>>66043518
as long as it makes me feel and has some interesting elements, its bretty good to me. Technical skill doesnt really mean all that much to me

>>66043518
>technical skill
No, some of the blandest music is made by the most skilled musicians (especially as far as guitarists go
>creativity
This is more like it. I get bored of similar sounding things naturally, so anything that's considered new or experimental is best.

You mention drawing a line on it, but I think that's only a real problem when you force yourself to rate albums. The way I operate is on a dichotomy of "Is this interesting?", and if so, it was a worthwhile listen. I'll take music that sounds unique but bad any day over something derivative yet decent. Ideally the best album would be one that sounds like nothing else and sounds good to me. Of course I can't rate this objectively since I'm not an encyclopedia, but that's how I do it on a personal level.

>>66043679
OP here, that's where I fall as well

I know some people who value technical skill over creativity, a lot of their music library is pretty similar and boring tbqh

creativity>technical skill for me

I usually don't give a fuck about the skills as long as it make me feel something.

Of course there's lots of music wich is absolutly amazing on production and stuff, but i enjoy more simplicity and feelings on it.

Whether it's gimmicky, more technical, or creative/expressive, I really kind of enjoy all the aspects separately, but do recognize where they fall.
The most enjoyable to me is when an artist puts a lot of work and effort into their music (artistically, more meaningful, something original, and technically complex [this ranges]) and making it sound good, enjoyably listenable, and touch the listener in some way.

simply for me, good songwriting always wins. i don't care how technically impressive the musicianship or the production is, if i can't remember the tune or want to go back to it, then it's poor

>>66043518

Either emotions or creativity.