Quote:
Originally Posted by spherenine
Okay, music is made of sound. Sound is made of regions of compression and rarefaction in the air. I still fail to see where soul and passion come in.
A good piece of evidence supporting this: this thread.
|
Thanks for the physics, but we are obviously not talking about general sound in space. Your knowledge seems limited.
Humans can generate, or synthesize sounds in their head. Meaning, it is more than just compressions and shear waves. It can have a strong psychological effect.
When speaking of music, which is more than just sound, no matter how you want to look at it, it IS more than just sound. Music really only exists to the relativity of humans since we are the only ones who perceive it as so.
Cognitive thought is what makes music, not sound. If we couldn't cognitively process information, we would have no music, only sounds.
There is an underling logic surrounding music, therefore the way we perceive music can be interpreted as more than just sound. I'm sure a dog doesn't hear an A minor scale, and think depressive, like most humans would. The same goes with this instance. I heard Bach compared to a computer, and instantly recognized a 'human' element in it. Or what I precieved as human, it was partly luck yes, but my initial instinct proved to be right.
If you understand music as only being sounds, then you don't understand music to the full extent. You should probaly learn some psychology, specifically the cognitive relation to music and the brain, and you might have a better understanding on how one could guess the correct artist in the inference.
It's just like language. You can make sounds all you want, but when you put it in a logical system of sounds, it creates language, so you can have all of the compressional waves you want, but it's music when you recognize the underlining logic behind all of it.
So until you learn more about music, you should probaly rest your mind in trying to simply prove others wrong. You obviously didn't have the full knowledge to be doing so, and I don't see why you made an attempt.
It's impossible to point on the artist unless you know every piece by them, but there can always be a logical, even educated guess and that's what this pertained to.
You used physics as your means of interpretation, and it is obviously wrong because we are talking about a musical context which is primarily psychological.
I hope I helped.