Excellent comments, Ghosthouse; you are exactly right. Re the objective/subjective issue:
As I see it, the main sticking point in the debate is what often seems to be the assumption by some that when objective criteria are used to judge some or all aspects of a particular music, that this automatically means that the evaluation is devoid of subjectivity or simple emotional reaction; or, that the person who sometimes analyses ALWAYS analyses when listening. Nothing could be further from the truth. As you point out, not only is there "no need for one to be at the expense of the other", objective analysis can actually help the listener appreciate MORE of what might otherwise fall under the heading of subjectivity. All this, of course, then plays into issues of the personality of a listener. I can understand why some need to keep analysis out of the equation and don’t want to be "hampered" by it and want to keep the listening experience as "simple" as possible and not be "challenged" as a listener; its a personal call. However, like you, I don’t understand the aversion to knowledge. Moreover, one of the key unanswered questions in this never-ending debate is why the "subjectivists" have no problem having strong opinions and even putting down certain music liked by others. In other words, if "subjectivity" alone is to be considered the best approach, should not the subjectivity of all listeners be respected while rendering ANY criticism moot? Why should the criteria used by subjectivists, whatever those may be, be more credible than that of those who bring SOME analysis to the equation? The pure subjectivists’ criteria are, by definition, personal; objective criteria are not.
One of the most curious aspects of all this as concerns subjectivity/objectivity and as it relates to the old jazz/new jazz debate is the simple fact that it is the staunch old jazz devotee(s?) who seem to like ONLY old jazz while I don’t think there has been a single fan of new jazz to post here that has not posted or expressed liking old jazz as well. So, to my simple minded way of thinking, just what is the problem? As you yourself have pointed out, there ARE universally accepted (well, almost 😉) basic criteria for judging SOME aspects of art. That is a hard pill for some to swallow for some reason.
Related in a very roundabout way, if arguably related at all, but came across this quote and thought it was worth sharing ☺️:
"Some days you get up and put the horn to your chops and it sounds pretty good and you win. Some days you try and nothing works and the horn wins. This goes on and on and then you die and the horn wins" - Dizzy Gillespie
