I think it is admissible to state preferences in music without justification. However, I have difficulty with the notion of absolute good and bad in any art and, even assuming they do exist, I certainly do not know enough to distinguish the two.
I (mainly, not always) prefer organic form, free rhythm, syncopation, to a certain extent arbitrary harmony containing surprise, spontaneity, unstable metre.
I (mainly, not always) dislike rigid form, theories, fixed rhythm, playing on the beat, rigid harmonic patterns, repetition and predictability, motoric and metrical sounds.
Therefore, it is obvious that I would tend to dislike, say, Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, Brahms and like, say, much Chopin, Delius, Ives, Jarrett, most ragtime and much jazz, Bridge, Ireland ….. and in fact this is the case.
As I get older though, I find I can control my tastes more than I could when younger. So one day I may wake up and find I understand Beethoven and Mozart. It does not appear at all likely now but I try not to shut any musical doors completely.
I realise this hasn’t answered the initial question, but I cannot happily assign “good” and “bad” to any music. And even my preferences need to be justified in terms of more fundamental likes and dislikes of certain pure sounds – certainly never because of social, biographical or emotional associations with the composers themselves and their reputations, as many seem to – I cannot see the sense in that at all.
Topic: 50 worst composers