yeppp
Yeah, radio was better in the time of Bach…
Well, better a bunch of kids that listen crappy rap & techno than a bunch of fat kids.
Like mentioned above, it’s good to be able to play an instrument (I’d even recommend a harmonical one). Then you simply don’t wonder what tonica, dominante, sub-dominante, 7th, 5th and all this is. But it’s less important to understand that all. It’s more important to be able to make use of these techniques. No, I’m not telling any rules. No way, I’d rather let anyone experiment by himself. And that’s the point when I disagree with Andy5.
I did. People who never knew what a chord made beautiful tracks with arrested harmonies, Sept’s and so on while songs of Jogeir Liljedahl who plays the guitar, are kept simple. I don’t want anyone to think that I don’t like his music - I love his music! 
Anyways, many people make interesting beats and melodical rythms in hardcore/trance/d&b songs which you can’t play by learning an instrument - that’s something JUST electrical, you have to belive that. Fast played meodies, arpreggios which you can’t play with an instruments, freaky beats with more elements than a drummer could play, etc…
But at the end you’ll have some advandtages once you’ve learned an instrument. I learned the guitar after I’ve been tracking for five years and indeed it’s a big help.
Let’s through a question in here: Premium Trance, do you play any instrument? Maybe you do. I’m asking this because I’ve heard quite a good song from you - it was Copy&Paste. If you don’t - It’s intro is complex enough that someone could say that you know how to play an instrument.
I could ask anyone but I prefer the Trancers in our community. Its understood that many of them are so creative that they can come around without playing an instrument.
And one interesting fact that I simply have to mention at the end is that we, the trackers are making our own suggestions which are often helpful for creating music. No scary notes, no examples of classical music, just intuitive tracker-style. I wonder why none mentioned the ‘Trackers Handbook’ here. It’s created by trackers who are explaining things in our own ‘language’ and I truly enjoyed reading it. I usually don’t like reading at all like a nagging school-kid
The point was that in Bach’s times people had more respect to complex music. Or at least they pretended to have.
…and they still do.
Kaneel mentioned it a couple of times:
Some like to say that they listen to punk because they want to seem alternative, some say they like IDM because they want to seem intelligent (not the KORE ones ), some like to seem open minded and pretend listening to everything while they’d call Melodic Trance ‘Techno’…
Edit: Why doesn’t anyone care about the hidden hint with RADIO and BACH’s times? First CD’s came out THEN the radio was invented!
omg, me example 
I can play piano but… unfortunatly very bad
Most people only heard this kind of music in churches, and
they probably didn’t come there for the concert
“Most people” at that time had their own, simplistic, music, much like today…
all intellectual matter that we “consume” has degrees of complexity
that vary according to our individual intellectual prowess in the field…
what’s good or bad is mostly subject to… err… well, subjectivity…
and in that sense there is nothing that can be deemed better than something else…
we don’t usually see this and thus fall into antagonistic discourse that leads us nowhere…
i think that “good” and “bad” are qantifying refferences that relate how close or removed something is to an ideal. while ideals may be subjective (since everyone has to decide what’s best for themselves) i think a musician has to have an ideal to be striving towards. so it’s important for an individual to have a notion of good and bad.
so…
if you don’t think “good” and “bad” music exists, you don’t have any musical ideals. and in my opinion, music that doesn’t have SOME sort of ideal it strives towards (even if it can’t be put into words) might not be bad (since it can’t be diametrically opposed to an ideal that doesn’t exist) but it isn’t good either, it just >is<.
all the same i think you can also judge “good” or “bad” music by the ideal it strives towards. i tend to dislike Linkin Park because I feel that the band strives towards a crappy ideal (being angy, depressed and making money), while it’s certainly well produced, it’s just “bad” as far as i’m concerned.
“good” and “bad” have to exist in music. i think that to say that they don’t is merely a refusal to measure music by your own standards/music.
if the ideal is subjective doesn’t this make good/bad the defining factors of subjectivity?
I still judge music, and the rest of the world around me for that matter, in those terms… I’m just as human as you… but it doesn’t make it true…
You just said something very important in the above paragraph… “it just >is<”…
and that’s what existence is all about… just being… and how you define it is (just) subjectivity…
and if I were to disagree with you I would just prove my own point, now wouldn’t I?
I think that to say that they DO is just proving my point…
if all notions of value and quality are subjective and no true worth exists in everything, then why do anything?
and why bother discussing if the validity of your points hinges entirely on your perspective and doesn’t have access to “truth”. are we engaged in intellectual masturbation?
if this is a disagreement i guess that means i’m >right< and you just >are<. 
Yes, let’s ignore all the interesting parts of all music and
only judge it based on the common, boring parts. 
exactly. no, seriously… of course there is worth in different forms but the point is… why discuss matters of subjectivity based on a subjective view?
exactly.
exactly.
that’s your entitled point of view…
it may also be interpreted as:
me being totally accepting and all encompassing and you just being opinionated. 
(OR me just being full of it and you spot on)…
I’m sorry but I just find the discussion of music (and all other creative art-forms executed well) in the terms of good and bad just simply absurd… It’s interesting whether you like it or not and why you have that opinion but if I disagree with you I would never try to convert you to my point of view… (I doubt I would succeed anyway )
as with Linkin Park… you say; “it’s just bad”… we may both agree it’s well produced… That it’s “good” in a sense… but if I were to say that the actual music is “good” (Im not saying I do but for the sake of argument… )
Do you honestly think that you, with any sensible argumentation, could change my opion or that I, by the same token, could change yours? I don’t think so…