What makes music music?

[capnsandwich]

I've been thinking way too deep here lately and I came up with a question that has been baffling me for a few days now. I asked my wife and she was clueless as well.

What makes music music? Music is just organized sound in the form of notes. Some notes work together to make music while other notes clash with one another. Why and/or how do are brains decipher good notes and bad notes? What exactly makes a chord sound good, in our minds that is? I know, too deep, but someone's got to have some insight on this.

I hope my question is clear enough to understand although I still don't understand it.

[popinfresh]

Resonance would play a part in chords no? When all the notes harmonise its pleasing to the ear. At least I don't want to hear reverberating noises drumming into my ear.

I haven't studied music in any way for years now, so take those descriptive words with a grain of salt.

Know wha i'm sayin'?

[vlxyooper]

I've thought on this subject before now and then ....and still don't have much of an answer.

Keep in mind that various cultures and generations within cultures throughout history had (and still have) their own idea of what makes up good and/or pleasing music.

I'd imagine similar ideas holds true for all forms of artistic expression.

[DeluxeRed]

It is the audio version of encapsulating a recognizable subjective emotive experience into an objective medium for transfer to another person (potentially across distance and/or time).

There is lots of music that is not pleasant just like there are lots of experiences that are not pleasant.

And there is a physical component to it where "pleasing" sounds have synchronized wave patterns, etc., which has is a factor of how we receive the vibrations and change them into electrical impulses (you can literally see the difference in slo-mo video--see TimeWarp).

[popinfresh]

Originally Posted by DeluxeRed

And there is a physical component to it where "pleasing" sounds have synchronized wave patterns, etc., which has is a factor of how we receive the vibrations and change them into electrical impulses (you can literally see the difference in slo-mo video--see TimeWarp).

What I was going for.

[geeza]

^ what DeluxeRed said.
Also, the brain tends to expect certain things. As you listen to a melody or chord progression, our brain starts to anticipate what it thinks should come next. If it then hears what it expects to hear, we are pleased and like the song. If there are too many instances of what actually comes next being different from what our brain is expecting to hear, we are displeased and find the song to be discordant.

[fdeck]

Remunerative employment for a bass player makes it music.

[elpezpr]

Music?

[Yngwie 4String]

Music is organized sound with a defined ending.

[capnsandwich]

Ah, great answers guys. I think I'm getting it although my head hurts.

[Metal Matt]

Originally Posted by DeluxeRed

It is the audio version of encapsulating a recognizable subjective emotive experience into an objective medium for transfer to another person (potentially across distance and/or time).

There is lots of music that is not pleasant just like there are lots of experiences that are not pleasant.

And there is a physical component to it where "pleasing" sounds have synchronized wave patterns, etc., which has is a factor of how we receive the vibrations and change them into electrical impulses (you can literally see the difference in slo-mo video--see TimeWarp).

THIS.

[Hoover]

Originally Posted by capnsandwich

What makes music music? Music is just organized sound in the form of notes. Some notes work together to make music while other notes clash with one another. Why and/or how do are brains decipher good notes and bad notes? What exactly makes a chord sound good, in our minds that is? I know, too deep, but someone's got to have some insight on this.

You've got a couple different questions (as well as some generalizations, oversimplifications, and slightly misguided assumptions) nestled in there. But let's start with the Big Kahuna: "What makes music music?" Well, you already answered that for yourself: "Music is ... organized sound"

(Note: personally I think saying that it is "just" organized sound does a disservice to the organizational principals and/or the human cognitive process.)

...but I think an important aspect of Music As Organized Sound is the realization (and acceptance) that organization can come from two very different sources: Sound can be organized by the creator (aka, the composer, conceptualist, extemporizing performer, etc). But sound can also be organized by the listener; you may hear birdsongs, traffic jams, thunderstorms, nine types of industrial pollution, half a dozen marching bands colliding at a downtown intersection, or the sound of cosmic interstellar dust settling, and perceive it as music. And you'd be correct.

Your other question, which I believe is separate from "What makes music music?" you expressed as "Some notes work together to make music while other notes clash with one another. Why and/or how do are brains decipher good notes and bad notes? What exactly makes a chord sound good, in our minds that is?" and I think that boils down to "what makes some music sound good to an individual?"

...and I think it's much harder to answer that question! (Although Daniel Levitan's book This Is Your Brain On Music does a commendable job of attempting to answer that). But I will say that it's important to separate those two questions: whether or not something is music, and whether or not that music sounds good to a particular individual.

[René_Julien]

Music is expressed mathmatics and mechanics.
You just can not divide by zero and everything is fine.





My old highschool math teacher thought I was very expressionist in my math homework and exams.

[capnsandwich]

Originally Posted by Hoover

You've got a couple different questions (as well as some generalizations, oversimplifications, and slightly misguided assumptions) nestled in there. But let's start with the Big Kahuna: "What makes music music?" Well, you already answered that for yourself: "Music is ... organized sound"

(Note: personally I think saying that it is "just" organized sound does a disservice to the organizational principals and/or the human cognitive process.)

...but I think an important aspect of Music As Organized Sound is the realization (and acceptance) that organization can come from two very different sources: Sound can be organized by the creator (aka, the composer, conceptualist, extemporizing performer, etc). But sound can also be organized by the listener; you may hear birdsongs, traffic jams, thunderstorms, nine types of industrial pollution, half a dozen marching bands colliding at a downtown intersection, or the sound of cosmic interstellar dust settling, and perceive it as music. And you'd be correct.

Your other question, which I believe is separate from "What makes music music?" you expressed as "Some notes work together to make music while other notes clash with one another. Why and/or how do are brains decipher good notes and bad notes? What exactly makes a chord sound good, in our minds that is?" and I think that boils down to "what makes some music sound good to an individual?"

...and I think it's much harder to answer that question! (Although Daniel Levitan's book This Is Your Brain On Music does a commendable job of attempting to answer that). But I will say that it's important to separate those two questions: whether or not something is music, and whether or not that music sounds good to a particular individual.

So then I'm not the only one who's pondered this. That's good. I'm glad I'm still normal.

I guess these 2 questions that I'm asking then are related but on two different levels. One asks what is music and the other asks what makes "good" music, at least that's how I understand your post. If you look at jazz, is there really a definitive answer to what exactly is called jazz and what is not? Jazz, especially fusion, has some of the most unnatural chord progressions but yet it still sounds good. If you add those chord progressions to rock it would more than likely sound horrible. Why is that? It's all in how each individual perceives it I guess.

[Hoover]

Originally Posted by capnsandwich

If you look at jazz, is there really a definitive answer to what exactly is called jazz and what is not?

No. There might be some slightly more authoritative opinions, answers provided by folks whose pedigree perhaps earns them more caché than your average piker, but it's still a somewhat nebulous definition.

Originally Posted by capnsandwich

Jazz, especially fusion, has some of the most unnatural chord progressions

...in your opinion perhaps. Someone else might not agree. You've made a statement of taste (ergo opinion, not fact).

Originally Posted by capnsandwich

but yet it still sounds good.

...in your opinion perhaps. Someone else might not agree. You've made a statement of taste (ergo opinion, not fact).

Originally Posted by capnsandwich

If you add those chord progressions to rock it would more than likely sound horrible. Why is that?

see above re: opinion, not fact

Originally Posted by capnsandwich

It's all in how each individual perceives it I guess.

A-ha! Now you're getting it!



While there are reasonably objective reasons why some music sounds "good" to a large number of people, to extrapolate that therefore that music is good is a dangerous leap to make. In a nutshell: We're predisposed to like things that make us feel good. Some folks feel good when they listen to crazy-ass "unnatural" jazz-rock fusion. You don't think those folks are actually broken, do you?

[capnsandwich]

Originally Posted by Hoover

Some folks feel good when they listen to crazy-ass "unnatural" jazz-rock fusion. You don't think those folks are actually broken, do you?

Well I like the stuff and I'm all messed up in the head so I'm not one to ask.

However, I see your point and agree with it.

[KrisH]

Some of my thoughts:

I've thought about this a lot from time to time, and my thoughts start with the concept that "music" is, at its root, nothing more than organized sounds. That said, the organization that lets us perceive "music" incorporates both biological and cultural elements. The human mind seeks patterns in everything; patterns help us to recognize and classify objects and events, help us predict cause and effect consequences, etc. Our mind will often bend our perception to find patterns that aren't really there.

When I was a hack mercenary bassist, I often viewed music mathematically. After laying off for a few years, I'm approaching it differently the second time around.

Music has rhythmic, structural and tonal patterns, but what we find pleasing in perceiving these patterns is more a function of our cultural upbringing than anything else. Eastern and western music share many rhythmic patterns, but differ in the pleasing intervals between notes that make up an octave. But significantly, all forms of music recognize the octave interval, which may be a biologically fundamental interval.

Stuff we don't like we call "chaotic," and some music is very repetitive. Philip Glass? That speaks for itself. But we also crave novelty and surprise, and enjoy that which balances the two. Even machinery has musical qualities. But what about John Cage? You could still say it's organized, just not note-for-note or with a steady rhythm; it's not really chance (because he sets up the parameters) but not really predictable, either. The most free-form jam operates within certain rules. Maybe Wendy Carlos' "Sonic Seasonings" toes the line between music and chaos -- but I still like to listen to it.

I've read that music hits a spot in the brain that is even more primitive than the speech centers. I saw something in the news a while ago about an archeologist who found the remains of a Neanderthal flute/recorder, reconstructed it and recorded a few pieces. I doubt the songs sounded like Neanderthal music, because who could even imagine the thoughts and experiences that would shape the music of another intelligent species? The best we have now are the songs of whale and birds.

As you might guess, I have a very broad view of what music is.

[BassChuck]

Originally Posted by Hoover

...but I think an important aspect of Music As Organized Sound is the realization (and acceptance) that organization can come from two very different sources: Sound can be organized by the creator (aka, the composer, conceptualist, extemporizing performer, etc). But sound can also be organized by the listener; you may hear birdsongs, traffic jams, thunderstorms, nine types of industrial pollution, half a dozen marching bands colliding at a downtown intersection, or the sound of cosmic interstellar dust settling, and perceive it as music. And you'd be correct.....

A most excellent answer. I would summit, however, that it is listeners mind and only the listeners mind, that is the organization. Every culture has it's way of expressing itself in sound and we learn that as we grow up and/or live in that culture. When we are confronted with music from a very different culture the organization of the music is not immeditatly apparent. In time, we can learn new forms of organization. Someone brought up hearing only church hymns will be a little confused by John Cage's work. If you know mostly Western commercial music, Indian Ragas seem strange.

The same is true for 'notes that are pleasing'. (a very subjective phrase indeed) We learn what is pleasing by repetitions. There can be a long and somewhat boring conversation here about frequencys and overtones etc etc, but in the end, we like what we know.

[DeluxeRed]

I submit that "music" requires intent. Random (or non-sentient) sounds, however pleasing, aren't taking a human moment and sharing it, and other human activities, such as speech, babynoise, farts, whatever, may be "sharing" a moment, but not in an encapsulated, recognizable, and reproducible form. (Or the definition gets so fuzzy that anything goes; we're not talking spoken poetry and prose here, are we?)

At least for the purpose of defining and answering the OP.