[Unpopular Opinion] Is MUSIC Actually A LANGUAGE?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 тра 2024
- FREE eBook "How To Learn The Notes On Your Guitar Fretboard": www.musictheoryforguitar.com/...
FREE eBook "18 Tips To Make Your Pentatonic Solos Sound Professional": www.musictheoryforguitar.com/...
Complete Chord Mastery course: www.musictheoryforguitar.com/...
Master of the Modes course: www.musictheoryforguitar.com/...
---
If you like this video, share, like, comment & don't forget to subscribe for more content!
Need help with music theory for guitar? Check out these FREE resources: www.musictheoryforguitar.com/...
FOLLOW ME:
UA-cam: / musictheoryforguitar
Facebook: / musictheoryforguitar
Twitter: / theoryguitar
Website: musictheoryforguitar.com
I share this unpopular opinion.
In addition, I like that you emphasize this uncertainty about the ratio of physiology and psychology in the interpretation of music.
It took me a looong time to understand that the modes of scales depend a lot on the listener and some can interpret a mode as some mood but some can't whatever frequencies should make them to. When I realized and accepted this, it became easier to take in modes that MAY cause different emotions using the very same set of notes.
Agreed, and I have the same observation with modes.
You don't even need modes to create ambiguous feelings. There's a composition called "A", which consists of a sustained A note played by every instrument in an orchestra (or band). It's amazing how many emotions a single pitch (class) can create.
Thank you for the video!
It's also a mathematical system and it's balanced; it's all about the frequencies and the frequencies and overtones it creates, there is pure physics underneath, this is why our tempered tonal system works.
Yes. If you liked this video, link it on your social. We need to spread the message.
Your 100% right, there's no comparison.
i completely agree! people try to make everything into a metaphor unjustifiably. Chess and Life are a better metaphor. Language is like music sometimes but not the other way around.
p.s. my girlfriend and I enjoy your accent. Don't change a thing.
As I commented elsewhere, chess is a game, and if you don't follow the rules of the game, you're not playing chess. However, you are playing a different game.
Great explanation, at the end I agreed with your point.
I agree with you totally but music is something that touches everyone's heart and mind in many different ways. There's a lot of different genres of music and and people from all walks of life are touched by it. I guess it's more like magic and less like a language.
I have to agree with you, some of these big musicians can say anything and get away with it as long as they pucker after they say it.
If music was a language it would be an ambiguous one with no point.
"as long as they pucker after they say it" There's so much truth to this statement that it hurts... ;-)
Another great video. I get what you are saying about music and language not being the same, but do you think there are similarities in the way the brain learns and processes both things? There is a lot of talk in the language community about Stephen Krashen’s theory of language acquisition through comprehensible input(CI). Whatever ones opinion might be about CI, it is an interesting hypothesis nonetheless. Just wondered what your thoughts might be. Thanks for the video.
I agree there are similarities. That's why I say: "if anything, language is a music". When you say "music is a language" you are saying "music is a subset of the set of languages". I think the inclusion goes the other way around.
That also means that (in my model), statements made about music DO apply to languages, but not necessarily the other way around.
(When you say "music is a language" instead you imply that statements about languages to apply to music. That's what I think is wrong)
@MusicTheoryForGuitar That’s great. Thank you for your reply
100% agreed
This largely depends on how one would define a language. In my opinion language is simply a way to communicate. To communicate what exactly? It doesn’t matter. Music can be used to communicate with emotions (and other things as well like communicate a mood), therefore music is a language in my own definition. Yelling and crying to convey an emotion is also a language. Not all languages are equal. There are languages that are used to convey different things other that emotion; for instance, programming languages. They are used to convey to the computer instruction and sometimes to convey to the human coder documentation. Would you say that programming language is not a language because you can’t order pizza with it (assuming the guy on the other side of the phone doesn’t understand programming paradigms). Music is like a language when you say a language is something used to convey “something”. Music is not a language when you say language is “vocabulary and grammar”. Saying music is just math and physics is like ice cream is just physics and chemistry
But you CAN use a programming language to order pizza. And, just my curiosity, if ice cream is not physics and chemistry, then what it is? Literature?
Physics and chemistry applied to biology :) (when eaten)@@MusicTheoryForGuitar
The natural minor scale is just so phenomenally "multicultural": it (or something very closely resembling it) is used in so many different places, cultures and traditions around the globe that you can't help positing that it somehow resonates more organically with the human ear than any other combination of pitches. It's not tied to a single emotion like "sad" or "melancholy", but the sequence of notes b3-2-1-b7-1 is so universally and instinctively fulfilling to hear that in my mind, it's even bigger than the V-to-I motion (which, for me at least, is an absolute acquired taste).
And for that matter, as sub-dominant to dominant to tonic chord progressions go, somehow it feels like whereas IV-V-I is "westernly triumphant", in contrast bVI-bVII-i is somehow "agnosticly glorious".
"words are trains, for moving past what really has no name" - Paddy McAloon, of Prefab Sprout.
For me, music is shorthand for the soul. Without the lyrics, you're just left with a mood, an emotion.
Agreed, music is not a language. However, I think there are some similarities.
- To learn a style of music, it helps to immerse themselves in some way, just like learning a language.
Listening, reading [sheet music/tabs], writing [songs], speaking [playing].
- Both are audio.
- Music can be seen as an "attempt" at communication (emotions)
Where the metaphor falls apart:
- When there is a misinterpretation in language and people are not on the same page/don't understand each other, there is a problem.
With music [and all other art], two different interpretations are completely valid and there is no problem with that.
- Language has RULES, while music has moreso "guidelines" (maybe not even that?).
It conveys intangible things, that's part of it anyway. Flight of the Bumblebee is a great expression of a bumblebees flight... but would people think of it like that if they didn't know the name? I think maybe they would but who knows.
Find somebody who does not know about it, and have them listen to it without knowing the title. Kids are great for that... and they have a lot of imagination.
Let's talk about the real problem here,do People really think your accent is Russian? 😅
... yes they do (lol)
If you must have a metaphor, music is more like punctuation that conveys mood. The lyrics are language, but the music punctuates the words with mood. Like language, punctuation has rules, or at least a common understanding that is an unenforceable set of rules. Music is an adjunct to language as a form of communication, so I see nothing wrong with referring to the language of music as there is no quantitative measure of vocabulary, how much a system of communications must communicate to be called a language. Does music communicate through symbols and/or sound? Yes. To me, that's language despite a small vocabulary. I can't order a pizza in Latin because it has no word for pizza, but it's still a language. That's a bad example! I can tell you to wake up by blowing reveille on a bugle the same as yelling "Wake up!" Isn't that language? Music can convey a mood the same as a poet's verses, sometimes abstract beyond what words alone can describe. Will banning the phrase "language of music" improve our playing? No. Is this argument a useless distraction? Yes, so enough of this mental masturbation and get back to making music.
You: "I can't order a pizza in Latin"
Ancient Romans: "dude, who do you think invented pizza?"
Music is poetry set to music or just beautiful notes set in a pattern.
As I teach it I have my students play any note in the scale to a UA-cam backing track. As they get used to it I show them how to incorporate stuff like slides and hammer-ons. Eventually telling them to only play when they breathe out just like speaking or playing a sax. I mention how BB King would say that to him he just switched from singing the song with his voice to singing it with his guitar. It’s not a language but we do use similar techniques at times and I think that’s why people say it is.
Honest question: how is that exercise similar to language?
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar Because I tell my students to make up something to say for each syllable (like scatting). So if my student is making up a melody based on what happened at school during lunch I could see why they would then in turn think that makes music a language. But I agree with you. Anyone listening to them would not be able to tell someone else what happened at lunch. I’m just saying I think that’s how the perception of music being a language might come to be in the mind of some people.
They are related, for sure (that's why I say that "language is a music" in the video). For instance, babies learn to sing nursery rhymes before they can speak, and they learn to speak earlier if they listen to more music. You are tapping into something similar with your students (it's a great exercise, BTW!)
I think of music as the craft of deliberately arranging audible sounds in ways that will trigger the listener. Language on the other hand is a system that uses perceptible signals to structure intelligent thought. It may (and usually does) use sounds to do that, but that's not indispensable. Just think sign language. So I'd say that music is not a language, and not all languages have a musical component to them. Otherwise the metaphor is fine 🤭
That's an interesting point: "and not all languages have a musical component to them". I wonder if sign language has a rhythmical component to it. We agree that it has no pitch (some music has no pitch too). This is one of these moment where I think I should proceed cautiously, lest I define everything with a temporal component "musical" (which I don't want to do, even if very very tempting). Good points, you are making me think!
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar Very interesting question about rhythm. And the answer is probably "it depends". To a certain extent yes, there might be a rhythmical component, but how much of that is intentional (in which case it is music) vs how much of it is the consequence of gestures having to be performed sequentially? In that vein: the drone of a synthetic voice engine reading out lyrics of a song can be regarded as speech based on language for sure, but it's not music. The same lyrics pronounced with a deliberate rhythm againt a beat (I'm thinking Eminem right now): that's music, using language as an instrument.
And you don't even need to understand the language to enjoy the music, but go and try to enjoy the speech without understanding the language...
After a quick consultation with a few friends who have studies to becomesign language interpreters - The answer is that there definitely are rhythmic components to sign language in many same ways as in spoken language.
This is not particularly surprising either, since deaf people can also enjoy dancing to music. It is pretty normal that the part of the brain that would normally react to sound attunes to reacting to vibrations that they feel with their body. Consequently music with heavy emphasis on bass (techno etc.) is what they would typically "listen" to if they get into music. @@MusicTheoryForGuitar
@chrisrosencrans: Music is music. Language is language. MATH IS MATH!!! WHY WOULD THEY CHANGE MATH?!?
Music is indeed a language, but what it is not, however, is a tongue. There is a significant difference between the two terms. Language, in its semiotic sense, is a structured communication system, with a defined context of use and certain formal combinatorial principles. These contexts can be both natural and artificial. It's true that you can't order a pepperoni pizza just with music. However, there are many things that art in all its forms, including music, can express that verbal language cannot
Any sources you can quote on the difference between language and tongue? Also, you defined language, but not tongue.
Before I answer, I need to tell you that I enjoy your channel. It's distinct, intelligent, and I've learned a lot from it, so thank you. Now, my answer: 'Language' refers to a structured system of symbols, whether verbal or non-verbal, used for communication. 'Tongue', on the other hand, specifically refers to spoken language. Music is a language because it is an abstract and symbolic medium that allows humans to express meaning and can evoke a range of responses and interpretations from its audience.
Building on this, Ferdinand de Saussure's distinction between 'langue' and 'parole' provides further insight. 'Langue' represents the abstract, structured set of rules and norms-a shared, collective system that forms the foundation of a language. It is the underlying framework that governs how language is constructed and understood within a speech community. In contrast, 'parole' refers to the individual, actual use of language-the diverse and variable expressions of speech in real-life situations. This distinction is crucial in appreciating the complexity of linguistic communication, where 'langue' provides the blueprint, and 'parole' embodies the dynamic, lived experience of language.@@MusicTheoryForGuitar
I realize now that my answer could "sound" hostile, but I was really asking for more info. My apologies.
Re: the distinction, I will have to read/think more about it, but based on what you write, my immediate reaction is to think: ok, then music is still not a language because there are many "shared, collective systems" that convey meaning in music. Indeed, I identified 3 (there could be more). So... music is a family of languages? But I still like my formulation better, "language is a music".
Again, that's my immediate reaction, not a reasoned answer. I will sleep over it.
Language is like a vast container that holds within it other, smaller boxes. One of these boxes contains 'tongues,' which in turn encompass dialects, accents, and regional variations. Other boxes include Proxemics, Braille, Gestures, and Art, among others. The latter, Art, is itself a large box containing diverse forms such as Dance, Plastic Arts, and Music, to name a few. Linguistics, a social science, works alongside semiotics to define language as the quintessential human ability, enabling people to encode and decode meaning.
@@octavio.herrero Well, forgive me for not taking the linguist's word on "all this stuff is a language". Considering that mathematicians and physicists have such a claim too, (+ several other people). My point of view is that all these people 1. do not understand how music works 2. consistently bring in misunderstandings into music because they make metaphors with their main discipline 3. they do not listen to musicians.
The music-language comparison is a time-honored one, but certainly has flaws and limitations. You can't tell someone: "Pick up a quart of milk on way home from work" using notes, right? The two have fundamentally different purposes. On the other hand there are many *loosely* similar (analogous) things... There are rules, sequences, structure, repetition, constituient parts (notes, words). So, yeah, agree people say "music is a language" perhaps too glibly. However if this comparison somehow aids (don't know exactly how it would) a learner/player, then it has a place.
Was the first Hawai pizza ordered by a musician? That would explain things…
:-)))))
Music is not a language to those who have nothing to say with it. 😎 But still liked the video 😊
I like the video, but I disagree with you. "Music is a language" doesn't mean it is an advanced language. Yes, you can not order a pizza with music, but you CAN evoke emotions, you CAN call for a response, you CAN respond musically to what you heard. It's a basic language. A 2-yr old also can't order a pizza, but can still say a few words and understand a few basics. In my opinion Music IS a BASIC language. Your thoughts?
My thoughts is that the "common wisdom" is backward, and the correct way to state it is: "Language is a music". Or "Language is the kind of music that 'evolved' to transmit more specific information". Insights we have in music do apply to languages. Insights we have in language mostly do not apply in music.
Interesting take, I'm not sure where I firmly belong here. I feel you are onto something here. I am reminded of Wittgenstein's concept of the "language game" where sets of rules and qualities define the purpose of a certain subset of words, grammar, intonation etc. (e.g. in comedy, comedic timing can be used to great effect. whereas in say a line cook's profession, they might have to know words like "hands" "corner" etc. to indicate specific requests, considerations, and actions to take.) So I think about your example, that music cannot be written into a song that will get you a pepperoni pizza.
I have two thoughts about that: 1. Languages that are very old or so foreign (e.g. a tribal language) also lack the resources to order a pizza, but they are still indeed languages. 2. Music could be adapted into a code to allow for such a request. For example, a C major chord means a cheese pizza, a C minor chord means a pepperoni pizza. Play a minor chord and the pizza type is now known. Your address (say your postal code or coordinates or whatever) could be done via some sort of Morse code after with the highest note of your guitar. Silly I know, but now I could make the "give me a pepperoni pizza" song and even "give me a cheese pizza" song.
Still, I do think there is something to be said here about music is typically doing something else, I can't actually pick a side!
If you adopt my take that "language is a music", then you can see how intonation, etc factor into communicating with spoken language.
For your objections:
1) Of course, we want to be culturally appropriate. Even if your language lacks the word "pizza" you can probably still get away with "the round thing with juicy topping on it". But I would settle for communicating "let's go hunt, roast, and eat a pheasant. Meet me here when the sun rises tomorrow" or something culturally-equivalent.
2) In the same way I could redefine common language and say that every time I utter the phrase "Go F*$& yourself" I actually mean to give the highest praise to the person I am speaking to. But that's not going to work out, right? Out of metaphor, what you're describing is a "code", not a "language".
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar I think we do actually see phrases like that come in and out of vogue and switch up their meaning entirely. Like 'bad' means bad, but Michael Jackson (at least for a time) made 'bad' mean good. A "baddie" is a hot person, etc. Even with your strong example, we do sometimes emphatically go "oh f*$& off" to mean "wow that was very impressive!" And I think that this encoding is part of language. It takes time and enters cultures/social groups, but it does happen. So if your example becomes a kind of running joke amongst friends (this is another way to view language, our running jokes or turns of phrase become a special form of communication, "sub languages") or somehow enters the public lexicon which always grows and evolves, then for sure it works out! I would say ultimately languages do bend to codification which is why we see slang and such.
None of what you say supports your original argument of "Music could be adapted into a code to allow for such a request." Unless I'm missing something, in which case I want to hear the explanation.
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar Yes you are missing the idea of a "language game". Language games are multitudinous and achieve just about every possible faucet of communication. To say it is merely a "code" and not fit for language misses the entire point of how languages are made. So again: there is a lexicon and grammar in e.g. a working kitchen, this language game set can contain things like "the exclamation 'hands' means 'any available waiter within earshot ought to take this dish out'". This normally makes no sense in day to day conversation, but in this circumstance it has a very specific use. People in the kitchen actually have to be taught and learn the meaning of these words and actions.
Likewise, I could construct musical gestures that means anything I want for any purpose, and I have therefore constructed my very own language game that works. I already gave you a very specific way in which I could in fact make a song about ordering the pizza, which was your original point was that you cannot do so. If the person taking orders was given the song, and they were knowing how the music is to be interpreted given the prior explanation, they will in fact be able to understand my order.
So yes, you can make a song that will let someone know what pizza you would like. Or you could make a song that informs how much longer of a wait time there is, or any other extremely specific thing you can do in language. You simply need to lay out the rules. This is no different than another language. If you try to learn another language, you need to learn about the different sets of rules. Even more specifically, when you come to learn of language games, you need to learn even more nuanced rules.
If it's still not clear, I recommend reading Ludwig Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations to get a proper understanding of this concept.
@@nicholastessier8504 using a language game requires a transfer of information OUTSIDE the message. You have to TELL people "If I play a major chord, put pepperoni on this" etc. According to your argument ANY stream of information is "a language". That is too say, your argument proves too much.
2:38 I've just challenged Helge Kåre Fauskanger to prove to _you_ that Quenya is a language.
He has already proven it to _me,_ he has translated Genesis, the Johannine corpus, and probably by now some more into Quenya (he does Bible translating for a living ...)
I'd like to hear how one can order a pizza in Quenya. Can we also get the tengwar for it? I may, uh, carve them in a ring...
I think "Ánin raitare" would be pretty correct for "give me a pescatore" ...
(Based on Helge's translations of John 4 and Mark 1).
Why do people need to compare music with a language, with mathematics etc etc. I fail to see why one should do this. It’s the same as comparing a country to a mountain or a river. It’s just different things. Music makes use of language and at the same time the structure of mathematics (apart from free jazz). That’s what it is. The competencies one needs to make music might partly seem to be the same as for a language/mathematics, but that is a didactical/pedagogical question. If you want to understand and study one or the other, the comparison doesn’t help. Even though this is a well made video, I find it a too long to debunk that wrong way of thinking
Hello Thomas!
grunt ungh un un, w pepperoni
:-)
Accento russo! piango...
Odd enough, I agree with you the music isn't a language. I have no complaint on how you say anything, if you speak english then it ok with me.
I disagree that you have to follow grammar rules. When you change or alter grammatical rules you get a new dialect or something like AAVE/Slang which is an offshoot of American English that has its own guidelines. I’d say music is linguistic even if it’s not a language by pure definition
2 questions: 1. these new dialects/slang do still have verbs and adjectives in them? (if yes, there we go, they still follow the rules) 2. what exactly are verbs and adjectives in instrumental music? (if you don't know, well neither do I, but I'm the one that says music is not a language...)
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar 1. If you’re talking order of operations, ie Subject-Verb-Object vs Subject-Object-Verb then i agree. When I hear “grammar” I am thinking smaller things that occur with dialects. So apologies for misunderstanding
2. I agree that music isn’t a language. But I think it’s linguistic in nature since it does have syntax & phonetic qualities. This might just be me restating what you said in the video about language being a kind of music
1. I meant the very existence of categories like "verb", "noun", "adjective" etc. So we agree :)
2. I'm thinking of "music" being a larger (and possibly mroe primitive) category than "language". "Music is a language" is usually meant to imply "what we call music is a subset of what we call language", but I think the inclusion (if it exist) goes the other way.
At the end of the day, I am opposed to the glib generalizations that come from the metaphor "music is a language". There is a relationship? Yes. but we can't apply everything that works for a language to music (like A LOT of people try to do)
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar gotcha. I appreciate the clarification. Great video as always
My pleasure - and thanks for the thoughtful comments!
4:51 "A grammar is just an a bunch of rules. But then you have to learn the vocabulary, you need to be be fluent with that, you need to learn all the kind of phrasing that they use, the intonation the pronunciation." Music, too!
5:30 An Italian who lives in Canada.
6:18 This is what someone (Robert Anton Wilson?) referred to as "game rules": If you want to play the game (compose in the Baroque style), you need to follow the rules (don't use 12-tone rows, etc.). Just like if you want to play the Catholic Game, you have to accept that the Pope is infallible; that's one of their game rules.
7:00 Music does not have a grammar, but grammars can be used to produce music. (I have read a few dozen papers about music where this is done.) These grammars do not produce all possible music, though. It's like saying that you can create English sentences with the template "The [singular noun] [past tense verb] the [improper noun]."
9:07 A metaphor is not the object, but a model of the object. And, as statistician George Box once said, "All models are wrong, but some are useful."
A paper I read a few years ago had a really nice comment about why music is not a language, but I can't seem to find it.
One more comment, this one actually being from Robert Anton Wilson. He (along with some other people) want(ed) to abolish all sentences of the form "X is Y", because they imply universals (which only occur in mathematics) or state that a model is the same thing as what it represents ("The map is not the territory", "The menu is not the food", etc.) In fact, a good exercise is to simply not use sentences of the form "X is Y", because it forces you to be more precise. It also brings out the fact that you are speaking from your own experience and sense data. For instance, don't say "That apple is red"; instead, say "That apple appears red to me."
Music is math, not a language. LOVED the video
Thanks :-) Link it around (social media, etc), we need to spread the message.
But Maths are a language, not everything is about pizza...
@@HeadbangoO Physics PhD here. Math is NOT a language (but can be used as)
You are so right. I create spreadsheets to explain music, such as, how modes work. The math is always dependable and perfect, no matter what angle you approach it from. It's a beautiful thing.
I respectfully disagree. I don't think music is math, but math can be used to describe music. There are many examples of musicians performing a piece of music that speed up and slow down in unison perhaps while also not being perfectly tuned to 440 and it ending up being quite popular. I don't mean to suggest that math isn't malleable, but rather that the variables of human nature make it imperfect to describe all musical applications.
"Language" has a couple of definitions, and I think people get confused by that. If someone slaps you in the face, is that language? Technically yes, in that it is "body language". It is language in the sense that it communicates a general idea (i.e., the person is upset with you). But, like music, it is far more limited than a tongue, which is what most people think of when they hear the word "language".
Body language is a whole 'nother can of worms that I'm not sure I'm ready to open right now...
body language is just a figure of speech.
@FK-we1dp That would have been my first answer too, but I want to think more about it. @sm5574 might have a point there.
@@FK-we1dp, a definition is in how people use the word. People use it that way, so it is a _common_ definition (common, meaning widely used), and it causes confusion, which is what I was trying to say. I'm not disagreeing with anything in the video, just elaborating on why people "mistakenly" call music _a_ language rather than a _form_ of language.
That's why I need to think about "body language" more. BTW my argument is more radical: language is a form of music.
So interesting that this discussion says so much about music not being a language without defining language. "Language" has different definitions. People use language for different purposes. No, you can't use music to write a business contract, however one can write poetry using language, which is as far from a business contract one can get.
I think when people are trying to describe something, it is natural to create analogies. By nature, an analogy is an imperfect way to describe something.
The question is, by saying music is a language is there any utility in this regardless if the analogy is apt or not? My sense from this editorial video is that there is nothing useful in this analogy and further that this analogy may be harmful in some way.
The argument presented here that the analogy is inaccurate is persuasive. It's also unremarkable in that all analogies are inaccurate. The conclusion that using the analogy may be in some way harmful is not persuasive.
I've heard musicians who are considered "great" or even "legendary" speak about music as a language. If thinking about music in this way is harmful, I'd like to see examples about how this thinking negatively affected their compositions and/or held them back.
I find it ironic that in a world where musicians exercise "creative license" by breaking musical rules and convention that this language analogy would somehow be intolerable.
Pick your best argument (rather than shooting at me a dozen or so) and circle back to me.
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar It wasn't personal. You made multiple points in favor of your position. I don't see why viewers can't do the same in analysis and response. If I'm not mistaken, you invited discussion. I thought that was the point of comment area.
To be honest, to me this subject is a non-issue. If saying or thinking music is a language has some effect on learning, understanding, writing or performing music in some demonstrable way, I would like to see a real life example. If there are none, then this is just an exercise in expressing an opinion of no consequence.
As you are a music instructor and this appears to be a subject you feel strongly about, I expect you must have some concrete examples to support how the concept of music as language affects a student's progress and how this manifests.
It's not personal from me either. I just don't have the time to answer all that (in your first post). For your second post, yes, I have several examples - but ow can I give them to you? Can't (of course) give you their names and address...
@@MusicTheoryForGuitar How do you give examples in support of a point you made in the video? An easy joke for me to make here would be to ask you to use language.
Simply tell the story of how a student who held the view that music is a language was negatively affected by that view and how. That's all.
And by the way, from my first post to this one, I've made the same argument, not a dozen. Simply show an example of how holding this point of view makes a difference in real life.
@@ezeriamoore Sure. I had a student who could not understand how music theory worked (well, many, but here I'll talk about that one). He could not write music - his creativity was completely blocked. After a long discussion I realized that he was dividing music theory in "descriptive" vs "prescriptive". Neither of these two 'functions' actually help in writing music. Why was he thinking this way? Because "prescriptive" and "descriptive" are categories applied to languages, and music is a language (plenty of people on youtube talking about this, and their argument is flat out "music is a language"). It took a while to explain this student how music is not a language, and how there is more to music theory than "descriptive" vs "prescriptive". Once he "got it" writing music was not a problem for him anymore.
Now, this is one example. There are many, all different. Since you made only one argument in your posts, I trust this answers everything.
I agree that it's not a language but I do not agree it's a math as some comments have suggested. I believe that math can be used to describe music, but I believe that as you seemed to suggest in your video music comes from a primitive place within our species and as such is colored by the idiosyncrasies that make up an individual. This is then compounded by a group of musicians who then form a band. But if one looks at the way the Police would ebb and flow as they speed up and slow down to different tempos throughout a track I believe the math argument begins to fall apart perhaps more quickly than the language argument. Furthermore, in this modern era of grided music that is quantized within a daw it is becoming such that it's almost unbearably rigid. Folks grow up imitating autotune and so on. While this type of music may well be popular with some I would point to the decline in music's popularity culturally over the past couple of decades as an example of why it isn't best described as math as a case in point. Music I believe is best described as abstract communication_ but this is just my opinion of course and I may as well be wrong as I am right. Thanks for the video!!!
I agree on everything except the "math" part.
The thing is I (sincerely) do not understand is why people equate "math" with "soulless".
I am not here trying to defend "music is math" (that would require another video... but who would watch that? Besides I'm not sure myself if music is math or not and to what degree). Still:
- "[music] is colored by the idiosyncrasies that make up an individual" And math is not? Every mathematicians has a style and specific aesthetic preferences
- "grided music that is quantized within a daw it is becoming such that it's almost unbearably rigid. Folks grow up imitating autotune" Yeah, all these people are using discrete math to make their music, when they should be using continuous math or topology instead. Why math should be "rigid"? Because of the boring stuff that they teach in high school as "math"? (most mathematicians - me included - hate the stuff that are taught as "math" in high school. Any sane person would, actually)
- "But if one looks at the way the Police would ebb and flow as they speed up and slow down to different tempos throughout a track I believe the math argument begins to fall apart" any mathematician worth the paper of his /her degree can describe that easily... and give you several insight on what the Police were doing! (I'm not saying the Police were mathematicians, and I agree that going "by feel" is better in many ways and in most situations... I'm just disagreeing that math is limited to "constant tempo" situations)
- " Music I believe is best described as abstract communication_ but this is just my opinion of course and I may as well be wrong as I am right." No, I agree... AND this means that it's math, though.
Anyway - I don't really want to start a flame war here :-) We DO agree on the language thing.
And everything else I say does not really contradicts your opinions: I too agree that today's music is too rigid and quantized, and will fall out of fashion. Really the only thing I disagree with is characterizing all that as "math".
Thanks for your thoughful comment!!
@MusicTheoryForGuitar I thought that this might be a point of contention based on what I remember of your background in math. I would amend my comments in this way_ if you are a mathematician, then I wholeheartedly support your not only describing but equating math to music. More than being your prerogative, it is something that sparks your creativity, no?? And I certainly respect that. For me when I am learning a rhythm pattern or a drum fill or something like it, it actually is much easier for me to use a pneumonic device to remember the pattern than it is to count it. I would argue this has more in common with someone being a left - or right-handed person than anything else in particular. But I am no expert on anything, and I do believe that the internet has been a detriment to the respect of expertise, and certainly I defer to you in most all things music and music theory related. So, while my musical path isn't one that is rooted in math(*that I consciously think about*) that's not to take away from those that use math in their own creative process. As for the Police speeding up and slowing down _ I brought it up because of the way it permutates_ starting the verses at a given tempo, speeding up the choruses to a speed that isn't a multiple of the original tempo and then going back into the verse at a different tempo than it had started and while I don't think it is impossible to describe mathematically I don't believe that math was a consideration before hand. I believe they played it that way naturally and am uncertain they would have been able to come to the same composition had they started with a methematical formulae. But again, I am not speaking in absolutes because they are certainly talented enough.
But I apologize if I have rubbed anyone who sees math as a beautiful and creative endeavor the wrong way, or if I sounded as if one couldn't find creative purpose in music through mathematical means. Just because it doesn't fit with my own understanding of the creative process doesn't mean I don't believe that in the right hands, it can be used as a creative tool. Apologies if I came off in any other manner.
All the best
Cheers
@@randydean23 Hey, I'm not offended :-) I just thought it was an interesting discussion. I really do appreciate the comments you made, and the answers you gave to my comments too. The important point is we all love music, and there is more than one path to it.
@MusicTheoryForGuitar It's all good! I appreciate you saying that but I'm good! I sincerely think I wasn't clear enough in my original post and would like to think I would have clarified in any case_ it seemed as though I was saying Math was bad or something and perhaps worse inferred that those who see the world through that lens were incorrect, or whatever. But it's all good from pov. Thanks for the back and forth !
3:18 Well before _we_ invented words ... ?
Becoming an inventor of _anything_ (including words) is very hard if you don't have ... words. Feral children don't become logothetes when they come to men again, if they were away from men the precise timeslot allotted to start acquiring a first language, they become crippled people who can't speak.
Well, if you are not speaking metaphorically then no, it's more like a smoke signal. Metaphorically you can says it's anything you want but you're a theory guy so you are probably pretty literal. Just not sure I would have made an entire video about it,. But then maybe I should watch it, huh? Maybe I will. Later. Maybe.
Maybe you should. Maybe.
Come on, man, "music is a language" is a literary image. It's a metaphor that comes from the fact that music can express feeling. Are you gonna make a video denying that "laughter is the best medicine" or "time is money"?
Sure, come and complain with the people who agree with you, rather than the ones who took the metaphor literally.
Your arguments are invalid (if not silly). Music IS a language. Not universal, but still a language.
You have an argument here, or are you just stating your position?