Q10 - Music historian: Some critics lament

[mitrakhanom1]

I'm confused on why the correct answer is B. It seems as if its strengthening the first sentence about the critcs. Why is answer choice D wrong? If the conclusion is the playing of the next generation lacks compactness then can't we infer that the following generation's quality is lower? Thanks.

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Task: Inference

Task: Find the answer choice that is most provable, based only on the provided information.

The "Real" Task: Find claims in the information that can by synthesized (put together to yield another idea or safe restatement).

Tendencies:
The synthesis usually comes from Causal / Conditional / Quantitative language

Trap answers:
(just like RC and Nec Assump)
- extreme
- comparisons
- out of scope
- opposite

== stimulus ==

Some people say that short solos on recordings sucked, because these musicians would play longer solos live.

Our historian says, no the short solos were awesome, beautiful, concise pieces of art. The recordings WERE different from their live shows, which is a good thing.

Also, by being forced to record shorter solos, they started performing shorter solos live.

Whereas the next generation of musicians did NOT have to record shorter solos. They were allowed to record long solos, so they kept playing longer solos live.

== assessment ==

There is some Causal language in each sentence.

The postwar recording studios FORCED musicians to record short solos.

The shortness of the solo CAUSED the recording to be a superb artistic work that was not just a copy of their live works.

The shortness of the solo CAUSED these musicians to start playing shorter solos live (the next generation did not have this cause and did not have this effect).

== answer choices ==

(A) "generally" is too strong. We can't make any claims about MOST representations of live solos.

(B) Sure, looks good ... super weak ... "some beneficial consequences = at least one good thing came of the recording conditions" ... we know that the postwar recording conditions caused shorter solos which caused beautifully concise playing that caused the recordings to be superb artistic works distinct from their live playing.

(C) "always" is insanely too strong.

(D) "lower overall quality" is the comparison red flag. There is no value judgment comparing early to later bebop overall. The only comparison we know is that "the music of the generation immediately following early bebop had less compactness in its live playing than did early bebop."

(E) "will not .. unless" is insanely too strong.

Nice job finding (D) as the 2nd best answer, because the extreme language in A, C, and E should be easy, quick low-hanging fruit for eliminations.

Make sure you hone in on comparisons and prove them from the text.

If I tell you that the Honda Civic has better gas mileage than the Toyota Corolla, can you infer that the Honda Civic is of better overall quality?

No, that's too much of a stretch. Gas mileage (or compactness) is just one aspect of assessing overall quality.