# Numerology, Astrology and Classical Composers



## prasad94 (Jul 11, 2016)

So as an avid fan of astrology(I say fan because I don't believe in it whole-heartedly, but do find it very interesting), I've found some interesting links between the birthdate of composers.

Here's 2: Tchaikovsky, 7th May and Brahms, 7th May. Both born on the same birthday, and 7 being a a number asociated with an 'affinity' for music.

I don't have much to say on that, but let's look at these two piano maestros: Chopin and Liszt. Now, they were both said to be very fond of each other's musical styles and developed a good friendship (though things did sour near to Chopin's death). Both of them are known to be maestros and brilliant composers, but here's something interesting I found when reading into both of them:

Chopin's known birthdate by the church is 22nd February and Liszt's is 22nd October. Here's where it gets interesting. The 'master' number 22, is a significant birth number for any persons. It is also known as the number of the "Master Builder", for these people are known to have grand plans and see all their work through. When two people possess similar birth numbers, it is common for them to be attracted to each other. I mean this in both a sexual and non-sexual way. The energies can be very refreshing to both parties, though not always (think magnets, same poles can be destabilizing sometimes). Both of them were fairly similar in the sense that they were maestros and composers; their talents befitting their characters based on their birthdates.

Here's another interesting fact about the two, they both share the same lifepath number! A lifepath number is dictated by the total of their birthdates added up and reduced to a singular digit.

Example:
Liszt: 22, October, 1811 = 22, 10, 1811 = (2+2)+(1+0)+(1+8+1+1) = 4+1+11= 5+(1+1) = 7.

Chopin: 22 February 1810 = 22, 2, 1810 = (2+2)+(2)+(1+8+1+0) = 4+2+10 = 6+(1+0) = 7.
_*Chopin's accepted birthday is 1st March 1810, but the original records by the parish state it was 22 Feb*_

So here's what we know about the lifepath of a 7:
*Wise
*Reclusive and loner-like
*Prefers quiet atmospheres
*Possibly shy
*Secret genius, or just simply genius
*Artistic flair
*Studious 
*Emotional

It was very much known that Chopin preferred the salon than big parties. He did fancy a drink or two. However, it seems like both these composers had very much in common. If we look at astrological sun signs, they were both born on matching Air/Water cusps (born in between astrological signs).

Chopin was an Aquarius/Pisces, whilst Liszt was a Libra/Scorpio. I've had friends born under these signs with very passionate and harmonious relationships.

I know there is very little point to read into this too much. This has no contribution to classical music in any way, but I do state this as I am a lifepath 7 and am very much a composer myself. Was just wondering what you guys think of this, or if you happen to have any other 'interesting' comparisons


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Brahms and Tchaikovsky sharing a birthday? Now I _know_ astrology is nonsense!


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

I share my birthday with one three-hundred and sixty-fifth of the entire world's population. That's about 20,000,000 people. Think of the possibilities!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Strange Magic said:


> I share my birthday with one three-hundred and sixty-fifth of the entire world's population. That's about 20,000,000 people. Think of the possibilities!


I think you and your mates should get together to have a big birthday party! But good luck finding a caterer. Also, parking might be a problem.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Some people having a very broad imagination


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Strange Magic said:


> I share my birthday with one three-hundred and sixty-fifth of the entire world's population. That's about 20,000,000 people. Think of the possibilities!


Not really. Birthdays aren't evenly spread out. Dec 25th is among the least common. September 16th among most common as it comes 9 months after the Xmas holiday season.  I would prefer Feb 29 since I would only have a BD every 4 years and I'd still be in my teens...


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I just did some research and discovered that everyone that I know was born on their birthday!

DaveM ... yes, and probably not yet able to drink or drive


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

DaveM said:


> Not really. Birthdays aren't evenly spread out. Dec 25th is among the least common. September 16th among most common as it comes 9 months after the Xmas holiday season.  I would prefer Feb 29 since I would only have a BD every 4 years and I'd still be in my teens...


Only in your teens and such a wisdom?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

All birthdays do is age us. Best to do it only every 4 years. Unfortunately, my wife is now over three times my age.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Some years back I was on a flight from Sydney Australia to Los Angeles. Due to that thing known as the International Date Line, it left at about 4pm on the 22nd and arrived at 10.30am on the 22nd. This was only remarkable in that, had the flight left 24 hours later, I would have had two birthdays in one year. As it was, I only had the statutory one birthday and avoided aging even faster than I already am.


----------



## prasad94 (Jul 11, 2016)

Well I understand the need to justify beliefs, but my point here wasn't that astrology is any real. Hell, I don't believe this stuff, but numerology is a very interesting subject. It's not so much about the 'supernatural' side of things, but numerology adheres to the universal law of numbers all things aside 

Think about it, in numerology one of the best numerical relationships for the number 7 is a 1. In music, the 7th scale degree's natural resolution is a 1. When I do compose, I use 3 methods:
1. Ear
2. Music Theory
3. Numbers

It's a very interesting method, using numbers is. I don't mean roman numerals of the sort but actual numbers. It is known in the universe for things to resolve naturally and our comprehension of the unknown is made clear through math and numbers. Music just so happens to be one of those 'abstract' things that we can comprehend in a spiritual way. But when the creative juice runs out, math never fails 

Yes, I do have a broad imagination and it's been known to get me in a world of trouble


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Becca said:


> DaveM ... yes, and probably not yet able to drink or drive


I still can't do both together.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

prasad94 said:


> Well I understand the need to justify beliefs, but my point here wasn't that astrology is any real. Hell, I don't believe this stuff, but numerology is a very interesting subject. It's not so much about the 'supernatural' side of things, but numerology adheres to the universal law of numbers all things aside


I think the rest of us don't take numerology any more seriously than astrology. They seem to have pretty much the same faults, perhaps the most important one being, you know what you're looking for before you conduct the analysis. If you decide there's something special about the numbers 7 or 22, then you'll find them popping up all over the place.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Many years ago, Isaac Asimov looked at the all of the numerological "truths" hidden in the dimensions of the Great Pyramid of Khufu. Intrigued by these revelations, Asimov then applied the same analyses to the Washington Monument and, amazingly, found revealed there not only the same wonders as the pyramid held but lots more as well, quite without limit.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

The only problem with numerology, as Martin Gardner showed with his fictitious "Dr. Matrix" year after year is Scientific American, is that by choosing your operations, you can do _anything _with numbers, and prove virtually anything you set out to do.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Here's something numerologically interesting.

12 tone equal temperament is the lowest number of tones where one can get a decent sound for the perfect fifth and major/minor third, in other words, a decent sound for the major triad. 7 tone doesn't distinguish between major and minor thirds, and 19 tone gives a good perfect fifth and major/minor third but has a more unwieldy amount of notes.

Anyway, 12 tones has another nice property: 12 = 2 * 2 * 3. This nice factorization property makes serial music actually possible. One couldn't have something like the Concerto for Nine Instruments (and most Second Viennese music) without this division property.

This numerological property is very important!


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

_Brace yourselves...._ 

On a quite similar topic, the topic of numerology, this was a big deal to some composers. Not quite in the astrological sense, but in the symbolic sense. Think of "curse of the 9" and things like that. What was going to be your op. 100? A dainty little work? No, numbers were significant to composers since they were like milestones in their lives.

Glazunov Symphonies 1 and 2 have no significant opus number choices as far as I know, but Symphony No. 3, op. 33 .... Symphony No. 5 op. 55 .... Symphony No. 7 op. 77 .... Symphony No. 4 op. 48 (That makes 4 4's! A perfect square! And yet it has 3 movements lol), and Symphony No. 8 ... opus 83 OH! He didn't quite make it to 84 with that one, but I bet he wanted to. Or perhaps he would have thought it symbolized the end of his life to end too completely, so op. 83 sorta beckons more completion to come. And of _course _he didn't do Symphony no. 6 op. 66, that would be demonic!   That's op. 58 instead, nothing numerically special about that one. Symphony No. 9? One mvmt unorchestrated, without opus. To be finished in heaven, of course, but not on this earth.

Prokofiev feared finishing his opuses on even numbers, groups of 5 and 10, etc, so he ended up often working on multiple pieces at the same time, for example an op. 90 as well as 91 and 92 in the works. He tried to do that at the very end of his life too, and so he left a set of "theoretical" compositions which he didn't even start on. This included piano sonatas no. 10 and 11.

Shostakovich famously thumbed his nose at this numerological superstition by writing a very simple, casual 9th symphony. He saved his big guns for the 10th instead.

Can you guys think of any other cases like this in music?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Can you guys think of any other cases like this in music?


Schoenberg. He was obsessed with numerology and similar, and chose opus numbers at times quite specifically. The big one is Pierrot lunaire, which is opus 21 and consists of 21 settings (in 3 parts of 7 each, for maximum numerological fun), but he also avoided writing an opus 13 by publishing an older piece out of order.

The other multiples of 13 in his oeuvre are the Wind Quintet opus 26 and the Violin Concerto opus 39, so it looks like he didn't have much psychological trouble there, but he did find that he often got stuck around bar 13 of a given piece, and occasionally numbered it as 12a just to get around that.

Webern's opus 5 is the Five Movements for String Quartet, while the opus 6 is the Six Pieces for Orchestra.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

There's even more to Schoenberg's triskaidekaphobia.

http://classical-music.livejournal.com/478853.html

A thirteenth note in a tone row might suggest a tonic, so clearly his fears were well-founded.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Woodduck said:


> There's even more to Schoenberg's triskaidekaphobia.
> 
> http://classical-music.livejournal.com/478853.html


Woah 

.............


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Woodduck said:


> A thirteenth note in a tone row might suggest a tonic, so clearly his fears were well-founded.


Bwahaha that made me laugh out loud... cuz you're right. :lol:


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Conspiracy theory: what if dodecaphony was simply the result of a _single individual's triskaidekaphobic neuroticism?_ *forwards this post to the TC Conspiracy Thread*

:tiphat:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Conspiracy theory: what if dodecaphony was simply the result of a _single individual's triskaidekaphobic neuroticism?_ *forwards this post to the TC Conspiracy Thread*
> 
> :tiphat:


Leave out "triskaidekaphobic" and you might have a plausible theory. _[Woodduck ducks behind twelve ducks in a row]_


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> Schoenberg. He was obsessed with numerology and similar, and chose opus numbers at times quite specifically. The big one is Pierrot lunaire, which is opus 21 and consists of 21 settings (in 3 parts of 7 each, for maximum numerological fun), but he also avoided writing an opus 13 by publishing an older piece out of order.
> 
> The other multiples of 13 in his oeuvre are the Wind Quintet opus 26 and the Violin Concerto opus 39, so it looks like he didn't have much psychological trouble there, but he did find that he often got stuck around bar 13 of a given piece, and occasionally numbered it as 12a just to get around that.


You forgot the best part, where he ironically died on Friday the 13th.


----------

