How to respond nicely to someone who says Pet Sounds is the most over-rated album in the world?

If playing a guitar in x versus y way counting as technical proficiency isn't about persons' preferences--what they like versus dislike, what is it about?

In other words, take every physically possible way that one can play a guitar.
Playing it x way is called "technical proficiency."
Playing it y way is not.

If the difference isn't based on preferences--what one likes more than alternatives, what is it based on?

There's the whole pool of what's physically possible. Some subset of those physical possibilities are being selected as the normative goal to shoot for. If those choices aren't being made via evaluative judgments (preferences, liking one thing or what one thing enables more than another), how are those choices being made?

 

I consider it an incredibly over rated album myself.

It does have 3 amazing tracks on it which I feel would belong on any CD length collection of their finest work, and I believe if I compiled a CD length collection of the finest work of every artist I love, the Beach Boys one would certaibly be among the top 20 of those collections. So it is not any lack of affection for the Beach Boys. It is really from the perspective of someone who considers them one of the very best singles band but finds about 75% of Pet Sounds to completely lack the catchy infectious quality that makes so many of their singles such a delight.

So I guess you will have to decide how to respond to me

 

pet sounds is kinda over-rated , but the king of over-rated albums is this one

Sgt. Pepper.

 

Of course as long as a significant number of people find Queen albums worth listening to, it will not be the most over rated album.

 

“I used to think that , too!”

 

Technical proficiency is not a matter of opinion. It is a level of skill. No preference involved. A person can just be objectively good at doing something.

Ways x and y can both be technically proficient, but way x can hit a person as cold and unmoving, while way y is both proficient and engaging. Personally, I’ll put Steve Vai down as a “way x” and Brian Setzer as a “way y”. Both are technically proficient guitar players. I respect both of them as musicians. I only like the playing of one of them.

 

This seems like a question aimed at the musician’s preferences, not what a music listener would evaluate as musicianship worthy of respect.

 

I believe it is overrated. Most overrated album in the world? Certainly not!

 

I disagree with this, so I'm challenging it and asking you to support your view.

Again, there's the whole pool of what's physically possible to do. I'm assuming we agree on that? (Otherwise, what would you suggest as the alternative?)

From that pool, a subset of physical acts are dubbed "skill," "technical proficiency" and the like.

So I'm asking you, IF the designation ("skill" etc.) ISN'T being made via evaluative judgments--that is, preferences a la what someone likes versus alternatives--then how is the designation made? On what criteria? In other words, what makes physical act x count as "skill" while physical act y does not?

To support your view, you need to be able to answer what makes the difference aside from evaluative judgments.

 

I like Pet Sounds, but it’s not even in my Beach Boys top 3 (possibly not even the top 5) so I’d possibly agree that it’s overrated.

 

I would simply shrug my shoulders and ask "what the score of the game"

 

I'm asking in general simply about calling one thing "skill" (or whatever) versus another.

Are you saying that you simply defer to other persons' comments about it and don't think about it yourself?

 

I just don't get "Pet Sounds," and the Beach Boys in general, so I think I fall in the camp of thinking it's overrated.

I've read and heard all about how it's harmonically advanced, etc., but I'm left thinking, "Okay, but so what?" It still leaves me cold.

My hot take would be that it gained its reputation mostly by being compared against the low bar of mid-60's pop music -- taking some baby steps in the direction of more complexity in harmony and song structure, never mind that people have been doing much better and more advanced stuff in that regard in other genres of music all along.

It also feels very kitschy to me.

I don't mean to offend anyone by saying this, just offering my opinion!

 

Just say "Close but not quite..... there's also Sgt. Pepper and VU&Nico. But hey, you still won Bronze!"

 

I'm a big fan of the Beach Boys but I understand that some people aren't and I don't get upset over it. Pet Sounds is far from my favorite Beach Boys album but I have to say the production is astoundingly good.

To the statement that Pet Sounds is the most over-rated album in the world, I would agree that it's seriously overrated but "most over-rated album in the world" is silly in a world that has Sgt. Pepper and Never Mind The Bollocks; thereby initiating another controversy that might swamp the Pet Sounds issue.

To the statement that Beach Boys music sounds like awful children's music, I would mention that the sun and surf era took up about two years of a highly faceted multi-decade musical career which the person is obviously unfamiliar with, not that there is necessarily anything awful about children's music.

Be thankful that you only have to defend The Beach Boys and not BABYMETAL or Hatsune Miku.

 

easy one:

just ask them id they ever hear meat loaf 'bat out of hell"

 

How to respond? Respect their opinion and move on. If that person does think it is overrated and you don't agree it certainly doesn't make their assessment wrong.

 

You’re asking me what constitutes “skill”? If something is difficult to do, and a person is able to do it, that is skill. What am I missing here?

 

No, I’m saying that recognizing somebody is good at doing something does not require liking anything.

 

Okay, and if someone doesn't prefer things that are difficult to do--doesn't like them or what they enable more than the alternative--then how do things that are difficult to do come to be labeled skill (with a normative connotation) rather than things that aren't difficult to do?

(This is ignoring whether things labeled skill really are things that are "difficult to do," by the way, but we can assume for the sake of argument that there's no issue there.)

Another way to ask this, by the way, where we can ignore the normative connotation is this:

If we're simply using the word "skill" as a synonym for "difficult to do," and there's no preference for things that are difficult to do; there's no preference for skill--people don't like things that are difficult to do more than things that aren't difficult to do, then why would anyone respect or call "good" things that are skilled or difficult to do rather than things that aren't skilled/aren't difficult to do? Surely "respect" and "good" have normative connotations, right? That is, there's an implication that people should (aim to) do things that are good and that are respected. Well, if there's no preference for the things in question, if people don't like them more than the alternatives, then what would be the reason that anyone should do them?

 

I think this is about all I can offer in continuance of this question about what “skill” means:
Definition of SKILL

My inclusion of a difficulty component was within the context of musicians I respect without liking their playing of music. If I am aware a piece of music would be difficult to play (something of which I am sometimes qualified to be aware), even if I don’t like it, I can still respect a musician who is able to play it.

 

I’m a big Beach Boys fan and even I rate it below a number of their other albums. But would I call it over-rated? No, there are far too many people and musicians who adore it for me to make such a claim.

 

Exactly. If I'm listening to Beach Boys, I'm going to go for the early stuff OR the later, weird stuff. Because they both rock a lot more than Pet Sounds.

Pet Sounds mostly isn't rock music. Nearly all of rock is more visceral than Pet Sounds. Beatles on Ed Sullivan, Led Zeppelin, Sex Pistols, Nirvana, where you just hear it for the first time and you're blown away. Why should people looking for that sort of feeling listen to Pet Sounds?

Pet Sounds appeals to music nerds with its insular nature. Not everyone wants that.

 

I’m just never sure where people are seeing these “ratings” upon which they base their assessment of whether something is overrated. Is there some database I should know about with consensus ratings of albums?