. If I wanted an opinion on music, I would probably go to someone who knows something about music. But that doesn't mean their opinions are always more valid, just that they are more likely to be well-supported.

superfluidity

I don't think you can prove someone is wrong in their opinion about music. You could try to persuade them to change their own opinion by providing them with more information that would give them a broader perspective.

Same goes for a musical context. If I was informed that my favorite song was not musically complex, it would not change my opinion on the music itself.

I think you would make a good music critic. Your writing is really colorful and you seem to have a good knowledge about music without being rigid about it.

GreySeal9

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

But how do you determine whether an opinion on art is wrong? If someone says, "I think this song is good," how do you objectively prove that it's not a good song?

I do agree with the some of what you're saying. If I wanted an opinion on music, I would probably go to someone who knows something about music. But that doesn't mean their opinions are always more valid, just that they are more likely to be well-supported.

superfluidity

I don't think you can prove someone is wrong in their opinion about music. You could try to persuade them to change their own opinion by providing them with more information that would give them a broader perspective.

Thats the point?

No-one is wrong, because it's all opinion no-one can be wrong.