How do i get over my inferiority complex towards musicians...

sad

I can remember the whole of Hart Crane's The Bridge, so its okay

>You won't remember whole symphonies, but only snatches of melody.
Huh?

Okay why are you talking about lyrics in a discussion of music?

Is it the one that goes dun dun DUUUUN duun Duuuum DUUUUN?

>the life of a musician is a much happier life, more social and full of passion, than a writer's who spends his days alone, painfully introspecting

>posts pic of dude who comes from Sirius and spends his entire existence writing out the incomprehensible noises going on in his head

No, it's the one that goes duuun dun, dun daduuun dun.

Are there unironically people who can't play melodies in their heads? Is this the dreaded "NPC" phenomenon?

Probably not, some likely let the skill die or let their own insecurity get in the way.

Well, there are those that get brain damage and loose the ability to comprehend music.

Fine art > Music > Writing

Objectively speaking. (I'm not speaking for the anomalous pieces of shit of each medium. Period painting on white canvas, Mumble Rap, Opinion Pieces under the guise of fact etc.)

>Objectively speaking
Do explain...

Velázquez > Bach > Shakespeare

Maybe you should become a librettist.

>he can''t play dozens of different instruments at a high level.
what the fuck were you parents even doing?

>Objectively speaking
Maybe he means form/structure/concepts instead of aesthetic appeal? As in concerning the notional goal before the hermeneutic interplay between the subject and the emanant. Objectivity wasn't always such a dirty word.

Writer
>captures the depth of human experience in an incredible feat of imagination

Musician
>LMAO I TOUCH THESE OSCILLATING OBJECTS TO PRODUCE SOUND WAVES WHICH COMBINE IN SOMEWHAT PLEASANT PATTERNS HOWEVER TO MASK THE BASED NATURE OF MY CRAFT I TALK ABOUT MY RUDIMENTARY ACTIONS AS "ELEVATED" AND "FULL OF PASSION" OR SOME OTHER MYSTIFYING CRAP RETARDS GONNA BUY IT WHOLESALE LMAO

why not both?

Music is the only pure art form, it requires nothing outside of nature and is totally abstract.

Professional musician here, I appreciate the kind words. I think part of what you’re talking about is the fact that form and content in music is interrelated in a very particular way. It’s like poetry but with the added depth of harmonic character, theres a mathematical precision to good songwriting that makes it more like a feat of engineering than composition.

As for the more superficial/social reasons for music’s superiority, it comes with its drawbacks too. It’s a far more collaborative programme, which means keeping the purity of your ideas is a fantasy unless you’re a solo artist (but that’s dull as hell).

Yet most music incorporates human conceptions of form, rhythm, composition, and emotion, often far more rigid than most abstract art or even still life and landscape paintings.
>inb4 music is mathematical so it be natural

I wasn't going to say anything about mathematics. It is natural because it requires nothing more than the voice one is born with. Conversely, painting requires fashioned tools and materials, writing requires those things plus language. That is, to paint the first picture, the first painter had first to create things that did not previously exist. The voice did not need to be created, the first singer was born with it.

Anyway, what makes music great is that it cannot help but transcend meaning. You cannot contain it in non-musical terms like so much emotionalist gushing. This is why almost all non-technical writing about music is complete shit.

>This is why almost all non-technical writing about music is complete shit.

Pretty much. I hadn't been able to phrase it the way you did, but I've often wondered why music criticism is so horrible compared to other mediums of art criticism and came to generally the same conclusion. You just can't talk about music outside of its mechanics without resorting to like prose poetry in an attempt to offer an analogy.

The same reason if you can describe books in a few words it's probably shit.
A good review/summary of a book will make you want to read it, much as a good description/background of a piece of music will compel you to listen to it.

>Every philosopher that I have read have offered compelling arguments for why music is the highest art form
The grass is always greener etc.
>Whenevr I see musicians or composers immersed in their craft, I feel that they can attain a level of sincere passion that writers cannot.
Writers can, on the other hand, communicate much more complex and precise ideas through language. If passion is what you're looking for in art, try theater. It's on average more emotionally intense than music.
>Most writers are depressed, boring nerds, while many composers are impressive people, full of life. The life of a musician is a much happier life, more social and full of passion, than a writer’s who spends his days alone, painfully introspecting
You're not even talking about art forms here, just the artists, with weird value judgements (why is a more social life better than a more solitary one with more introspection?)

It’s not fair to discredit music criticism because it depends on analogy - after all, so much of music terminology is only understood analogously! Phrases like texture, light and dark, wet and dry, etc. Are all technical terms that rely on an allegorical use to make sense. The problem is that music is so dependent on abstract constraints, on mathematical shapes and sequences, that the only way to make the experience communicable to someone without a technical knowledge is via analogy.

music only achieves the capture of one of the 5 senses human beings have so it isn´t the highest form of art

film and opera in the other hand........

Attached: 1516934854074.jpg (1920x1207, 417K)

With this logic, a matrix would be the greatest work of art

what is the matrix in your opinion?

not that guy but I get where he's coming from, like that room in Star Trek, the Holodeck.
The ultimate form of art who be in this case, a form of interactive art completely based in unreality, like the artist showcasing everything he wanted to in life that would be otherwise impossible to get forward.
Art is already superior to life, but art that can replace life entirely renders the latter completely useless. (One would imagine meth users see pornography and are immediately destined to die)

Just pick up an instrument. Learn to sing or something.

Yeah, video-games the logical conclusion to art.

Obligatory Stockhausen 9-11 quote
>Well, what happened there is, of course—now all of you must adjust your brains—the biggest work of art there has ever been. The fact that spirits achieve with one act something which we in music could never dream of, that people practise ten years madly, fanatically for a concert. And then die. And that is the greatest work of art that exists for the whole Cosmos. Just imagine what happened there. There are people who are so concentrated on this single performance, and then five thousand people are driven to Resurrection. In one moment. I couldn't do that. Compared to that, we are nothing, as composers.

Attached: images.jpg (225x225, 11K)

A matrix like the one from the film Matrix, a machine that stimulates all of your senses to the point where any outside influence doesn't affect you in any way. Also a tool of subjugation and brainwashing.

This is the correct answer. Mahler 5 would me duun.. dudududuuun.. dudududuuuuun

Mahler is firetruck garbage

you´re a moron, that´s not art to begin with, it´s a product, corporate garbage

But it stimulates all the senses! Isn't that awesome? All the senses!!!

so what modern life is a product, the only differentiation you can make nowadays is what escapism is more valuable, since primitivism is slowly becoming illegal, if not already.

read the last samurai by helen dewitt
pushing any artform to its limits, which is the occupation of genius, will lead to dissatisfaction and unhappiness

"“Women and wine, friends and family… those things are nothing more than a break… a rest between [art]…!”
- Nobuyuki Fukumoto

What else is there in life for an artist but art?

finding yer dad

I've found him, what next chap?
I'm not fist-fighting him

well, if you've tested him properly, and he's proven himself, then make him teach you his art.

Stop reading philosophers you idiot

He's in property and has been an entrepreneur (successfully) for most of his life. We have a good relationship despite me being a sperg like you'd imagine.
I've asked numerous times to be taught in his business but he declines softly every-time. I suspect through our conversations that, he has a fear of me being better than him. It runs in the family, his father feared his son would out-match him the same.
I do love my father but his long time lover /gf etc. is a complete dumb-wine-aunt-cunt-gold-digger and so I don't really care to get back into his vacationing boomer life with her around. I know you're referencing that samurai book, but if art is futile, love is futile, families are futile, where next? I can see myself reading Rosseau for 10 years but.. I don't know.

if your father refuses to teach you his art then he is not your father; he has abdicated his responsibility. you must seek a new master. thoreau is as good as any other possibility, or better.
there are no rules in life, only suggestions. perfection is only ever provisionally realized, and always superseded. what you see as futility is the actually the seedbed for further growth. without failure, there can be no future.

Thank you for this articulate post, I'll ruminate over this a good while

Is that Tallis era meme still alive on Yea Forums? How sad.

Haven't seen it in quite a while, personally. The current is "Hans" aka paragraphfag who writes lengthy posts usually criticizing modernism.

Experimental music like musique concrète, electro-acoustic and electronica exist though.

youtube.com/watch?v=rX8NMaGEs6g&t=517s
youtube.com/watch?v=Xnvj8--YtMI

Wrong

Sculpture > Poetry = music > Fine art > Writing

There is no finer art than pure sculpture. Turning raw earthen material into beautiful, life-like creations is unparalleled artistry

Attached: Michelangelo's_Pieta_5450_cropncleaned_edit.jpg (1584x1660, 634K)

>. If you are under 25 or have had training as a child, you could still pick up an instrument.
Not OP but this was always my big fear. I played violin as a kid and electric bass as a teen, and it was only my lack of dedication that made me stop. I think I have the consistency and self-control to actually learn to play something long-term now, but was never sure if my age would be a factor with music, the same way they say that it is for language. How do you propose someone starts up learning something in their early 20's? Especially without classes?

youtube.com/watch?v=Q3yqUeiMn_g&list=PLJTWoPGfHxQH5zdZN6UlMPwZerVApkqmk

Get (re-)aquatinted with some music theory, and in your case probably pick up a string instrument.
If you have friends who play instruments ask them for help. I also found that jamming and just having fun making music/sounds is a good way to learn an instrument.

If you don't wont to bother with melody you could also pick up a drumpad and some sticks and practise rudiments.

Sounds like Tallis but less druggy.

Thanks for the help, user. I'll try to check that out. I've always wanted to play the piano, actually, but I have small manlet hands and short fingers so that seems way beyond me

Well, in a way it is fair. The western harmony quite highly developed, to the point of it being its own language, much critiquing is done be those with little knowledge of the language, it is like reading Proust in French after a week of French lessons and then having your opinion hold weight, it is a joke. Most critics that know there shit essentially translate it into English when they critique, some do well, other not so, well. We do need to hold the writers accountable for garbage, problem is no one does so we have an abundance of people who think critique is stringing a bunch of adjectives together and suggesting what the perfect cocktail pairing for the music is.

Outside of the western tradition this stuff can be much easier, many cultures worked on developing things other than highly complex harmony and the technical aspect are easier to grasp to the standard person and these skills are more expected to be learned by the listeners.

>we have an abundance of people who think critique is stringing a bunch of adjectives together and suggesting what the perfect cocktail pairing for the music is
I appreciate this sentiment, but I still think you're coming down too hard on the critics for a lack of technical knowledge, when in reality most forms of contemporary music don't require much of that to talk about, you know? Pop music is such a homogenous form that I think music criticism has to navigate it as such, it doesn't really need to rely on technical jargon. So they end up talking about the tone of the music, its character or personality, its influences, etc.. things which the average reader will respond to more than talking about why the use of a plagal cadence is so effective, for example. Obviously it becomes very easy to abuse, but I still think falling back on theory would exclude too much of their readership.

a proper recitation of iliad an epic poem with a meter is accompanied with music is the pinnacle of art.

youtube.com/watch?v=qI0mkt6Z3I0

The pop critic is were it all comes from. I really think a certain amout of theory should be in every critique, basic things like modulation and progression, people will pick up and develop an intuitive sense with time. While it is a very complex subject, sparing that sentance or two for the sake of mentioning what is unique about the piece in a technical sense would be a very good thing.

The argument of what form of art is higher than any other is fucking pedestrian.

Based and redpilled

Also Wagner was a great poet, as can be seen in the Libretto for his operas, which he wrote himself. Tristan und Isolde is pure kino.

This is literally alien and out of words...

if i could go back in time i'd expunge queen's music from the cosmological record

Try telling it to the swaggering hipster journos who think you're oppressing their freedom of speech. It's not very punk to talk technical

Which is more dangerous– music or poetry?
youtube.com/watch?v=TPuf2adIwZ8

cope from a literal who
also a writer simply has a 1 in a million knack for writing, no difference at all

If you read Leonardo DaVinci's Treatise on Painting, he completely BTFO's music as an art form.

Although, he does so to prove that painting is the king of Arts, so it doesn't really help you OP.

>How do i not feel small in front of musicians
Be a better writer. Also, know that there are a LOT of invisible sessionists, dive giggers, etc, all the way to lounge performers, who cannot compose. They just earn more than writers because their skill is rarer; everyone who got through highschool is literate, but only 15% of that are from band, maybe 5% will keep doing music past highschool. And the number of band singers frontman who are girls but cant play anything apart from bass and tombourine... You're lacking the perspective that comes from being in / around the biz, bro. Go talk to a barman, sessionist, gigger, roadie. Go talk to a guitarshop boss with a recording studio for rent. You think YA selfpublishing is bad? The equivalent for Yea Forums is the mixtape. Ohmahgawd dude, the ego STINK rivals the worst examples in Yea Forums. The musician equivalent of the poseud writer is the metalhead who uses big words out of a thesaurus, put a lot of distortion on it, pass it off as track 3.

>Every philosopher says music is the highest art form
It is the most unlogically persuasive artform. John Lennon wrote hotgarbage lyrics and paired with okay tunes, and people just eat it up because there is no way to prove it is objectively bad. If a writer makes grammaticals, or inconsistent characters, or hail mary plots, any one paying attention can catch him. Writing is def the harder game. All the time you have to come up with an original as a writer, even if it is genre cliche; 50-70% of musicianship is IRL guitarhero. A writer needs originality as a key ingredient; a musician needs practice instead, muscle memory.

>I see musicians immersed
>Real passion
Stop you there. Half of that "immersion" is playing to the crowd, feeding off the ra ra dynamic. It happens less in recording sessions.

Also, no one sees writers immersed; your presence distracts them.

>The life of a musician is happier
You mean the life of a successful musician. Most musicians IRL are mercenary AF. Here's the math:
(Daily practice) + (gigging) = no wagecuck dayjob allowed. No security. You git v gud or you starve until you let go. Read Pratchett, Soul Music: every musician on the Disc has pawned his instrument at least once in his career. It's true dude. Writers? You can do cuckjobs while pursuing your craft. Writers get to be pure artists more often; musicians tend to be artisans.

>I feel torn
Dude do both if you got talent for both. If you see 10euros on the ground, and 10britquid, which one you pick up? BOTH, zoté! All arts cross pollinate; having more than one makes you geometrically more creative.

Add:

Go to some bar with a Yea Forums friend. Listen to one or two sets. Ask your friend if he can find anything wrong or esp good about the sets. Chances are, he can pick up a bunch of missed beats, offkeys all that shit you dont even notice.

You can't say music is best; you admittedly dont have the metric to judge.

Form a proper idea, don't just string together words that sound correct, we get it, you hate the left.

Music was a very different thing in his time, if you knew anything about western harmony and it's history, you would know Leo would love what it has become.

I always got the impression the greatest musicians lead infantile lives. They shut themselves away to focus entirely on their music, as if they had some kind of autism that made them uninterested in everything else in life. I believe literature is a far more mature medium, and that music becomes enlightening through the combination of knowledge with its transcendent experience.
A lot of musicians in my experience are depressed and/or incompetent, completely flakey and socially anxious people

Realize most modern music is all the same verse chorus verse and limited to under 5 minutes ( firstly by radio now by convention and streaming) and just know that it doesn’t have much in common with the pieces philosophers were talking about.

Do you think any musicians believe literature has no value? Many find inspiration in literature. They're different art forms, the world is better with both rather than only one.

reading the shit that some of you nigs write sometimes makes me never want to come back to the internet, ever

>pleb tinted glasses
>most batrachian
>i can quit the internet
>any time i want
get some sleep user.

Just start learning an instrument lol

Art is multifaceted OP. There's not really a superior art. If every artist only engaged in the "highest art form," whether it be music or literature, the first person to deviate from that would be the greatest pioneer in art by taking on a lesser form. Musicians and writers live all sorts of different lives. You shouldn't be asking yourself which artist life you want to emulate, but rather what is the aesthetic or story you want to tell and which medium is most conducive to getting it across?

_