Good/bad music has both a subjective and an objective benchmark.
From a subjective point of view, if the music connects with you, it is good. What somebody else thinks is totally irrelevant. As my favourite audiophile company says; "If it sounds good, it is".
From an objective point of view, there is definitely good and bad music. This is the type of thing you study in a formal music school. Composition is but one example. There would certainly be standards against which Mahler's compositions could be judged. However, even here there is room for interpretation, disagreement and debate. Standards change with time. That's why music history consists of distinct eras. Poor composition according to the standard of one era could in fact be the emergence of a new standard, or it could be the poor implementation of an existing standard. There are certainly standards against which you friend's opinion of Mahler can be benchmarked. It is also possible that your friend is simply giving his subjective opinion, and then trying to give it greater legitimacy by cloaking it with reference to an objective standard, i.e. musical composition and its associated theory.
I am sure that Beethoven is probably "good" and the Sex Pistols are probably "bad" having reference to objective standards. From a subjective point of view, it's your own preference as to which is "good" and which is "bad" and nobody call tell you otherwise.
From a subjective point of view, if the music connects with you, it is good. What somebody else thinks is totally irrelevant. As my favourite audiophile company says; "If it sounds good, it is".
From an objective point of view, there is definitely good and bad music. This is the type of thing you study in a formal music school. Composition is but one example. There would certainly be standards against which Mahler's compositions could be judged. However, even here there is room for interpretation, disagreement and debate. Standards change with time. That's why music history consists of distinct eras. Poor composition according to the standard of one era could in fact be the emergence of a new standard, or it could be the poor implementation of an existing standard. There are certainly standards against which you friend's opinion of Mahler can be benchmarked. It is also possible that your friend is simply giving his subjective opinion, and then trying to give it greater legitimacy by cloaking it with reference to an objective standard, i.e. musical composition and its associated theory.
I am sure that Beethoven is probably "good" and the Sex Pistols are probably "bad" having reference to objective standards. From a subjective point of view, it's your own preference as to which is "good" and which is "bad" and nobody call tell you otherwise.