What is Musicality?


Hello fellow music lovers,

I am upgrading my system like a lot of us who follow Audiogon. I read a lot about musicality on Audiogon as though the search for musicality can ultimately end by acquiring the perfect music system -- or the best system that one can afford. I really appreciate the sonic improvements that new components, cables, plugs and tweaks are bringing to my own system. But ultimately a lot of musicality comes from within and not from without. I probably appreciated my Rocket Radio and my first transistor radio in the 1950s as much I do my high-end system in 2010. Appreciating good music is not only a matter of how good your equipment is. It is a measure of how musical a person you are. Most people appreciate good music but some people are born more musical than others and appreciate singing in the shower as much as they do listening to a high-end system or playing a musical instrument or attending a concert. Music begins in the soul. It is not only a function of how good a system you have.

Sabai
sabai
Tiggerfc - I loved "Once" and would heartily second your recommendation to see it. What do you think of their recent release together under "Swell Season"? I have yet to warm up to it vs the soundtrack which I do really enjoy.

One more film that speaks to the some of this, in some way (there are certainly many, but indulge me this one more because upon seeing it I would rank in my top 10 films of all time): The Swedish film, "As it is in Heaven". Ten stars is not enough for this film - this one goes to eleven! That's one more than ten! If you love music, do not pass go, run, don't walk, see this movie!

One of the interesting bits brought up in the great book pointed out by Hellofidelity (This is Your Brain on Music) is about the history of music in civilization. Briefly, and paraphrasing, he points out that it is only a very modern day development where musicians are considered another breed, and talent in music has become a matter of elevated (arguably distorted) prestige in society. He goes on to point out in days long past, in most cultures, music was a given as common and expected as perhaps ones ability to drive a car might be today. Much like in some tribal cultures, a few that still survive today, music (and dance) are tightly interwoven into the culture and enjoyed and practiced practically from birth to death. For one to not participate in that, to those people, is completely shocking. So it was more common in western civilization hundreds of years ago - or at least much closer to that model. Elevating musicians (and performers) to levels of celebrity is a recent manifestation of modern culture, says Levitin. Anyone who's spent any time with "celebrities" knows that, in spite of their talents, they are simply ordinary people with both good qualities and bad, just as flawed as any of us, and who put their pants on one leg at a time just like any of us do. Some are extraordinary people and some are rather plain, and some are complete A%$holes (and everything in between)....just like the rest of the population. I really resist any statements that infer such things as, "most zookeepers love dogs." Really, what's the point, even if it were true?

What I was awkwardly trying to get at in some of my remarks was that I really do enjoy when people share their personal experiences - it's fascinating to see how widely varied we all are. But I do find that I am pushed away when I get the sense that someone sees the world through blinders and tries to fit everything into pigeon holes, and especially when judgments become involved elevating one person above another, or making broad generalizations about some particular group whether it be professional musicians or women, or audiophiles (I'm not saying that's what anyone IS trying to do here, but I have got that sense from some of the conversation, whether deliberate/intended or not). There is nothing to be gained in such a scenario, from my perspective. Again, I am not pointing to any one person's comments here... but these are general responses to the (ridiculous) sub-topic that seems to have arisen here of who appreciates music more, and what ways can one appreciate music more. To me, that's like someone telling me that they have a way that I can enjoy chocolate cake even more by learning about the way it is made, or by standing on my head while I eat it, or by eating only one particular kind, etc. Hey, I don't mind hearing what works for you - I rather enjoy it, and I do revel in your passion shared, and do very much appreciate that you take the time and energy to share them. But when someone else assumes that something that works for them will necessarily work for me and everyone else....well, it's kind of like having some religious belief shoved down your throat. For me personally, I really don't want to question why I enjoy music, or wine, or cake. I don't need to understand or comprehend it on any other level than I already do...I'd just like to continue to enjoy it without my head getting in the way (as I mentioned, it is prone to do that once in a while). I admit, I'd consider myself a simple kind of person in this way. For me my head does not add to my enjoyment of such things, to the contrary, it gets in the way. Musicality ends when my head becomes involved - I realize that's just one experience among many and that there are other possibilities.
Jax2 - "What do you think of their recent release together under "Swell Season"? I have yet to warm up to it vs the soundtrack which I do really enjoy."

I surprisingly wasn't very happy with the Swell Season album either. But the soundtrack, definitely. I downloaded quite a few of the soundtrack songs I liked.

I'm not a huge movie buff so I don't see very many. Unfortunately, I have not heard of "As it is in Heaven" and can not comment on it but I will put on my list of things to do. Any movie about music is always interesting to me. "Ray" was fantastic though it was more about his life. "August Rush" or was it just "August"???...that was more based on music itself and I thought it was great. The theme song from "Schindler's List" is one of my favorite violin pieces to play. Of course I put my own twist on it. But I digress... a little off topic there.

One thing that most people agree on here is that music speaks to each person on an individual level. Some may get more dopamine action than others but I don't think that is the final piece in musical enjoyment or appreciation or comprehension or whatever word you want to throw at it.

There is definitely a fine line because each has been debated together and seperately. And I don't think anyone could possibly have a solid and definitive answer here since indivuality will ultimately define the listening experience and ability to attain the amount of enjoyment from it.

The best answer here regarding musicality has already been stated by others here as well... it's you.
Jax2 - People became more practical in last 50-70 years and tend to learn only skills that have some market value. It was different before. Generations of our fathers or grandfathers were learning often useless skills believing that life is not practical (has no purpose) to start with. People used to learn singing just for the pleasure of it. My father was learning Greek and Latin etc.

Music role was also different. In many cultures (China for instance) music was on such high pedestal that was breaking social divisions. Peasant was allowed to perform with noble man or even emperor if he possessed required skills. Music and dance ability was subject of an exam for higher government positions. In modern India, every movie has dance and singing sequence every 10 min. - if it doesn't it means it was made for US. In many countries (whole Europe) there is a a special government department in charge of culture (music art etc).

In western culture government was involved in promotion of art and music for centuries - not so much today, at least here. We're closing music and art programs in schools calling it a waste of taxpayers' money.

It is interesting that economic crisis in our country makes it worse for the art and music but same conditions in India produced world best musicians like Ali Akbar Khan (at least Yehudi Menuhin called him that) who had been learning music 18 hours a day for 20 years because competition is so strong that only the best are successful.

I just wonder if he, having no equal, could enjoy music played by others as much as I do.
Jax2, I was not trying to elevate women or audiophiles in my comments. I was just trying to point out the different ways different people experience music. For me experiencing music in its wholeness is what musicality is all about. I believe that more men than women are doing the buying and selling on Audiogon as well as participating in its forums. Does this have any meaning? I believe it does. I believe it means men think more about audio systems than women do. Both may be able to appreciate the music deeply but I believe more men than women have a tendency to become concerned about specific aspects of the music and the equipment it produces unless the latter are musicians or are in the music industry. Women have a more innate and natural ability to just sit down and enjoy the music without letting their brain interfere with their appreciation of it. Not that women may not notice a particular shortcoming in the sound reproduction. On the contrary, they may pick up on it faster than their partner. But because their partner may be more involved in the technical side of things he may be more worried about how to upgrade or tweak to get things just right and may spend a lot more time on Audiogon trying to figure things out.

Sabai
I was not suggesting that you had "elevated" anyone, Sabai. I'm sorry, I reread what I wrote and realize that I was not clear. I included it in the same sentence which might have implied that, qualifying it with the phrase, "..OR, making broad generalizations..." The inference of elevating a group was more around the discussion of those with a more thorough knowledge of music having the capacity to enjoy music more, as well as the idea of elevating celebrity, both of which I think are absurd notions myself. My comment around what you said about women, is more about generalizing about any group of people - sure, you can generalize, but I was trying to point out that generalizations are most certainly not a rule. For instance, I do not fit your general descriptions of men and women that you've set forth as based on fact, and on Carl Jung's studies. I am not at all a cogitator and operate far more on feelings than I do on thinking. I also have known many men and women who are the exception to these generalizations. I have no doubt the studies exist as you say they do. Again, I don't see the point in the same way I don't see the point of implying something like; more caucasians are audiophiles than African-Americans. That may be one person's experience, and there may actually be studies to back this statement up, but really, what's the point? What does this information serve to do? In some contexts far more harm than good. Perhaps it's that I'm not a cogitator (though I guess these tomes require a bit of reflecting, so there's certainly some element of that in me). I'd rather just experience people, and the world, at face value than try to predict everything ahead of time. But I digress, as usual. Just my .02 Lincolns on the subject.