# The experience of music



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Something I've been bemusing for a while . . .

I often thought that music has three phases, composing, interpreting, and hearing. I have jokingly stated that my part of the process is the hearing and as a listener I am vital in making music complete. One of my main goals in life is to be a receptacle for music and other arts.

But now I'm wondering if there is a fourth phase - sharing. No, not file sharing. I mean sharing the experience. As music can have a profound physiological effect on the listener (even more profound than love-making, some researchers say), we seem to have as profound a need for others to have the exact same experience - even to the point of thinking people rude or inept if they don't or can't share it.

You see this throughout life and it is especially evident on the web where decorum takes wing. You Tube is riddled with exchanges like:

"Man, Ritchie Blackmore rocks!"
"No doofus - Clapton is God."
"You're both #$%*ing morons. Hendrix rules them all -- end of story."
"No. Iommi is da MAN!!!" etc. etc.

The forums here are scarcely more civil sometimes, so it's universal. We all have an almost primal need for others to experience life and particularly the arts in exactly the same way we do. I see it in myself as well.

I wonder why this is. What is the motivation behind this need? Surely someone has studied this phenomemon. *Maybe I need to read some books on the impact of the arts, if there are any. *

Not sure what I am asking for here. Sorry for the meandering rather unfocused topic.  Maybe the sentence I have bolded above is really the focus.


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

Interesting post, and the topic is well worth discussing. I think by its very nature it's going to be diffuse rather than sharply focused, while we explore what's going on.

Art - all art, including music - is primarily a form of communication, for me. There's a thrill that comes from the actual communication process itself (because it feels exhilarating and inspiring when real, significant communication takes place between people); and with great art there's a thrill about _what's_ being communicated, because so often new insight is acquired. Great art changes lives - literally; or at least, it can do. We've experienced something that's changed us in an enriching way, and we see, in hindsight, that we were poorer before it happened. When some new piece of music, or poem, or painting hits us like this, it nearly always feels like someone throwing a window open in a stuffy room - only we hadn't quite realised that the room was stuffy, until now. So it's not surprising, I think, that we want to tell other people and share this, and recommend them to open the window too. It's perfectly possible to enjoy a delicious wine on your own, but so much better if you can share the bottle.

The difficulty arises when someone comes along and rubbishes it, trampling all over the pearls you've just found. That's quite painful. You were _there_; you tuned in; you got the message; you know what you know. This guy who's rubbishing it may have been there, but he didn't tune in; didn't get the message; doesn't know anything about what you've just experienced, yet speaks as if he does. You dug down and found treasure; he dug down, and found none. That doesn't mean there's no treasure; it just means he didn't find any. You _know_ it was there. You hate the pain he inflicts with his negative comments about something you love; he hates the fact that you found treasure but he can't find any. Perhaps he may even find consolation by convincing himself that _not_ finding any is a sign of his superior taste. And so everything is set up for a typical internet forum fight. Nothing much to do with art at all, really; but a great deal to do with self-esteem.

I think that in all this, the real thing - the only thing unquestionably of personal value - is that insight that came through the art. Even if you're the only person who can see the gold, you know the gold is real. The discussion, however desirable, is secondary.


----------



## howlingmadhowie (Mar 26, 2009)

music's a funny thing because it is a mixture of subjective and objective, in the sense that there are some discussions where opinion will be divided roughly equally and we can refer to the final decision being a matter of personal preference whereas you can have other discussions where there is an overwhelming opinion that A is better than B (whatever attribute better applies to in this particular context). 

in that respect, comparing different musical experiences is very different from comparing different cars or comparing scientific hypotheses. 

i'm not sure about your 3 phases hypothesis, and even less sure about the 4th phase. while composing, a (classical) composer really does do the first 3 at the same time. s/he writes the music on the page, which is just what s/he is hearing in his/her head played in a certain manner. the 4th phase seems to be a standard part of psychology. 

sorry to be so negative about your ideas. they probably work well enough for you and any number of people, but i'm not sure they provide a good framework for analysing or describing music.


----------



## Gorm Less (Dec 11, 2008)

Weston said:


> As music can have a profound physiological effect on the listener (even more profound than love-making, some researchers say), we seem to have as profound a need for others to have the exact same experience - even to the point of thinking people rude or inept if they don't or can't share it.
> 
> I wonder why this is.


I have snipped the main two sentences in your post, as I see them.

I am not sure that I agree with your fundamental premise. I would suspect that if a survey were carried out asking people about their tastes in music and then asking whether they feel a need to proselytise among friends, family, work colleagues, strangers on music forums, and whether it concerns them if others may not share their tastes, the results would show a wide spread of opinion ranging from little or no need /concern to possibly a great deal.

Where the "mean" of that distribution might lie I do not know but I cannot believe that it is all that high in terms of high need/concern, or that the "mean" is stable across different age groups. Thus, whereas you see uniformity in the way you think that people try to persuade others to participate in their tastes, I see wide diversity.

Also, I cannot believe that for any one individual the response would be the same at different points in their relevant life cycle. It is likely to change over time according to previous experience.

Speaking personally, I have long given up expecting my acquaintances to share my tastes in music, or worrying about it if they do not. Therefore, your premise does not apply to me, except perhaps in a mild way. I certainly have no wish to slam other peoples' tastes in music. On the contrary, I find myself occasionally niggled by people who have strong opinions on their choice of music and who try to foist them on others or to belittle others' tastes. This might explain why I tend to react to certain people and situations.


----------



## Lang (Sep 30, 2008)

Blimey, this deserves repetition in full. I do hope it's read by certain people on this forum:-



Elgarian said:


> Interesting post, and the topic is well worth discussing. I think by its very nature it's going to be diffuse rather than sharply focused, while we explore what's going on.
> 
> Art - all art, including music - is primarily a form of communication, for me. There's a thrill that comes from the actual communication process itself (because it feels exhilarating and inspiring when real, significant communication takes place between people); and with great art there's a thrill about _what's_ being communicated, because so often new insight is acquired. Great art changes lives - literally; or at least, it can do. We've experienced something that's changed us in an enriching way, and we see, in hindsight, that we were poorer before it happened. When some new piece of music, or poem, or painting hits us like this, it nearly always feels like someone throwing a window open in a stuffy room - only we hadn't quite realised that the room was stuffy, until now. So it's not surprising, I think, that we want to tell other people and share this, and recommend them to open the window too. It's perfectly possible to enjoy a delicious wine on your own, but so much better if you can share the bottle.
> 
> ...


----------



## Nicola (Nov 25, 2007)

Lang said:


> Blimey, this deserves repetition in full. I do hope it's read by certain people on this forum:-


Does it? I found reading it once was more than enough. In fact I am still reading it, wondering what the heck it all means. Anyone worked it out yet?


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Nicola said:


> Does it? I found reading it once was more than enough. In fact I am still reading it, wondering what the heck it all means. Anyone worked it out yet?


Yes, and I think it's a wonderful post.

What it basically means is that you have on the one hand those who like to slam others for having a different opinion from their own and who like to wallow in negativity, and on the other hand those who hope that their enthusiasm for the music that they love is contagious enough to convince a few others without feeling the need to bash what those people may already like.


----------



## nefigah (Aug 23, 2008)

Excellent post, Elgarian. I wholeheartedly agree.


----------



## Nicola (Nov 25, 2007)

jhar26 said:


> Yes, and I think it's a wonderful post.
> 
> What it basically means is that you have on the one hand those who like to slam others for having a different opinion from their own and who like to wallow in negativity, and on the other hand those who hope that their enthusiasm for the music that they love is contagious enough to convince a few others without feeling the need to bash what those people may already like.


Very touching support for your "friend" but I can't see its relevance to the opening posts which appears to ask why people who like classical music yearn to persuade others to participate in their musical tastes. The first post does not appear to be asking for a categorisation of the extreme responses (and that is all they are, extreme) this may sometimes evoke from some types. It might appear that you should check your own list of "friends" as I detect one very good example of a character who tends to slam other others' tastes almost at the drop of a hat.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Nicola said:


> It might appear that you should check your own list of "friends" as I detect one very good example of a character who tends to slam other others' tastes almost at the drop of a hat.


I'm not responsible for other people's posts.


----------



## Nicola (Nov 25, 2007)

jhar26 said:


> I'm not responsible for other people's posts.


No but you can choose your "friends", can't you? Personally, I find the whole concept of "friends" utterly childish.

Do you have any observations on the rest of my post which questioned the relevance of the reply you are defending to the opening post? I maintain that it is skew-whiff with respect to the OP, and seems to be inspired by a lingering concern over some different matter.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Nicola said:


> Personally, I find the whole concept of "friends" utterly childish.


Your doubtless well-meaning critique of one of our new board features has been duly noted...*

and filed...









Yeah... I guess you could say it's childish, but I'd say it's _even more childish_ to 
a) review members' profiles
b) note friendships formed, and then
c) pass public judgement on the friendships accepted.

All this seems to fall in the realm of the Tom Lehrer definition of 'philosopher,' whom he said was "someone who's always ready with helpful suggestions and general guidance for people who are happier than they are."


----------



## Nicola (Nov 25, 2007)

Chi_town/Philly said:


> Your doubtless well-meaning critique of one of our new board features has been duly noted...*
> 
> and filed...
> 
> ...


I am glad that you agree that the "Friends" feature is childish.

I'm sorry that you find it necessary to resort to "trash" symbols to describe your feelings about my post. This surely can't be a very mature way of responding, and I guess the Mods would hardly endorse this procedure it if were to catch on more widely. It seems to reveal something about the seemy side of your temperament which occasionally comes over.

The only reason I referred to one of JHAR's "friends" (note I did not mention any specific name) was because JHAR had just given endorsement to another member's post which frowned very heavily on those members who go out of their way to discredit other members' tastes in music. I thought it ironic, to say the least, that possibly the worst offender by far in this regard who has ever hit this Board is listed among those "friends".


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Nicola said:


> I'm sorry that you find it necessary to resort to "trash" symbols to describe your feelings about my post.


Point of clarification... I didn't find it "necessary," I found it _useful_. The "friends" feature was placed on this board, presumably as a result of a decision on the part of the Site-Owner & the Administration Team, and early returns show that it appears popular enough. If one were to lobby against the feature, I think I can anticipate fairly accurately (and graphically) the outcome of such lobbying...


Nicola said:


> This surely can't be a very mature way of responding, and I guess the Mods would hardly endorse this procedure it if were to catch on more widely. It seems to reveal something about the seemy side of your temperament which occasionally comes over.


Point taken, and it's a very relevant one. However, '_Cet animal est trés mechant_' don'tcha know... 


Nicola said:


> The only reason I referred to one of JHAR's "friends" (note I did not mention any specific name) was because JHAR had just given endorsement to another member's post which frowned very heavily on those members who go out of their way to discredit other members' tastes in music. I thought it ironic, to say the least, that possibly the worst offender by far in this regard who has ever hit this Board is listed among those "friends".


Ironic... (hmmmm)... _really_??

I have friends, "virtual" *and* real-life, who are sometimes on opposite sides of certain issues. Don't you??


----------



## Herzeleide (Feb 25, 2008)

Elgarian said:


> You hate the pain he inflicts with his negative comments about something you love;


You believe an anonymous person's opinion over the net can cause pain? 



Elgarian said:


> he hates the fact that you found treasure but he can't find any.


Or maybe he just dislikes the music and decided to voice this opinion.


----------



## Nicola (Nov 25, 2007)

Chi_town/Philly said:


> If one were to lobby against the feature, I think I can anticipate fairly accurately (and graphically) the outcome of such lobbying...


I am not lobbying for the removal of the "friends" facility. I am merely expressing my view that I find the concept childish. On reflection I might add that I find this facility to be potentially harmful too. What I am thinking of is that could facilitate co-ordinated action among a group of like-minded individuals to put pressure upon the Message Board management to discipline certain other members who do not belong to the "coterie", and who for any reason they dislike.

This concern is not just hypothetical. I can support it describing an actual example from another big classical music Message Board, which I will not mention it by name. Following the introduction of a similar "friends" facility, a bunch of the leading lights used it as a way of leaning very heavily on management to secure the banning, or disciplining, of certain members they did not like for one reason or another. For a while, the management generally acceded to these demands, and various other members suddenly disappeared or went very quiet as they had been warned off by Management to keep quiet. Basically these other people had done nothing wrong except incur the wrath of the "coterie" because they had different values and opinions.

However after a while the dozy Management finally wised up to what was really going on and rescinded all further such requests for such disciplinary banning action. They pinned a sticky thread at the top of the Board (which is still there for all to see) advising all members that lately the owners/administrators have received complaints and requests to delete threads and posts and to kick members out of that Board. It notes that the complaints had come for the most part came from a small but vocal group of the virtually the same members. Management then urged members to review the Rules and recall that the default position of the owners/administrators is freedom of speech for members. They encourage the free flow of ideas on the theory that the antidote for bad or dumb ideas is more discussion, not less, and certainly not deletions and banning. In virtually all cases, the threads, posts, and members complained of had not broken the rules of that Board. Etc.

So, Mr Chi, I hear what you say but I regard the "friends" concept as only superficially attractive and essentially a bad idea. One has only to look at some of the gossipy, witch-like attempted coordination of complaint action being brewed up here to see what I mean. One particularly self-opinionated wind bag is at the centre of it. I hope that T-C's Management is wise to the dangers of this kind of pressure.

What is more, Mr Chi, I repeat that I think your general manners are disgraceful in posting pictures of a dustbin to illustrate your disliking of someone else's opinion. Your pathetic excuses for doing this cut no ice. Suppose how you would feel if I were post a picture of say a communal latrine to illustrate my disdain for you and your friends' opinions.


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

_Encore une fois_, for those who can't see the wood for the trees:



Elgarian said:


> So it's not surprising, I think, that we want to tell other people and share this, and recommend them to open the window too. It's perfectly possible to enjoy a delicious wine on your own, but so much better if you can share the bottle.
> ...
> I think that in all this, the real thing - the only thing unquestionably of personal value - is that insight that came through the art. Even if you're the only person who can see the gold, you know the gold is real. The discussion, however desirable, is secondary.


----------



## howlingmadhowie (Mar 26, 2009)

Elgarian said:


> _Encore une fois_, for those who can't see the wood for the trees:


i think that depends on what sort of person you are. i like to communicate with others, and time i spend doing that is more valuable to me than time spent making music (well, mostly, anyway).


----------



## marval (Oct 29, 2007)

Can I get back to the original subject, I am definately in the listener catagory. I am not a musician or composer, but I do have a profound fondness for music. I used to go to music appreciation evenings, some time ago, The person who ran it enjoyed sharing his love of classical music with other people. I think it would be a dull world if everbody's experience of music was the same, and we all liked the same composers. Hence some lively discussions here, allowing people to exchange views. I expect different kinds of music give people a different experience, it certainly does me.


Margaret


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

howlingmadhowie said:


> i think that depends on what sort of person you are. i like to communicate with others, and time i spend doing that is more valuable to me than time spent making music (well, mostly, anyway).


I think that's a perfectly reasonable response - it does indeed depend on what sort of person you are. Mine was a personal response to Weston's original question, which talked about the profound effect that music can have on us and our consequent desire to share that experience - because it is perceived as so important. But of course if music _doesn't_ have a profound effect on you (I'm not sure if that's what you're saying), then that's a different matter, and I presume the priorities would be different.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Goodness me - you leave a thread for a day and it gets a little heated and interesting!

My original premise is based on observation of people around me in my small neck of the universe, but also on what I see on the web. It is not intended as a serious theory of musicology, rather a discussion opener. Thinking more on my thread, I believe I know what prompted it. It wasn't really about proselytizing or championing music. It really was about the sharing. 

I had a close friend visit recently and, too lazy that day to do the work she and I had planned, we watched a concert DVD by a moldy old baby boomer rock band. I had misgivings about this because I thought it might be one of my more esoteric guilty pleasures, and I thought it might bore her. To my surprise she loved the group, knew most of the songs, has many of their albums and actually sang along. Now I had already seen this concert DVD, but I can tell you I did not enjoy it nearly as much as I did with her the second time around. It almost brought me to tears. I knew she was a kindred spirit but never suspected how much so.

So maybe my thoughts were more about connecting with someone than with music, but the experience does seem to have made the music more complete for me.

I can see that to some this would be of little importance and that this need for sharing may be more a character trait of the young. This is how teens form peer groups and learn to fit in. As we get older that need decreases somewhat. However, it has been said that inside every sixty year old is a sixteen year old who wonders what the heck happened. I’ll nurture my inner teen if it gives me the kind of epiphany I found in the scenario above.


----------



## Margaret (Mar 16, 2009)

I do think sharing the experience can be a part of the whole process. It's obviously not absolutely necessary; I've listened to classical music by myself for years. I expect a lot of you have. But it is nice to share the experience whether online or in person. I'm taking a friend with me next month to the Elgar Cello Concerto symphony. We've been planning this for many months -- ever since I got the season schedule -- and are really looking forward to it. And I've been in pop / rock concerts where the whole audience stands up and dances at their seats. (Though I do think the fake encores at the end where the lights go down and the audience raises their lighters is just too contrived). I prefer the symphony or the opera where we jump up together at the end and clap till our hands hurt calling back the performer for bow after bow.

Yes, I'd say sharing the experience with people who feel the way you do is enriching the experience.

EDIT: Forgot to say that I've found being on this forum with like minded people to be an enriching experience as well.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Margaret said:


> I do think sharing the experience can be a part of the whole process. It's obviously not absolutely necessary; I've listened to classical music by myself for years. I expect a lot of you have. But it is nice to share the experience whether online or in person. I'm taking a friend with me next month to the Elgar Cello Concerto symphony. We've been planning this for many months -- ever since I got the season schedule -- and are really looking forward to it.
> Yes, I'd say sharing the experience with people who feel the way you do is enriching the experience.
> 
> EDIT: Forgot to say that I've found being on this forum with like minded people to be an enriching experience as well.


I agree that the fourth step the original post described does enrich the experience of enjoying music. I too have friends whom I contact in person and online with whom I share classical music. I regularly send any good bargain priced CDs I can get my hands on to a friend overseas. So far, I've sent music by composers like Hindemith, Bartok, Schubert, Kodaly, Vaughan Williams, and my friend has enjoyed these, judging from the emails I've received. I'm also planning to go with a friend to one of the Australian Chamber Orchestra's concerts at the Sydney Opera House in August. They will be playing Bartok and R. Strauss, among others. I listened with this friend to those pieces on CD, and it was very good for me to share this with him.

I also used to go with a friend to the art gallery. I think sharing a love of painting and music is very rewarding, as you always get the other person's point of view. Obviously, it's easier if you and the other person has similar tastes, but sometimes if you introduce another person to something they didn't know about, it can be an interesting discovery for them. Likewise, I know people who like contemporary music like Coldplay, and I've enjoyed listening to that, since it is unfamiliar territory to me. I think in these situations, it pays to have an open mind, be flexible, and respect people's opinions and what they're trying to offer you. You don't have to love it like they do, but the main thing is that you enjoy it, just as you enjoy their company...


----------



## Artemis (Dec 8, 2007)

I think it is nice if one's partner shares a similar taste in music, as is the case with me. In fact our precise musical tastes are remarkably close and there are only minor areas where we don't fully agree. 

I know other people where one side has completely different musical tastes to the other. I'm not sure how they reconcile their differences but it doesn't seem to be a huge problem. Maybe music in general does not feature too strongly in some peoples lives so any differences in tastes are not that significant. By the same token I guess that where music is of importance it is less likely that incompatibities will emerge as these would presumably have been ironed out in the screening process if I may call it that. This doesn't preclude possible problems occurring later, for example if a couple of head-bangers get hooked up and then some time later one of them goes off it completely and becomes interested in something like Gregorian Chant. 

I don't know whether this kind of sea-change in musical preferences is common as one ages. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be much available in the way of reliable survey data on peoples attitude towards music, their likes and dislikes, in what directions they tend to evolve. etc. Some argue that classical music is a minority interest but I am not sure about this. It may well not be the majority's preferred brand music but I suspect that many would rate it positively at least to some extent.


----------



## Lang (Sep 30, 2008)

Artemis said:


> I don't know whether this kind of sea-change in musical preferences is common as one ages.


Well, it hasn't happened to me. The music I loved when I was 14 I love just as much at 67. The only difference is that I love a lot more besides.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Lang said:


> Well, it hasn't happened to me. The music I loved when I was 14 I love just as much at 67. The only difference is that I love a lot more besides.


My experience is similar to yours. There's not that much that I loved when I was a teenager that I don't like anymore.


----------



## Ciel_Rouge (May 16, 2008)

Artemis said:


> I think it is nice if one's partner shares a similar taste in music, as is the case with me. In fact our precise musical tastes are remarkably close and there are only minor areas where we don't fully agree.


Hi Artemis, I also noticed that the musical taste in two individuals may be more or less overlapping. I found people who like almost everything I like. I also found people whose musical taste is almost exactly opposite, so they honestly hate everything I like but also: I tend to like the pieces they hate  So I might even end up asking them what they hate because I might like it 

As for the sharing experience itself, I do not find it at all necessary but it is a nice addition if opportunity arises. And initially, we might be surprised that what we think of as universal beauty may not be appreciated by someone else - since musical taste does not overlap COMPLETELY. The first time that happened I felt a bit hurt indeed but then I simply realised that people are just not the same and got over it. Now when I share the experience I only listen to short passages out of potential common ground and only go for extended listening when I am sure they like it.

Regarding the possibility of converting listeneres of other genres to classical listeners, this is not a simple process with the prevalence of pop. And it is not only pop that prevails but also the electronic illusion of sound, far from accoustic sound. Therefore, people simply have certain expectations and stereotypes which may desensitize them.


----------



## Mr Dull (Mar 14, 2009)

Lang what you said sums up my feelings exactly


----------



## Ciel_Rouge (May 16, 2008)

Hi Lang and Mr Dull,

In my case it's a bit different but I suppose the subject of taste evolving over time deserves a separate thread:

Other genres and how taste evolves over time

And as Margaret noted, let's just stick to the "sharing the experience" aspect here


----------



## Bgroovy2 (Mar 27, 2009)

It's a pretty simple concept to me. When we enjoy a certain peice of music, regarless of the genre, we own it! It touches us emotionally and spiritually. When someone around us does not feel the same way as we do, we tend to take it very personally, as an attack upon the very core of our being. I have a greatly veried taste in music. My Ipod is filled with everything from Back to the Beatles. I tend to look for music that is meaninful and well done. The only genres that I have not engaed is Hip-Hop and the metalheads. IMHO, most of today's Pop is about marketability and not talent. With the impending dome of the big recording lables, we just my start to see more talent in pop. Case in point: Paul Potts. Granted, he may not be a "Jose Cura" but he awakened a whole new generation to the beauty of arias like Nessun Dorma and Caruso! No grand opera singer could of had this kind of imapact on our Pop culture. 

So if you are affended that folks around you don't like the music you listen too, turn up your Ipod and don't take it so darn personal!


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

But Clapton is God!


----------

