Why we listen

Hedroom · Post by **Hedroom** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:39 pm

Freud is a load of outdated nonsense!

LOFA · Post by **LOFA** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:44 pm

SimonPHC wrote:If there is something Freudian about all of this techno/house stuff, then why do only young people really like it? Ok the summer of love is 17 years ago right now, but anyways most elder people I know hate being throbed at with a subbass...
f*** Freud, realy

Exercise is fun with simple techno. It encourages you to be young. I see a connection here. I would go indepth but I am overclocking on anti-sinus medication at the moment and I already deleted a 1000 word response that you all don't need.

At least I can breathe better, and I swear that the peopl next to me in this lab are typing at 134 bpm!

computo · Post by **computo** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:44 pm

I know what freud researched, but I meant he approached such topics from a FAR too intellectual position...i.e. HE thought too much...

Instinct cannot be boiled down....

Hedroom · Post by **Hedroom** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:50 pm

All that sexual jealousy, oedipus complex, penis envy stuff. Give me a break! It smacks of olde england chauvenism.

jack rock · Post by **jack rock** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:18 pm

computo wrote: Instinct cannot be boiled down....

Neither can music...

computo · Post by **computo** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:20 pm

actually, Music can DEFINETLY be boiled down.

Theory? Harmony? Rhythm? These are the core concepts of music, and almost ALL music can be analyzed accordingly...Id like to hear some that cant be....

But that would probably be alien music, nothing here on earth.

I think the common thread among all of these artists and composers and concepts is the underlying idea of creating music for a higher purpose...not neccesarily "God" but in Bachs case it sure was.

To attain a higher understanding perhaps.

conny · Post by **conny** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:28 pm

jack rock wrote: With all respect, I always feel sick when I hear people "analyze" techno music in this way!

I could buy into that too, to some extent (the way I am, multisided, sorry).

Reducing a form of art, an expresssion etc to some biological base is rediculous, because it rips off all the other levels of perception, meaning, values, interpretetion, history etc.
It's like saying we are basicly only structured chemicals interacting under the influence of physical stimuli.

Rythm, structures, tension, dynamics, culture, experiences and pre-natal influences - ofcourse everthing get into the mix.

Just curious... not staing any truth.

// C

helixx · Post by **helixx** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:18 pm

but reducing instinct to chemical reactions and muscle memory is like reducing music to theory and "proper" technique and such.

there is more to good music that can be captured in a theory, piece of sheet music or orchestral direction. i've heard plenty of technically proficient musicians who suck and vice versa.

people like what they like.

conny · Post by **conny** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:33 pm

helixx wrote: people like what they like.

True, but sometime one wonders what keeps it together.
Why do I like strange rythms, unexpected turns?

// C

telekom · Post by **telekom** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 10:10 pm

Yo mama, Yo mama...
Well yeah maybe the womb is an important bodily memory. But while you were in the womb your mother was part of the universe... isn't that likely to have an impact on you too? A "mother" does not exist in a vaccuum. She's part of a family, a community, a society and so on. The universe has rhythms which we all respond to. Nature has rhythms we all respond to. Your mum and you (and even your dad, poor soul), we're all part of this and affected and influenced by it. I think the mother that gave us all the beat is mother nature. Sorry to sound like a hippy but it's kinda logical innit?

134 bpm - yeah, it's double an average resting heartbeat or thereabouts. Conny (was it conny?), the alpha wave thing is 60 hz for the human brain. So bass end and LF cycles and multiples/fractions thereof are of some relevance to human musical responses I think.

Yep a very interesting thread. I love the ableton forum.

OK I am a hippy.

conny · Post by **conny** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 10:14 pm

telekom wrote:
Yep a very interesting thread. I love the ableton forum.

OK I am a hippy.

Yo mama

// C

jack rock · Post by **jack rock** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 10:26 pm

Of course there is a reason these theories exist - including the one about the womb. These can help explain why we like what we like.
After all, we truly ARE nothing more than structured chemicals interacting under the influence of physical stimuli!

The interesting question is: Do we analyze on this fact? Or do we analyze on the experience? Personally, (if I have to analyze) I prefer the latter.
I think music is interesting because it can give me an experience that by far supercedes what I can understand or explain, and at the same time trigger my urge to understand or explain why it does so!
To me, the experience - and trying to understand the experience - are inseparable phenomena. And this goes for any art form, by the way.

Why? Because we are social beings. If I cannot communicate to another person why I like or - more importantly - dislike something, I cannot excist in a social context! It's a really basic thing - judging things by taste and trying to explain said judgement in "logical" or "neutral" terms afterwards.

This is why art is interesting. It emphasizes this reaction in everyone of us.

computo · Post by **computo** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 11:54 pm

well said

conny · Post by **conny** » Fri Oct 21, 2005 6:31 am

computo wrote:well said

Absolutely.

// C

Winterpark · Post by **Winterpark** » Fri Oct 21, 2005 6:55 am

gee... what has this forum turned into?!

...can't we just talk about midi controllers and Sasha here?