GMG Classical Music Forum

The Music Room => General Classical Music Discussion => Topic started by: knight66 on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM

Title: How do you hear music?
Post by: knight66 on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
One of the executives within BBC radio has claimed this week that men predominately listen to the technicalities of music, whilst women have a predominantly emotional response.

I don't relate to this generalisation, but wondered if it holds any truth for the people here.

Mike
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Josquin des Prez on February 22, 2008, 12:29:23 PM
Quote from: knight on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
whilst women have a predominantly emotional response.

More like a predominantly sensorial response. Most women i've met wouldn't understand emotion if it hit them in the shins.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Don on February 22, 2008, 12:39:15 PM
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 22, 2008, 12:29:23 PM
More like a predominantly sensorial response. Most women i've met wouldn't understand emotion if it hit them in the shins.

Sounds like you don't think very well of females.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Josquin des Prez on February 22, 2008, 12:42:28 PM
Quote from: Don on February 22, 2008, 12:39:15 PM
Sounds like you don't think very well of females.

It's in my psychological make up:

http://www.ourcivilisation.com/whatis/chap12.htm
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: greg on February 22, 2008, 12:48:15 PM
both
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Brian on February 22, 2008, 12:51:30 PM
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 22, 2008, 12:29:23 PM
More like a predominantly sensorial response. Most women i've met wouldn't understand emotion if it hit them in the shins.
Watch out, man, or there's going to be a woman hitting you in the shins.

EDIT: Or somewhere else.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: bhodges on February 22, 2008, 12:51:56 PM
Quote from: knight on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
One of the executives within BBC radio has claimed this week that men predominately listen to the technicalities of music, whilst women have a predominantly emotional response.

I don't relate to this generalisation, but wondered if it holds any truth for the people here.

Mike

Good question, and one that I haven't thought about in awhile.  I think I perceive music both ways, depending on what my initial approach is to the music.  If I've been briefed on the structure (i.e., overall arc, number of movements, repeats, etc.) ahead of time, my listening will probably go that way, at least at first.  If other elements have been highlighted, then I may be paying more attention to timbre, pitch, rhythm, etc.  But generally I try to "listen first, analyze later," if at all possible.  (Sometimes it's not, of course.)

Sometimes at first, it's very hard to separate out the elements that are creating what you are hearing.  In the best works, they are usually working in tandem, in such a sophisticated way that it is difficult to isolate exactly what is producing the "I really like that" effect.  Interesting question, and one I'll have to think about a little more.

--Bruce
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: knight66 on February 22, 2008, 01:01:27 PM
I am pretty sure that I react emotionally first and probably last. I can get interested in the nuts and bolts. But if my emotions are not engaged, then I am never going to get as far as the technicalities.

I certainly listen differently to things when I have performed them and you get to understand it somewhat from the inside.

Mike
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: orbital on February 22, 2008, 02:14:34 PM
Quote from: bhodges on February 22, 2008, 12:51:56 PM
Good question, and one that I haven't thought about in awhile.  I think I perceive music both ways, depending on what my initial approach is to the music.  If I've been briefed on the structure (i.e., overall arc, number of movements, repeats, etc.) ahead of time, my listening will probably go that way, at least at first.  If other elements have been highlighted, then I may be paying more attention to timbre, pitch, rhythm, etc.  But generally I try to "listen first, analyze later," if at all possible.  (Sometimes it's not, of course.)


I am perceiving the technical aspects of music as well, but not quite in the same way. I probably do not notice those phrases and their relation to each other, even sometimes repeats. But with piano music in particular, I am developing more and more of a visual sense of the music, meaning how it would be to watch somebody play the music. Or, how and if I would be able to play it, with which hand and fingers. Often times, in subways for example, I find my self air-piano playing :D which probably looks weird  ;D

The emotional part hardly ever gets me in the first listen, and sadly very few pieces that I've listened to hit me in that direction. But when they do they become an integral part of the music for me. The con fuoco part of the G minor ballade gives me the goosebumps even after I've listened to it I-don't-know-how-many-hundredth time  for example  :)
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: marvinbrown on February 22, 2008, 02:29:26 PM
Quote from: knight on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
One of the executives within BBC radio has claimed this week that men predominately listen to the technicalities of music, whilst women have a predominantly emotional response.

I don't relate to this generalisation, but wondered if it holds any truth for the people here.

Mike

  I couldn't disagree more with this generalization Mike.  For me music is all about emotion.  I am drawn to "mood" altering music- the more powerfull the emotions a peice of music brings out in me the more I am drawn to it.  Its ironic that I am an Engineer (technically, scientifically and mathematically minded) and yet technicalities of music interest me not!  The human mind is very complex indeed  ;)!

  marvin

  marvin
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Josquin des Prez on February 22, 2008, 02:57:32 PM
^ So you are like, the exception that proves the rule?
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Ephemerid on February 22, 2008, 06:29:00 PM
When I was younger (and in music school), I was all into the technicalities of a piece of music, the construction, what was going on harmonically, motivically, etc. -- you know, looking at it more from a craftsmanship perspective.  I used to live for that.  Emotionally I would respond to music as well, but at the time, that's what I tended to focus on.

I'm not sure when, but sometime in my early 30s, my attention shifted to the emotional and sensual aspects of a piece.  I can still hear those technical aspects when I choose to, but the mechanics of a piece is not what draws me deeply.  Technique may be important and I can still appreciate it, but when I am *in* the music, I actually find all that falls to the wayside for me. 

In my most receptive moments, I often find music brings me to tears, which I can't always explain-- whether the music seems to express great joy, grief, violence, or whatever, somehow there are a great deal of pieces that elicit that response from me, sometimes unexpectedly.  It seems over the years I become more receptive to that.  There are certain pieces I can't even have just playing in the background at work or in the car because it can get under my skin so easily. 

With the exception of two particular pieces * , I don't necessarily associate the various music I listen to with specific, extra-musical, personal events in my life, but I feel that living through certain things in my life have somehow helped me relate to music in a way that is really more possessive. 

There have always been certain pieces that have moved me but over the years I've noticed that's just become more prevalent in my listening habits.  Maybe I'm just turning into a sentimental fuddy duddy.   ;)

The technicalities of a piece is still something I appreciate, but that's generally something I consider only after the fact (usually after repeated listenings).  Its like the difference between an analysis of a kiss and the act of actually kissing.  There's something sensual and even erotic I find in the best music that stirs up something in me physiologically that still surprises me! 

* Vaughan Williams' "Silent Noon" and Ravel's "The Fairy Garden" from the Mother Goose suite, which have very specific connections with someone I love deeply.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Ephemerid on February 22, 2008, 06:34:03 PM
Oh, but I do want to add this-- sometimes the "intellectual" and "emotional" sides converge-- I'm thinking of Britten's Sinfonia da Requiem-- the shock of realising (again and again and again) how that tortured melody of the opening dirge is transformed in the third part into this heavenly melody!  It's the SAME MELODY!!  The realisation of that in that moment is so powerful (for me, anyway), connecting that theme in a totally new context, far removed from the opening movement.  There are other examples of that as well.  Maybe sometimes its not such a good idea to put "emotion" and "intellect" into neat little boxes like that.   :)
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: val on February 23, 2008, 12:46:37 AM
To me the emotional response, or the pleasure, is always in the first place. But the understanding of the work, its structures must be there too.

That is why I don't feel confortable with works, such as Schönberg's Pélleas et Melisande that I cannot understand.

On the other hand, if a composition doesn't give me pleasure or doesn't touch me emotionally, then what's the use of understanding it?
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: marvinbrown on February 23, 2008, 07:56:34 AM
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on February 22, 2008, 02:57:32 PM
^ So you are like, the exception that proves the rule?

  I never looked at it that way, though I would venture and say that I believe there are many more men like me than that generalization presumes. Music to me is a form of art- to be appreciated on levels far beyond its technicalities.  Isn't that what the romantic movement in music was all about? I am talking about the likes of Wagner, Bruckner, Mahler and R. Strauss.

  marvin
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Dana on March 18, 2008, 06:35:37 PM
Quote from: just josh on February 22, 2008, 06:29:00 PM
When I was younger (and in music school), I was all into the technicalities of a piece of music, the construction, what was going on harmonically, motivically, etc. -- you know, looking at it more from a craftsmanship perspective.  I used to live for that.  Emotionally I would respond to music as well, but at the time, that's what I tended to focus on.

I'm not sure when, but sometime in my early 30s, my attention shifted to the emotional and sensual aspects of a piece.  I can still hear those technical aspects when I choose to, but the mechanics of a piece is not what draws me deeply.  Technique may be important and I can still appreciate it, but when I am *in* the music, I actually find all that falls to the wayside for me. 

In my most receptive moments, I often find music brings me to tears, which I can't always explain-- whether the music seems to express great joy, grief, violence, or whatever, somehow there are a great deal of pieces that elicit that response from me, sometimes unexpectedly.  It seems over the years I become more receptive to that.  There are certain pieces I can't even have just playing in the background at work or in the car because it can get under my skin so easily. 

With the exception of two particular pieces * , I don't necessarily associate the various music I listen to with specific, extra-musical, personal events in my life, but I feel that living through certain things in my life have somehow helped me relate to music in a way that is really more possessive. 

There have always been certain pieces that have moved me but over the years I've noticed that's just become more prevalent in my listening habits.  Maybe I'm just turning into a sentimental fuddy duddy.   ;)

The technicalities of a piece is still something I appreciate, but that's generally something I consider only after the fact (usually after repeated listenings).  Its like the difference between an analysis of a kiss and the act of actually kissing.  There's something sensual and even erotic I find in the best music that stirs up something in me physiologically that still surprises me! 

* Vaughan Williams' "Silent Noon" and Ravel's "The Fairy Garden" from the Mother Goose suite, which have very specific connections with someone I love deeply.

      This is why I don't put much stock in the above generalization - people change. To say nothing of the lack of actual research apparent behind that quote.
      With that said, I listen for both, but find that the when I do listen with a primarily emotional ear, I feel like I'm not really paying attention, but simply letting the music wash over me. That's not to say that I'm sitting in my seat thinking "ok here's the transition... and now the second theme..." but knowing where those markers are allows me to follow the arc of the music much better.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: DavidW on March 19, 2008, 06:58:12 AM
Quote from: knight on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
whilst women have a predominantly emotional response.

Namely anger. ;D
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: DavidW on March 19, 2008, 07:07:53 AM
Anyway when I listen to music it's for the emotions and not the technicalities.  Copland wrote about the different levels to music appreciation and I try but to me it's still a largely emotional response.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on March 19, 2008, 07:15:30 AM
Quote from: marvinbrown on February 22, 2008, 02:29:26 PM
  For me music is all about emotion.  I am drawn to "mood" altering music- the more powerfull the emotions a peice of music brings out in me the more I am drawn to it.  Its ironic that I am an Engineer (technically, scientifically and mathematically minded) and yet technicalities of music interest me not!  The human mind is very complex indeed  ;)!

Same here, including the Engineering part. :)

Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Danny on March 19, 2008, 01:06:43 PM
Quote from: knight on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
One of the executives within BBC radio has claimed this week that men predominately listen to the technicalities of music, whilst women have a predominantly emotional response.

I don't relate to this generalisation, but wondered if it holds any truth for the people here.

Mike

I wish I could appreciate the technicalities more; for me, music tends to be a purely emotional experience.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Earthlight on March 19, 2008, 03:29:19 PM
I know this sounds philistine and even barbaric, but I almost go out of my way to avoid learning very much about structure and technicalities. I have a career that requires a lot of detail work and a personality that tends to analyze everything into a pulp anyway. If I let myself get too wrapped up in the "hows" of music, I won't enjoy it as much -- or I'll enjoy it in the same way I enjoy work, or research, or a lot of other things, and there's not much point to that.

So if a piece of music reaches me on some emotional level -- or if I've got a reason to believe that there's something going on there I want to know -- I'll listen to it again. If not, I'll let it go and get on with my life.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: greg on March 19, 2008, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: Earthlight on March 19, 2008, 03:29:19 PM

So if a piece of music reaches me on some emotional level -- or if I've got a reason to believe that there's something going on there I want to know -- I'll listen to it again. If not, I'll let it go and get on with my life.
listen again- without a score?
Some stuff I just HAVE to get the score, to find out what is going on that's so good- like how, with all of my experimenting i could've missed such a basic concept or chord progression or whatever. But there's infinite variation, so it's understandable, I guess.

But understanding something that I enjoy (emotionally) intellectually is just an added bonus, it just opens up the ideas in music.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Mark G. Simon on March 19, 2008, 03:57:26 PM
I don't know that I can separate the two. Both ways of listening are present pretty much all the time. I would say I tend to listen more analytically to a piece I'm not familiar with, because the first thing I want to do is make sense of it, then I can get an idea of how I feel about it.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: JoshLilly on March 19, 2008, 04:46:59 PM
I would use my ears, but that's just what they'd be expecting me to do.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Chaszz on March 21, 2008, 09:52:00 AM
I listen for emotion, but with a desire to understand the technical aspects also. But emotion is more important to me. Do I go against type? NO.

I'm a visual artist, and work from emotion. A woman artist I know works from intellectual plans. Do either of us go against type? NO.

I hear landscape in Brahms symphonies, and a very experienced woman listener I know, with thousands of CDs, hears nothing of the sort, only pure music. She also denies there is emotion in music, and considers it organized sound complete in itself, with no outside reference point or accurate descriptive handle of any sort. Do either of us go against type? NO.

I'm most worked up here about the generalization that men listen one way, and women another; and about the generalizations in the patriarch vs. matriarch essay that Josquin linked to. I personally see all of these "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" generalizations as nothing but stereotypes, and often harmful ones. This type of declaration is often made from the prejudice of the observer, with little or no scientific evidence. The patriarch vs. matriarch author generalized from ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN that he personally knew. It is one of the first rules of evidence in medical and behavioral disciplines that personal, anecdotal experience cannot be accepted as applying in general, even if it's extensive. Only large populations and double-blind tests can provide real evidence. We would not take a prescription drug that had not been widely tested; why then do we swallow philosophies on an important matter like the mental natures of men and women, that are the result of potentially biased personal opinions?

Brain science using MRI imaging is beginning to provide solid evidence, and though a few real mental differences between men and women have tentatively emerged, they are a small number compared to the large number of stereotypical supposed differences that have been proven false. This kind of thinking -- prejudice toward women OR toward men masquerading as general scientific fact -- is IMO sexism, no different from racism, and it's past time society got over it. It has a certain positive, comforting romantic component -- the strong rational man protecting the weaker more intuitive woman, who repays him with needed emotional nourishment -- that most people are naturally susceptible to, and this is one reason it's so hard to get past. Also men and women often tend to act the way they think society expects them to rather than in accord with their real personalities. Can we be so bold as to generalize -- without real solid proof --on the actual differences between the sexes with all these confusing and contradictory factors involved? In such a situation, 80 to 90% of the supposed differences could easily be pure hokum.   

You needn't agree with me. But if you don't, would you consider questioning your thinking more carefully the next time you make a stereotypical gender assumption, on musical listening preferences or anything else?
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 22, 2008, 09:14:23 AM
Quote from: Mark G. Simon on March 19, 2008, 03:57:26 PM
I don't know that I can separate the two. Both ways of listening are present pretty much all the time. I would say I tend to listen more analytically to a piece I'm not familiar with, because the first thing I want to do is make sense of it, then I can get an idea of how I feel about it.
I agree entirely. Music must move one if it is worth listening to but the reason it does is because it is well constructed technically. The more one sees this, the more the music attracts. This does not always mean that good music is fully appreciated either by others or by myself. I do pass on some well known masterpieces, even though I do acknowledge their worth. After all - we don't live forever!

Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: dave b on March 22, 2008, 09:45:35 AM
I am the same way. Strictly emotional, the beauty of the melody. Some very famous classical pieces don't appeal to me much, simply because they are not as pleasing to the ear as some other lesser known works. I keep harping on Respighi Ancient Airs and Dances as a prime example. Not on anyone's top ten list but it is absolutely beautiful.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: The new erato on March 22, 2008, 09:59:34 AM
I listen sitting down.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Al Moritz on March 24, 2008, 12:08:12 PM
Quote from: Mark G. Simon on March 19, 2008, 03:57:26 PM
I don't know that I can separate the two. Both ways of listening are present pretty much all the time. I would say I tend to listen more analytically to a piece I'm not familiar with, because the first thing I want to do is make sense of it, then I can get an idea of how I feel about it.

Well put, and seconded.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: drogulus on March 24, 2008, 12:52:24 PM

      For me it's more of a foreground/background experience.  Most of the analytical work goes on behind the scenes, so I'll just be enjoying a piece and learning something about it without trying to. Learning and enjoying can't be entirely separate things even with a piece that's familiar. I don't think I set out to learn about music as an exclusive goal, but then I'm not sure I can say why I want to listen to music in the first place.

      It's possible that men and women listen differently on average, though I'll bet individual differences would tend to blur any such distinction. Men tend to be prone to many kinds of mental oddities like very high or low intelligence, autism or autism-like syndromes and probably others that go undiagnosed. Whatever it is that makes it far more likely that a mathematical, scientific, or artistic prodigy will be male may also affect how the sexes process musical information differently. If sexism has an effect on these factors it would probably be a minor one. That would be a matter of beliefs, mostly, whereas these differences operate at a deeper level.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: quintett op.57 on March 24, 2008, 03:40:14 PM
Quote from: knight on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
One of the executives within BBC radio has claimed this week that men predominately listen to the technicalities of music, whilst women have a predominantly emotional response.

I don't relate to this generalisation, but wondered if it holds any truth for the people here.

Mike
I do believe it's true but I don't know in what proportion. I have no proofs, only my own observation of what occurrs around me.
Right now, I can think of one woman who reacts like men in this regard, I know others, but they're a minority, for sure.

That would (partly) explain the week number of female composers.

This topic is a bit politically uncorrect nowadays.
Many people fear this difference could be interpretated as a difference of intellectual level (that would be a mistake).
The sacro-saint principle of intellectual equality between sexes (and races) is at stake. (As far as I'm concerned, no opinion, it does not interest me).


Most of you will answer they both listen the technicalities and react emotionally.
Remember we're talking about predominance. It's never exclusive. Our mind never stops to experience emotions. 
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 26, 2008, 12:51:13 PM
Quote from: quintett op.57 on March 24, 2008, 03:40:14 PM

Remember we're talking about predominance. It's never exclusive. Our mind never stops to experience emotions. 
Maybe we don't stop but we do examine the techniques that created the emotions.
My examinations of the lives of female composers suggests that one big difference from their male counterparts is that they nearly always had more than one life. Continuous devotion to composition was very rarely possible. This has usually precluded a sequence of major works.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: dave b on March 26, 2008, 01:12:38 PM
I think that when we all hear music, our primary and immediate response is emotional, and only after that initial reaction, do we care about technicalities. We do not listen to the music primarily for technicalities. When we see a stunning sunset our first reaction is, that is beautiful. Very very few of us would say that: the color spectrum appears to be at a certain named point, and the shifting of the light produces an effect which is technically stimulating, allowing our vision to experience the retinal operation which allow us......you get the picture.....
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: millionrainbows on May 05, 2017, 02:00:55 PM
As an example, I think men are more drawn to jazz fusion, where there are way too many notes played, and there is a virtuoso aspect. Music like this seems to inherently lack emotion, and is rhythmically driven, almost mechanical-sounding.

Maybe part of it is genetic: women had to nurse babies, so they needed a quiet, sheltered environment. Men were outside the caves, yelling at coyotes to scare them off.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Spineur on May 05, 2017, 05:59:12 PM
Quote from: knight66 on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
One of the executives within BBC radio has claimed this week that men predominately listen to the technicalities of music, whilst women have a predominantly emotional response.

I don't relate to this generalisation, but wondered if it holds any truth for the people here.

Mike
It is always fun to see some of these old thread resurface !  I had heard this claim before.  For me it is stated too vaguely and may involve some prejudice to be of interest.

A more precise and related question is: are men more sensitive to harmony and women more sensitive to melody ?  Actually most pieces have both.  But most people would agree that Bach is mostly an harmonic composer.  Schubert is more inclined toward melody.  Cimarosa is mostly melody.

I would be interested to read a statistical analysis of relation between genre and harmony vs melody.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: amw on May 05, 2017, 06:36:50 PM
Quote from: millionrainbows on May 05, 2017, 02:00:55 PM
Maybe part of it is genetic: women had to nurse babies, so they needed a quiet, sheltered environment. Men were outside the caves, yelling at coyotes to scare them off.
That's not how genetics work, and that's also not how human beings worked. Early humans had a much more gender-equal society than we do now in all likelihood.

In my experience the whole thing about men and women listening differently isn't borne out by reality, particularly when it's weird old-fashioned generalisations like that with women being emotional and men rational or whatever (as far as I know the scientific evidence is actually the exact opposite—testosterone is associated with heightened emotional states and reactivity, whereas oestrogen is a mild antidepressant/mood stabiliser). Things that would have a much greater effect on how people listen would include culture, education, class, profession, and obviously personality, for instance it's fairly well documented that working-class people rarely listen to classical music or that people from different cultures identify the emotional ramifications of a particular musical piece differently. (eg the Aka people of west africa not finding the music from the shower scene in Psycho to be scary, threatening or dissonant)
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Crudblud on May 05, 2017, 06:52:56 PM
If I listen to a piece twice and hear it the same way each time I would find it odd, because it means that I gained nothing the first time around. Even if it is only a minor detail that is revealed during a listen, the next will be different because of that detail, so too my response.

Listening for details and responding emotionally are not mutually exclusive, and the idea of doing all of one and none of the other is quite alien to my experience of listening to music.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 05, 2017, 07:05:50 PM
I have always wondered how on Earth it is possible not to have a predominantly emotional response to music. Are the people who claim that men who don't have predominantly emotional responses actually robots or something?

These days I rarely come across music I don't like to some degree. All of the music I hear I have some kind of emotional reaction to. When I don't like something it is always due to the nature of the performance or interpretation than the actual music itself.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: NorthNYMark on May 05, 2017, 08:18:01 PM
Quote from: amw on May 05, 2017, 06:36:50 PM
That's not how genetics work, and that's also not how human beings worked. Early humans had a much more gender-equal society than we do now in all likelihood.

In my experience the whole thing about men and women listening differently isn't borne out by reality, particularly when it's weird old-fashioned generalisations like that with women being emotional and men rational or whatever (as far as I know the scientific evidence is actually the exact opposite—testosterone is associated with heightened emotional states and reactivity, whereas oestrogen is a mild antidepressant/mood stabiliser). Things that would have a much greater effect on how people listen would include culture, education, class, profession, and obviously personality, for instance it's fairly well documented that working-class people rarely listen to classical music or that people from different cultures identify the emotional ramifications of a particular musical piece differently. (eg the Aka people of west africa not finding the music from the shower scene in Psycho to be scary, threatening or dissonant)

Thank you for this thoughtful and well-informed response. After reading through the thread, it was very refreshing to be able to come to this at the end.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Crudblud on May 06, 2017, 07:17:09 AM
Quote from: jessop on May 05, 2017, 07:05:50 PM
I have always wondered how on Earth it is possible not to have a predominantly emotional response to music. Are the people who claim that men who don't have predominantly emotional responses actually robots or something?

I think the vast majority of people react emotionally to pretty much everything before they come at it rationally.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: some guy on May 07, 2017, 01:30:37 AM
This wholesale resurrection of old threads seems not quite the thing, but what do I know? It's been done, and there's a statement in it that I hear a lot that seems impossibly odd and impertinent, so....

Quote from: Earthlight on March 19, 2008, 03:29:19 PM
f a piece of music reaches me on some emotional level -- or if I've got a reason to believe that there's something going on there I want to know -- I'll listen to it again. If not, I'll let it go and get on with my life.

You see? Listening to music here is not a great pleasure, maybe even a necessity, it is an interruption. It might be a pleasant interruption, and if so then fine, but it's not really part of one's life. And what a life is suggested here. It is a thing to be got on with. Wow. I don't know about the rest of y'all, but isn't life something one simply does? Maybe one does it simply, too. But if music is not part of one's life, an addition to at best, an interruption or distraction from at worst, then why, at the very least, would one get involved with music-lovers in conversations about music.

Something seems to not quite add up, here.

Now posting to music discussion threads, that might be an interruption. In fact, I'm going to go now and "get on with" my life, a large part of which involves listening to music and sometimes even making some.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 07, 2017, 08:53:34 AM
Quote from: some guy on May 07, 2017, 01:30:37 AM
This wholesale resurrection of old threads seems not quite the thing, but what do I know? It's been done, and there's a statement in it that I hear a lot that seems impossibly odd and impertinent, so....

You see? Listening to music here is not a great pleasure, maybe even a necessity, it is an interruption. It might be a pleasant interruption, and if so then fine, but it's not really part of one's life. And what a life is suggested here. It is a thing to be got on with. Wow. I don't know about the rest of y'all, but isn't life something one simply does? Maybe one does it simply, too. But if music is not part of one's life, an addition to at best, an interruption or distraction from at worst, then why, at the very least, would one get involved with music-lovers in conversations about music.

Something seems to not quite add up, here.

Now posting to music discussion threads, that might be an interruption. In fact, I'm going to go now and "get on with" my life, a large part of which involves listening to music and sometimes even making some.

Thank you for this pleasant interruption.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 08, 2017, 04:27:20 AM
I don't see anything wrong with the idea of listening to music as an agreable pastime, with little, if any, existential implications in, and consequences for, one's own life.

First, not everybody is fortunate enough to live the life, or have the job, of their dreams. What's wrong, I wonder,  if music provides a welcome and sought-after interruption in, and a pleasant distraction from, the daily drudgery, monotony and boredom which for some people is an inescapable part of their job / life? What's wrong, I wonder, with a person who after a hard day's work sits tranquil in his armchair, a glass of his favorite drink in hand, listening to music in order to forget the "toil and trouble" of the day? And what's wrong, I wonder, if this person finds this music enticing and wants more of it, and that music repulsive and wants none of it anymore? Is liking each and every piece of music one hears, or listening to it at least twice, mandatory?

Second, not everybody subscribes to the Romantic mysticism of music, which views it as a legitimate, and even better and more profound than the original, substitute for religion, philosophy, metaphysics or sex, and as an object of veneration bordering on idolatry. Some people have more "classical" notions about music and its functions. Again, I wonder what's wrong with that.

Third, some of the greatest music ever penned was written with exactly this purpose in mind, namely to provide an agreable pastime to people interested both in listening to, or playing, it. Some of the greatest composers, and  tons of others more or less famous, had no other goal in writing all, or part of, their music, than to please their audience, connoisseurs and amateurs alike. This time I wonder not --- I know there is nothing wrong with that.

Fourth, the very fact of someone's registering and posting on GMG is usually proof enough that s/he is actively interested in being involved in discussions and exchanges and sharings with other music lovers. It's the inescapable nature of music, as well as one of its most beneficial social functions, to bring together people with different education, taste and listening habits. Questioning their motives for participating in debates, or altogether dismissing their approach to music as invalid or inferior, is indeed "impossibly odd and impertinent".

Fifth, and last, not everybody can be counted in among those "best and brightest" for whom ordinary life is dispensable but music isn't, so I might perhaps be pardoned for this post.

Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Maestro267 on May 08, 2017, 06:16:25 AM
Through my ears, generally speaking.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: eljr on May 08, 2017, 06:34:30 AM
Quote from: knight66 on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
How do you hear music?

"The problem with listening, of course, is that we don't. There's too much noise going on in our heads, so we never hear anything." Philip Glass
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: vandermolen on May 08, 2017, 06:37:57 AM
Quote from: knight66 on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
One of the executives within BBC radio has claimed this week that men predominately listen to the technicalities of music, whilst women have a predominantly emotional response.

I don't relate to this generalisation, but wondered if it holds any truth for the people here.

Mike

Almost exclusively from an emotional-response point of view.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 08, 2017, 07:13:19 AM
Quote from: Maestro267 on May 08, 2017, 06:16:25 AM
Through my ears, generally speaking.

+1
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 08, 2017, 09:34:38 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on May 08, 2017, 06:37:57 AM
Almost exclusively from an emotional-response point of view.

+ 1

I have absolutely no need, nor any use, for any music without a "concept, object or purpose".

Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 08, 2017, 09:45:42 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 08, 2017, 09:34:38 AM
I have absolutely no need, nor any use, for any music without a "concept, object or purpose".

Examples, please?
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 08, 2017, 10:15:00 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 08, 2017, 09:45:42 AM
Examples, please?

For I consider that music is, by its very nature, essentially powerless to express anything at all, whether a feeling, an attitude of mind, a psychological mood, a phenomenon of nature, etc. ---  Petrushka?  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 08, 2017, 10:33:47 AM
Are you claiming that Petrushka is music without a "concept, object or purpose"?  Claiming that anything of Stravinsky's is, on the strength of that horse you're beating (which must be dead by now)?

Anyway, I was asking, for the very reason that I doubt that I know of any music without a "concept, object or purpose."  So if you did know of such a piece, I wanted to consider if there really is such a thing.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 08, 2017, 02:04:29 PM
It is a strange idea to me that a composer would write something without a purpose. It would probably end up being a very thoughtless procedure. Not at all interesting to anyone.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 09, 2017, 12:19:54 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 08, 2017, 10:33:47 AM
Are you claiming that Petrushka is music without a "concept, object or purpose"?

Absolutely not. I chose it as being a perfect counter example for Stravinsky's theory about the non-expressiveness of music.

Quote
Anyway, I was asking, for the very reason that I doubt that I know of any music without a "concept, object or purpose."  So if you did know of such a piece, I wanted to consider if there really is such a thing.

Well, I don't either, and I even doubt there is any such music. The notion was proposed by Carl Dahlhaus in relation to "absolute music". With all due respect to him I think it's plain stupid.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 09, 2017, 12:21:14 AM
Quote from: jessop on May 08, 2017, 02:04:29 PM
It is a strange idea to me that a composer would write something without a purpose. It would probably end up being a very thoughtless procedure. Not at all interesting to anyone.

Precisely.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 09, 2017, 01:11:45 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 09, 2017, 12:19:54 AM
Well, I don't either, and I even doubt there is any such music.

Thanks; we agree, and now I understand your original post.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 09, 2017, 02:51:09 PM
I don't think music is inherently expressive, but human beings can perform music in am expressive way and certainly feel emotions from listening to it.

My theory is that saying 'music is expressive' or 'music is emotional' is similar to someone with synaesthesia  (who perhaps understands certain pitches to be certain colours) saying 'music has colour.' It's part of the human experience of music, not part of the actual sound or music itself. 
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 10, 2017, 01:20:05 AM
Quote from: jessop on May 09, 2017, 02:51:09 PM
I don't think music is inherently expressive, but human beings can perform music in am expressive way and certainly feel emotions from listening to it.

My theory is that saying 'music is expressive' or 'music is emotional' is similar to someone with synaesthesia  (who perhaps understands certain pitches to be certain colours) saying 'music has colour.' It's part of the human experience of music, not part of the actual sound or music itself.

But how can you separate "the human experience of music" from "the music itself"? This musical Kantianism is an impossibility: music is what humans do, whether as composers, performers or listeners. There is no "music in itself", devoid of, and divorced from, any human context (ie, experience) any more than there is "literature in itself" (as opposed to the human experience of literature) or "painting in itself" (as opposed to the human experience of painting).

The notion of "music in itself" implies logically that music is something independent from the composer who writes it down on paper (and his human experience) and who is simply a vessel through which "die Musik an sich" makes itself known to the world. This is as absurd as it sounds. There is no "Beethoven's music in itself" as opposed to "Beethoven's human experience of music"; there is only "Beethoven's music", product of a specific and particular human experience from which it can't be abstracted and outside of which its very existence can't even be explained. Paraphrasing Buffon, "La musique c'est l'homme même".

Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 10, 2017, 01:48:12 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 10, 2017, 01:20:05 AM
But how can you separate "the human experience of music" from "the music itself"? This musical Kantianism is an impossibility: music is what humans do, whether as composers, performers or listeners. There is no "music in itself", devoid of, and divorced from, any human context (ie, experience) any more than there is "literature in itself" (as opposed to the human experience of literature) or "painting in itself" (as opposed to the human experience of painting).

The notion of "music in itself" implies logically that music is something independent from the composer who writes it down on paper (and his human experience) and who is simply a vessel through which "die Musik an sich" makes itself known to the world. This is as absurd as it sounds. There is no "Beethoven's music in itself" as opposed to "Beethoven's human experience of music"; there is only "Beethoven's music", product of a specific and particular human experience from which it can't be abstracted and outside of which its very existence can't even be explained. Paraphrasing Buffon, "La musique c'est l'homme même".


Well yes exactly, I don't believe there is any real life situation where music can exist in and of itself. It's how we human beings have experimented with the way we hear sounds that we create music. It's a mistake to say 'music is expressive' in my view because I really think that only sentient beings can be or perceive expressivity.

I believe that music is created when someone listens to sound and considers it to be music. I can hear the cars on the road outside my house and I can choose to focus on different sounds my ears pick up to create my own musical experience expressive to me, but when I'm not listening to it as music then the musical/expressive element of sound ceases to exist for me. Someone, say, Paul Lansky, might record these traffic sounds because they believe there is potential in creating some kind of fixed media composition using these sounds in a musical way....that takes the idea of simply and purposefully listening to sound for its musical experience to the next level. Then this becomes 'Paul Lansky's Music' as opposed to my own.

On the next level of complexity in creating sounds as music, people start building instruments to create specific sounds they particularly enjoy and people start to instruct musicians on what they want them to do on these instruments. This has way more human involvement and thus there are many more experiences of how the same musical piece can sound....but then again, it's only music if someone believes it to be music, and how 'expressive' the sounds are is dependant on how we perceive them when we hear them. Now that I think about it like this, I certainly agree with you. :)
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 10, 2017, 02:20:38 AM
Quote from: jessop on May 10, 2017, 01:48:12 AM
I don't believe there is any real life situation where music can exist in and of itself.

Iow, you don't believe there is such a thing as "music in itself". Good, so far we are in perfect agreement.  :)


QuoteIt's a mistake to say 'music is expressive' in my view because I really think that only sentient beings can be or perceive expressivity.

Now, that's a little linguistical trick.   ;D

When someone says "music is expressive", that person does not mean, or imply, that music is a sentient being. S/he simply means, or implies, that music, just like any other art, is a vehicle for expressivity, that it can, and does, convey expressive content. "Music is expressive" is not in the same linguistic category as "John is emotional" or "Jane is cerebral".

Quote
I believe that music is created when someone listens to sound and considers it to be music. I can hear the cars on the road outside my house and I can choose to focus on different sounds my ears pick up to create my own musical experience expressive to me, but when I'm not listening to it as music then the musical/expressive element of sound ceases to exist for me. Someone, say, Paul Lansky, might record these traffic sounds because they believe there is potential in creating some kind of fixed media composition using these sounds in a musical way....that takes the idea of simply and purposefully listening to sound for its musical experience to the next level. Then this becomes 'Paul Lansky's Music' as opposed to my own.

Yes, agreed. This is actually the key distinction between "sounds" and "music" and the very reason why we have two different words for two different things and that is also why saying "music is just sounds and nothing else but sounds" is wrong. Sounds are a natural phenomenon (or in the case of cars an unintended byproduct of their way of functioning), music is something people do purposefully, thus investing it ab initio with meaning. Sounds are indeed just sounds, music is sounds plus the meaning we intentionally invest them with. No purpose or meaning, no music, it's that simple, or more general, no intention, no art.

Quote
I certainly agree with you. :)

Excellent.  :)

Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: jochanaan on May 11, 2017, 03:19:20 PM
Quote from: Spineur on May 05, 2017, 05:59:12 PM
...But most people would agree that Bach is mostly an harmonic composer...
Actually, most people would not agree.  Bach's music is very melodic, but the melody is very often organized into counterpoint.  The harmony is almost incidental.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on May 11, 2017, 07:22:59 PM
I for one like the technicalities. I find them emotionally moving.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 12, 2017, 03:52:45 AM
Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on May 11, 2017, 07:22:59 PM
I for one like the technicalities. I find them emotionally moving.

+1
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Monsieur Croche on May 13, 2017, 02:04:08 AM
Oh, dem British public schooled old boys... lol.

The man managed, quite deftly in one fell swoop, to insult the intelligence of the entirety of the music-making and music-listening public... with those few rare true hermaphrodites included, I suppose.

And I, with my American version of a background of 'public schooling' -- i.e. a (private) Arts Academy prep school -- say to what this British Old Boy said, "Pish-tosh and cobsnuts."

So, there.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 13, 2017, 11:34:46 AM
Quote from: Thatfabulousalien on May 13, 2017, 02:12:39 AM
what are technicalities? theory?  :-\ and how do they differ from emotions?

Technicalities differ from emotions in exactly the same way as knowing that tears are produced by an excitation of the lacrimal glands differs from crying.  ;D

Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on May 13, 2017, 03:30:50 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 13, 2017, 11:34:46 AM
Technicalities differ from emotions in exactly the same way as knowing that tears are produced by an excitation of the lacrimal glands differs from crying.  ;D

From a play I read:

SYLVAN Do you know I spent an afternoon once tracing the key relationships in the scherzo from Beethoven's first Rasumovsky Quartet. It's this wonderful, kaleidoscopic piece where Beethoven is juggling six, seven themes in the air, and I found that even though it touches almost every key center, the one key it never uses is the simple, basic subdominant. And I found that fascinating.
GODFREY Can't you just enjoy your music without thinking about it so much?
SYLVAN But I enjoy thinking about it.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Parsifal on May 13, 2017, 04:50:12 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 13, 2017, 11:34:46 AM
Technicalities differ from emotions in exactly the same way as knowing that tears are produced by an excitation of the lacrimal glands differs from crying.  ;D

Do you enjoy a dish less knowing what ingredients make it delicious? Why would you think recognizing the harmonic structure of a piece would make it any less moving?
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 13, 2017, 05:16:25 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on May 13, 2017, 04:50:12 PM
Do you enjoy a dish less knowing what ingredients make it delicious?

No.

Quote
Why would you think recognizing the harmonic structure of a piece would make it any less moving?

Well, I cannot recognize anything nearly resembling harmonic structure....
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 13, 2017, 06:05:43 PM
Quote from: Thatfabulousalien on May 13, 2017, 04:53:17 PM
Actually, I prefer not to know what I'm eating. Ignorance is bliss, I'd probably not eat a lot of stuff if I knew exactly how it was made.
This is why I prefer to eat healthy............
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 13, 2017, 06:12:56 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on May 13, 2017, 04:50:12 PM
Do you enjoy a dish less knowing what ingredients make it delicious? Why would you think recognizing the harmonic structure of a piece would make it any less moving?

I think this is a good analogy. ;D
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 13, 2017, 06:13:39 PM
Quote from: Thatfabulousalien on May 13, 2017, 04:53:17 PM
Actually, I prefer not to know what I'm eating. Ignorance is bliss, I'd probably not eat a lot of stuff if I knew exactly how it was made.

"Secret sauce"
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Monsieur Croche on May 13, 2017, 07:44:19 PM
Quote from: Thatfabulousalien on May 13, 2017, 02:12:39 AM
I don't understand the premise of that claim.

...who wants pizza? I'll order.

Bacon, Black Olive, and Mushroom, please.  Thank you very much.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Monsieur Croche on May 13, 2017, 07:45:58 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 13, 2017, 11:34:46 AM
Technicalities differ from emotions in exactly the same way as knowing that tears are produced by an excitation of the lacrimal glands differs from crying.  ;D

Oh my word.  That is rather perfect:  one is dry, the other wet, lol.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on May 14, 2017, 04:18:01 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 13, 2017, 05:16:25 PM
Well, I cannot recognize anything nearly resembling harmonic structure....

You most certainly can. There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that you could easily identify a dominant seventh chord, a plagal cadence, an appoggiatura, a diminished seventh, a modulation, and much more whenever you hear any of these things, and I assure you that you hear every one of them often. You just may not have the vocabulary to identify what you are hearing.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 14, 2017, 09:59:59 AM
Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on May 14, 2017, 04:18:01 AM
You most certainly can. There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that you could easily identify a dominant seventh chord, a plagal cadence, an appoggiatura, a diminished seventh, a modulation, and much more whenever you hear any of these things, and I assure you that you hear every one of them often. You just may not have the vocabulary to identify what you are hearing.

That is certainly true.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Niko240 on May 15, 2017, 04:42:28 AM
Quote from: eljr on May 08, 2017, 06:34:30 AM
"The problem with listening, of course, is that we don't. There's too much noise going on in our heads, so we never hear anything." Philip Glass

I completely agree with this, as I'm always trying to quiet my mind while listening to music.  So if an emotion, memory, image, etc., comes to me, I take it in and then pass it by going back to the music.  It's often quite hard for me concentrate, especially on music rich in complexity.  So I guess how I hear music is that I try to listen to it as best as I could.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 15, 2017, 04:52:57 AM
Quote from: Niko240 on May 15, 2017, 04:42:28 AM
I completely agree with this, as I'm always trying to quiet my mind while listening to music.  So if an emotion, memory, image, etc., comes to me, I take it in and then pass it by going back to the music.  It's often quite hard for me concentrate, especially on music rich in complexity.  So I guess how I hear music is that I try to listen to it as best as I could.
I'm sorry to hear that you have difficulties in concentration and this affects your listening. Has this always been the case? Do you find yourself not being focussed with other things as well? I'm very curious about this, as listening to music is as easy as breathing to me.......
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 15, 2017, 05:01:05 AM
It can require effort to resist internal distractions.  A good meditation.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Niko240 on May 15, 2017, 05:33:13 AM
Quote from: jessop on May 15, 2017, 04:52:57 AM
I'm sorry to hear that you have difficulties in concentration and this affects your listening. Has this always been the case? Do you find yourself not being focussed with other things as well? I'm very curious about this, as listening to music is as easy as breathing to me.......

It takes disciplined listening for me to hear technically sophisticated, emotionally complex music.  Another area that requires this sort of discipline for me is philosophy, which I enjoy reading.  Is the music of Webern "as easy as breathing" to you?  I think that you might be a better listener than I am.  Usually I'm trying to keep myself out of the experience, perhaps along the lines of a dissolution of the ego.   

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 15, 2017, 05:01:05 AM
It can require effort to resist internal distractions.  A good meditation.

That's true.  I don't meditate or practice mindfulness so listening to some of the composers discussed on this forum is closest to achieving a clear state of mind without internal distractions. I've asked several people who know a lot about meditation if it would help me understand a piece of music with less listens, but haven't gotten convincing answers.  It probably helps resist internal distractions, but being a good listener, or listening to music deeply, is another ball game.   
[/quote]
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 15, 2017, 05:37:22 AM
Quote from: Niko240 on May 15, 2017, 05:33:13 AM
I've asked several people who know a lot about meditation if it would help me understand a piece of music with less listens, but haven't gotten convincing answers.  It probably helps resist internal distractions, but being a good listener, or listening to music deeply, is another ball game.

I think you're right, there.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: millionrainbows on May 15, 2017, 12:27:01 PM
This may all change. In fact, I guarantee it.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 15, 2017, 03:47:01 PM
Quote from: Niko240 on May 15, 2017, 05:33:13 AM
It takes disciplined listening for me to hear technically sophisticated, emotionally complex music.  Another area that requires this sort of discipline for me is philosophy, which I enjoy reading.  Is the music of Webern "as easy as breathing" to you?  I think that you might be a better listener than I am.  Usually I'm trying to keep myself out of the experience, perhaps along the lines of a dissolution of the ego.   
Ah I see. Personally I don't think I'm a 'better' listener than anyone. I haven't been listening to music for as long as most people on this forum so I am much less experienced and have listened to fewer composers by far, however I do listen to music for what it makes me feel and for my own enjoyment. I love it when I feel like I'm hearing beauty or I feel excited when listening to music. The only thing I do is let it enter my ears and then my reactions are things I have no conscious control over. Webern is a wonderful composer; I'm especially fond of his five movements for string quartet op. 5.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Parsifal on May 15, 2017, 03:54:58 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 13, 2017, 11:34:46 AM
Technicalities differ from emotions in exactly the same way as knowing that tears are produced by an excitation of the lacrimal glands differs from crying.  ;D

Quote from: Monsieur Croche on May 13, 2017, 07:45:58 PM
Oh my word.  That is rather perfect:  one is dry, the other wet, lol.

I don't find Florestan's analogy rings true. The anatomy of lacrimal glands is unrelated to the source of grief that results in tears. The technicalities of music are the tools that composers use to create emotionally evocative music. Florenstan's understanding of lacrimal glands would be analogous to calculating the normal modes of vibration of a violin string.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 15, 2017, 08:57:28 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on May 15, 2017, 03:54:58 PM
The anatomy of lacrimal glands is unrelated to the source of grief that results in tears. The technicalities of music are the tools that composers use to create emotionally evocative music.

There are some posters here who claim precisely that the technicalities of music are unrelated to the emotions we experience when we hear it.

Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 15, 2017, 09:05:20 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 15, 2017, 08:57:28 PM
There are some posters here who claim precisely that the technicalities of music are unrelated to the emotions we experience when we hear it.


That sounds like a silly point to try to make.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 16, 2017, 02:49:01 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 15, 2017, 08:57:28 PM
There are some posters here who claim precisely that the relation between technicalities of music are unrelated to and the emotions we experience when we hear it is indirect and complex.

FTFY
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 16, 2017, 02:49:29 AM
Quote from: jessop on May 15, 2017, 09:05:20 PM
That sounds like a silly point to try to make.

It's next-door to a strawman.  Certainly a tiresome simplification, and I fail utterly to see the use Andrei finds in flogging it.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 16, 2017, 03:25:05 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 16, 2017, 02:49:01 AM
FTFY

In respect with your position on the issue, I agree with the correction.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 16, 2017, 03:39:39 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 16, 2017, 03:25:05 AM
In respect with your position on the issue, I agree with the correction.

Meanwhile, in the Unpopular Opinions thread . . . .

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 16, 2017, 03:38:26 AM
Barring the attachment of non-musical information, it is impossible, completely impossible, to write music which will mean the same thing, emotionally, to all listeners.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on May 16, 2017, 03:43:53 AM
I dislike the word "technicalities," because that implies a trivialization. It would be more proper to speak of the "materials" of music. And these include things most of us will recognize, no matter how much musical training we may or may not have. We can all distinguish an oboe from a violin; we can all easily perceive that a waltz is in 3/4 time and a march in 4/4. These are all part of the vocabulary of musical materials. The general public, however, is usually not educated in identifying intervals, chords, cadences, modes, and the like; and so when discussion of those things comes up it is regularly dismissed as indulging in "technicalities" or "looking under the hood" or "I don't have to know how the food is made to enjoy it."

But the analogy is false: there's no "looking under the hood." It is all out in the open. And if I were to sit with one of the "technicalities" crowd and identify the sound of a subdominant chord in a plagal cadence (the "amen" sound), you'd simply say: "Oh, that's what that is! It's easy once you know what you're listening to."
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 16, 2017, 04:04:02 AM
Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on May 16, 2017, 03:43:53 AM
I dislike the word "technicalities," because that implies a trivialization. It would be more proper to speak of the "materials" of music. And these include things most of us will recognize, no matter how much musical training we may or may not have. We can all distinguish an oboe from a violin; we can all easily perceive that a waltz is in 3/4 time and a march in 4/4. These are all part of the vocabulary of musical materials. The general public, however, is usually not educated in identifying intervals, chords, cadences, modes, and the like; and so when discussion of those things comes up it is regularly dismissed as indulging in "technicalities" or "looking under the hood" or "I don't have to know how the food is made to enjoy it."

But the analogy is false: there's no "looking under the hood." It is all out in the open. And if I were to sit with one of the "technicalities" crowd and identify the sound of a subdominant chord in a plagal cadence (the "amen" sound), you'd simply say: "Oh, that's what that is! It's easy once you know what you're listening to."

That's true, and a sad reflection on the state of general musical education worldwide. I for one regret not having a "technical" music education --- not because I'm not able to analyze to death this or that piece, but because I'm not able to play an instrument.

My point, though, is that for some people (not you nor Karl, just to be clear) it seems the "technicalities" in themselves are far more important than the actual response music evoke in listeners. I simply cannot understand how such a clearcut distinction between the technical and the emotional part of music can be made, and how the latter can be said as primarily dependent on factors other than the former.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on May 16, 2017, 05:25:34 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 16, 2017, 04:04:02 AM
That's true, and a sad reflection on the state of general musical education worldwide. I for one regret not having a "technical" music education --- not because I'm not able to analyze to death this or that piece, but because I'm not able to play an instrument.

My point, though, is that for some people (not you nor Karl, just to be clear) it seems the "technicalities" in themselves are far more important than the actual response music evoke in listeners. I simply cannot understand how such a clearcut distinction between the technical and the emotional part of music can be made, and how the latter can be said as primarily dependent on factors other than the former.

Then again, none of us knows how we actually listen, as opposed to how we talk about how we listen.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 16, 2017, 05:28:22 AM
Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on May 16, 2017, 05:25:34 AM
Then again, none of us knows how we actually listen, as opposed to how we talk about how we listen.

Very good!
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: millionrainbows on May 16, 2017, 09:48:47 AM
Listening to Wagner, like Parsifal or Tristan, to connect the "extended" harmonies back to traditional tonality is an intellectual exercise. Only an informed listener would know to make that connection, because without resolution, all the chromaticism is just chromatic, not tonal. So even chromatic "tonal" music needs informing.

Truly tonal music is based on harmonic realities, and its "logic" is in its sound. It is not an intellectual construct as much as it is a visceral experience.

One cannot truly grasp the structure of chromatic, 12-tone, and serialism without some form of understanding of that which is not apparent, and is "hidden" in the structure in the sense that it is not apparent to the ear. Without this, it is still beautiful sound, but not as fully understood as it could be.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: millionrainbows on May 16, 2017, 10:37:39 AM
The ear/brain has a natural tendency to hear interval relations in terms of their relation to a fundamental tone (not "root"), so your acuity (or lack) at perceiving more abstruse harmonic meanings (meanings which shift constantly) is similar to the ability of "experts" who have learned (and have inherent propensities) to perceive other types of perceptual meanings, like seeing visual meaning in abstract art, the ability to draw, to dance, throw a football, a master chef's sense of smell/taste, and other areas.

What I'm saying is that you either hear it, or you don't. The people who can hear meaning in abstruse music are the ones who like it, and have a natural visceral propensity; the ones who say that they "reject" it are more often than not unable to hear it, based mainly on an inherently lower visceral propensity. These people are "crippled" from the start.

If a person has demonstrated that they do have a good ear/brain connection (by playing an instrument, singing, etc) and they still can't penetrate more abstruse music, then this is more likely to be from willful choice, due to unfamiliarity or refusal to explore, not an inherent inability. This type of "refusal" is much more credible than the run-of-the mill criticisms of those listeners who are inherently unable to hear and understand, from both a vicseral and cognitive standpoint.

What I'm saying is that "your ear" (visceral) is the stimulus that "draws you in" to more difficult music. This is a very natural ability, and some folks have it, while others don't. This translates (after the fact) into "preference."

This preference is not "debatable" on a credible level by those who are unable to hear it on a visceral level, because this boils down to inherent ability, not will. It's like some people don't enjoy dancing because they can't do it well (comparatively).
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 16, 2017, 02:12:39 PM
Quote from: millionrainbows on May 16, 2017, 09:48:47 AM
Listening to Wagner, like Parsifal or Tristan, to connect the "extended" harmonies back to traditional tonality is an intellectual exercise. Only an informed listener would know to make that connection, because without resolution, all the chromaticism is just chromatic, not tonal. So even chromatic "tonal" music needs informing.

Truly tonal music is based on harmonic realities, and its "logic" is in its sound. It is not an intellectual construct as much as it is a visceral experience.

One cannot truly grasp the structure of chromatic, 12-tone, and serialism without some form of understanding of that which is not apparent, and is "hidden" in the structure in the sense that it is not apparent to the ear. Without this, it is still beautiful sound, but not as fully understood as it could be.

We can grasp the structure just fine, thanks. It isn't necessarily a 'hidden' structure. Motifs and harmknies derived from a row can be perfectly audible when a composer chooses to highlight those characteristics of a row. And for anything that isn't 12-tone, composers ave their own way of creating some kind of internal logic in each piece. The ears hear everything the composer writes for the musicians to play and we just happen to enjoy it and make sense of it because the composer wrote something that obviously has some kind of structure....
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on May 17, 2017, 12:00:34 AM
Quote from: millionrainbows on May 16, 2017, 10:37:39 AM
The people who can hear meaning in abstruse music are the ones who like it, and have a natural visceral propensity; the ones who say that they "reject" it are more often than not unable to hear it, based mainly on an inherently lower visceral propensity. These people are "crippled" from the start.

Nonsense.

Quote
What I'm saying is that "your ear" (visceral) is the stimulus that "draws you in" to more difficult music. This is a very natural ability, and some folks have it, while others don't.
[/quote]

Nonsense on stilts.

Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 17, 2017, 01:12:20 AM
And shaky stilts, at that.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 17, 2017, 02:07:36 AM
I find myself agreeing more and more with Florestan these days....am I growing wiser, or more insane?
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: some guy on May 17, 2017, 06:29:10 AM
Quote from: jessop on May 17, 2017, 02:07:36 AM
I find myself agreeing more and more with Florestan these days....am I growing wiser, or more insane?
Can't it be both?
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on May 17, 2017, 06:56:29 AM
Ideally, it ought to be both, perhaps.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Monsieur Croche on May 17, 2017, 07:07:38 AM
~ Honk If You Love Noise ~
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: North Star on May 17, 2017, 11:24:25 AM
But if you love it, is it noise?
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Monsieur Croche on May 17, 2017, 09:47:14 PM
Quote from: North Star on May 17, 2017, 11:24:25 AM
But if you love it, is it noise?

0:) Precisely!0:)

Thanks :-)
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: eljr on July 05, 2017, 12:47:56 PM
Quote from: North Star on May 17, 2017, 11:24:25 AM
But if you love it, is it noise?

well, in that case, it's lovely noise! :P
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: BasilValentine on July 12, 2017, 10:58:10 AM
Quote from: knight66 on February 22, 2008, 12:03:30 PM
One of the executives within BBC radio has claimed this week that men predominately listen to the technicalities of music, whilst women have a predominantly emotional response.

I don't relate to this generalisation, but wondered if it holds any truth for the people here.

Mike

Doesn't hold any truth for me. First and foremost I listen aesthetically, not technically or emotionally.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on July 12, 2017, 11:10:58 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on July 12, 2017, 10:58:10 AM
First and foremost I listen aesthetically

What does "listening aesthetically" mean?
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on July 12, 2017, 03:27:57 PM
Listening 'aesthetically' or 'technically' or 'emotionally' are equally as meaningless to me. I enjoy the aesthetics of various pieces of music, as determined by the tools and techniques a composer/musician employs, because they evoke an emotional response in me.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: North Star on July 13, 2017, 02:22:50 AM
Quote from: α | ì Æ ñ on July 12, 2017, 03:47:35 PM
To be blunt here, there is only one way you can possibly listen to music. No, not with your nose. No, not with your toes. No, not with your elbows.

With your ears, fullstop!


BUT, there are hundreds of situations you can listen to music, that is a different matter.

There could be aspects of music that take your fancy but that is really picking apart things in a rather mundane way. "Emotion" sure, but how does this differ? you know? it's just not the way music is really perceived.

I suppose you could say that you are a more emotional type of person (as in more emotionally sensitive or receptive), which would relate to the way you interpret on a personal level but you are still listening with your ears  ;) not your nose  :laugh:
With loud bass frequencies involved, your whole body can be a part of the listening experience, though. The ears are really just picking up vibrations, and the actual listening is what the brain does with the information, so it could be said that we don't listen with our ears but with our brains.
Title: How do you hear music?
Post by: Karl Henning on July 13, 2017, 02:26:14 AM
The ears are only the entryway.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: millionrainbows on July 13, 2017, 09:09:55 AM
"The ears are the only entryway." ---Stravinsky's duck

Yes, it's a given that we all hear 'harmonically,' because pitched sound 'models' the harmonic series in various ways; not literally, but as a 'model' of a fundamental with its subservient harmonic components.

The Berg Violin Concerto is an example, perhaps not ideal, of how a composer can convincingly create 'harmonic meaning' in music which is not actually tonal, or based on a tonal hierarchy. Some listeners mistake this artistry, as well as much of Schoenberg's later atonal works, as being 'tonal' because the composers have so convincingly manipulated the harmonic sequences and progressions, which make sense to our ears, but are not "tonal" at all, as in being referenced to a central tone.

But the harmonic meanings are comparative and relative to each other, in what preceded and followed, not in reference to a central tonic, as in tonality.

Naysayers who reject Schoenberg obviously do not have good enough ears to hear the harmonic logic. Those who do understand it often mistakenly call this 'tonality.'

So, yes, "the ear is the way in," but what about after that?

I'm afraid that the majority of listeners, even certain astute and educated ones with good ears, are groping in the dark when they try to interpret such sounds in Schoenberg as 'tonality' of sorts. Only the Second Viennese ties to tradition are what make this music palatable or meaningful to them, and only because the music resembles tonality, in its ebb and flow of tensions, do they 'gain admission' into the rarified territory of chromaticism and atonality, without fully grasping what they are hearing.

When faced with more difficult fare, such as late Webern or Elliott Carter, they fail, and call this 'tonality.'

Sure, we all have ears, and we can all swallow, and we can all reproduce; but beyond these 'automatic' talents, the 'brain' part of 'ear/brain' is skewed towards the sensual, the visceral, the emotional, and the easy spasm of knee-jerk attraction. Music is more than that.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Mandryka on July 13, 2017, 09:22:06 AM
Quote from: millionrainbows on July 13, 2017, 09:09:55 AM
When faced with more difficult fare, such as late Webern or Elliott Carter, they fail.

This just doesn't ring true for my own experience with the Webern cantatas or Carter Quartet 4. I'm listening right now to Babbitt 5 and it sounds stuffed with tunes and harmonically sounds natural and logical.

Basically I've lost the sense of disorientation I used to have with this sort of music, it now feels comfortable and relaxing.

(I listened earlier today to Reich's double sextet and that felt disorienting - like what's the point of this?)
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: millionrainbows on July 13, 2017, 09:32:11 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on July 13, 2017, 09:22:06 AM
This just doesn't ring true for my own experience with the Webern cantatas or Carter Quartet 4. I'm listening right now to Babbitt 5 and it sounds stuffed with tunes and harmonically sounds natural and logical.

Basically I've lost the sense of disorientation I used to have with this sort of music, it now feels comfortable and relaxing.

(I listened earlier today to Reich's double sextet and that felt disorienting - like what's the point of this?)

That's all good, Mandryka. If you can approach this music on its own terms, you are obviously an astute listener.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on July 14, 2017, 10:51:01 AM
Quote from: millionrainbows on July 13, 2017, 09:09:55 AM
Naysayers who reject Schoenberg obviously do not have good enough ears to hear the harmonic logic.

the 'brain' part of 'ear/brain' is skewed towards the sensual, the visceral, the emotional, and the easy spasm of knee-jerk attraction. Music is more than that.

<ADVERTISING>

The Second Viennese School scares you? Boulez gives you headaches? Are you nervous and sleepless after listening to Xenakis? Now you can forget about all these troubles and many more. The famous Cuban-born American audiologist prof. Atonalio Buenoreja, Ph.D., M.D, G.P., has developed a state-of-the-art, non-invasive and totally painless method of tweaking your ears so that they instantly adapt and adjust to the most difficult and abstruse combinations of sounds, providing you with a fresh, lasting, never-before experienced enjoyment and pleasure, both sensorial and intellectual. Don't hesitate! Quality guaranteed! 30-day total refund if not satisfied! Call now 555-123456789. For the first 10 phone calls, both ears tweaked for the price of one!

For best results, we recommend you consider as well getting yourself a razor-sharp, icy-cold harmonically logical brain, using the revolutionary, newly-patented treatment discovered by the celebrated German brain surgeon Dr. med. Abstraktus Steinherz. Details and prices coming soon!

</ADVERTISING>
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: BasilValentine on July 16, 2017, 09:24:34 AM
Quote from: Florestan on July 12, 2017, 11:10:58 AM
What does "listening aesthetically" mean?

The OP question is sort of like asking: Do you listen to language grammatically/syntactically or semantically? The answer is both because the two are indecomposably fused and mutually dependent. The same thing is true in music, it's just harder to hear and conceptualize.

Applied to music the technical vs. emotional dichotomy is just the ancient form vs. content question viewed from the perspective of the listener rather than from that of the aesthetic object. My view on these oppositions was succinctly stated by Mikhail Bakhtin in his "Content, Material, and Form in Verbal Art:"

"Above all, it is necessary to understand the aesthetic object synthetically, in its wholeness, to understand form and content in their essential and necessary interrelationship: form as the form of content, and content as the content of form."

I believe the vocabulary and forms of common practice (and beyond) music exist as they do because they evolved symbiotically over centuries with the kinds of content they were conceived to embody. Why did the major-minor system evolve the way it did after Gioseffo Zarlino first made the distinction between modes with major thirds above the final and those with minor thirds above the final "a thing" in 1558? It fell out the way it did because composers then and since have sought clear binary musical oppositions to embody expressive and semantic oppositions in the texts they were setting and in the rhetorical development of their themes. Why out of the great diversity of sonata forms prevalent in the late 18thc, from the frequently monothematic movements of Haydn to the profusely polythematic designs of Mozart, did textbook sonata form settle on two themes as a norm? Because certain iconic works of late Mozart and Beethoven suggested the ways clear binary oppositions in content can be used to define large-scale formal processes in single movements and to guide cyclic thematic processes across multimovement designs. Form and content are indecomposable aesthetically and historically. Modern theory, in search of a quasi-scientific cache, has decomposed them and made oppositions like technical versus emotional sound reasonable. They aren't and they really don't work. So, Florestan, listening aesthetically to me means: "[hearing] form and content in their essential and necessary interrelationship: form as the form of content, and content as the content of form."

In retrospect ^ ^ ^, maybe it would have been easier to just answer "both." ;)
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Florestan on July 16, 2017, 09:30:03 AM
Thanks for your thoughtful reply.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: millionrainbows on July 17, 2017, 12:44:41 PM
Western music, though, has always been a dialectic between the sensual and the logical/geometric. To apprehend a form in music through the ears is one thing, to apprehend it with the mind is the other, and since Bach & Mozart it has been thus.

Otherwise, Western classical music is like any other didgeridoo player.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: Wanderer on July 18, 2017, 12:38:04 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on July 16, 2017, 09:24:34 AM
The OP question is sort of like asking: Do you listen to language grammatically/syntactically or semantically? The answer is both because the two are indecomposably fused and mutually dependent. The same thing is true in music, it's just harder to hear and conceptualize.

Applied to music the technical vs. emotional dichotomy is just the ancient form vs. content question viewed from the perspective of the listener rather than from that of the aesthetic object. My view on these oppositions was succinctly stated by Mikhail Bakhtin in his "Content, Material, and Form in Verbal Art:"

"Above all, it is necessary to understand the aesthetic object synthetically, in its wholeness, to understand form and content in their essential and necessary interrelationship: form as the form of content, and content as the content of form."

I believe the vocabulary and forms of common practice (and beyond) music exist as they do because they evolved symbiotically over centuries with the kinds of content they were conceived to embody. Why did the major-minor system evolve the way it did after Gioseffo Zarlino first made the distinction between modes with major thirds above the final and those with minor thirds above the final "a thing" in 1558? It fell out the way it did because composers then and since have sought clear binary musical oppositions to embody expressive and semantic oppositions in the texts they were setting and in the rhetorical development of their themes. Why out of the great diversity of sonata forms prevalent in the late 18thc, from the frequently monothematic movements of Haydn to the profusely polythematic designs of Mozart, did textbook sonata form settle on two themes as a norm? Because certain iconic works of late Mozart and Beethoven suggested the ways clear binary oppositions in content can be used to define large-scale formal processes in single movements and to guide cyclic thematic processes across multimovement designs. Form and content are indecomposable aesthetically and historically. Modern theory, in search of a quasi-scientific cache, has decomposed them and made oppositions like technical versus emotional sound reasonable. They aren't and they really don't work. So, Florestan, listening aesthetically to me means: "[hearing] form and content in their essential and necessary interrelationship: form as the form of content, and content as the content of form."

In retrospect ^ ^ ^, maybe it would have been easier to just answer "both." ;)

Very succinctly put. This is my view on the matter, as well.
Title: Re: How do you hear music?
Post by: millionrainbows on July 18, 2017, 09:39:52 AM
Yes, that seems to wrap it up in a nice, neat little package.