What Is Good Music?

What Is Good Music

GOOD Music

Parent company	Universal Music Group
Founded	2004 ; 18 years ago
Founder	Kanye West
Status	Active
Distributor(s)	Def Jam Recordings (Worldwide) EMI Records (United Kingdom)
Genre	Various, with a focus on hip hop and R&B
Country of origin	United States
Location	New York City, New York Chicago, Illinois
Official website	good-music,com

GOOD Music (commonly known simply as GOOD, stylized as G.O.O.D. Music ; a backronym for Getting Out Our Dreams ) is an American musical label created by rapper Kanye West in 2004. The label secured an exclusive long-term international label partnership with the Island Def Jam Music Group in 2011.

What defines music as good?

REACTION AND Feeling – A good song not only has to have amazing chords, melodies, and lyrics, but it also needs to provoke some kind of reaction, or elicit a certain emotion in the listener. Both of these things are equally important. Many songwriters get inspiration for their work from certain times in their lives or experiences that they have had, which enables their songs to easily resonate with listeners of many backgrounds and walks of life.

What is GOOD Music and bad music?

Edit: Even after thinking about music for a whole semester, I’m not sure whether I have a clear understanding of what makes music “good” or “poor.” I also have a strong propensity to consider things from a teleological perspective. It appeared to me that the conversation we were having about profundity was quite similar to the one we were having about excellent and awful music.

It’s possible that we’re just voicing our tastes; it’s also possible that we’re confusing our terminology; it’s also possible that there is an objective “good” for music.
Despite the fact that I do not have any fresh solutions, I have uploaded several more “excellent” items for all of you to take pleasure in.

In the beginning, I thought “oh good! Picking anything that’s not good will be a breeze. There is a lot of music that isn’t very good out there “, but the process of physically sitting down and identifying one was a challenge in and of itself. It appears that I either grossly underestimated the quantity of terrible music that exists in the world or I have been forced to repress the truly dreadful “pieces” that I have heard.

However, this work by Friedrich Nietzsche, “Ade! Ich Muss Nun Gehen,” sprang to me at that very moment.
On the surface, there does not appear to be anything that can be singled out as a problem with the essay.
There is nothing that stands out as being really irritating; there are no dissonances that are handled improperly, no strange pieces of melody, and no weird rhythms.

It’s possible that a cursory hearing will do the song some favor and preserve its dignity. However, there is something about the song that is. grating. When I was attempting to organize my thoughts, I turned on the music on repeat, and it drove me crazy to the point that I wanted to yank out all of my hair.

Nothing violates any of the “rules,” and the shape is predictable—perhaps even too much so.
Levitin makes the notion that there is a happy medium between things being too easy and things being too tough.
This tune could need some serious complexity.
There is nothing that the audience will find startling or unexpected, thus there is no way to attract their attention and draw them in.

At addition to that, I can’t help but find it a little bit funny in places. For instance, the pounding, sluggish descending bass pattern that can be heard at about 11 seconds is neither graceful nor subtle; it conjures up an image of a portly elderly guy attempting to make his way down the stairs.

At forty seconds, there is an exclamation that makes sense musically, yet it seems artificial. In general, the work is “right” from a technical standpoint, but it is lacking in grace, elegance, and understated areas of interest. This work is “insipid” and “innocently foolish,” as Berlioz so accurately put it in his description of it.

The effort resulted in a much greater harvest, and as a result, I have uploaded several songs for your auditory enjoyment; you are welcome to listen to them if you are in the mood to do so. I wanted to give an excellent piece the attention that it deserves, so I decided to perform a very short piece in class.

I picked the Prologue from Orlando di Lasso’s Prophetiae Sibyllarum because it is one of his more famous works.
In contrast to the previous work, this one appears to disregard a great deal of conventions, such as the standard tone (his works were pre-tonal, but I speak of the “rules” of our modern, tonal ears).

However, despite the fact that these criteria were disregarded, the work offers a fascinating challenge to the listener and has the potential to still sound lovely to someone who isn’t as knowledgeable about music. But the work isn’t merely a random assortment of contraventions of the rules; rather, it makes meaning.

The conclusion has a rhythm that is quite pleasing to the ear.
The di Lasso work is not only intriguing and challenging to play, but it also satisfies on a melodic level.
However, apart from that, I am at a loss as to how to describe why it is beneficial.
There is a part of me that wants to conceive of excellent and poor music in teleological terms.

To believe that music has a function, and that any music that is unsuccessful in fulfilling that function is “bad,” whereas music that fulfills its function successfully is “excellent” (and that there are varying degrees of goodness and badness depending on how close or far it is from that goal).

What is GOOD Music taste?

What Is Good Music Image courtesy of: http://bit.ly/2rpk3LG (Image Credit). Someone has always complimented at least one of us on our musical preferences. But could you perhaps explain that in more detail? If a person is considered hip by several authorities, one indicator of their status is that they have excellent musical taste.

It also indicates that they are well-versed in a variety of musical topics and have a broad knowledge base in this area. In addition to this, the individual is able to determine which styles or types of music provide the highest-quality music in each category or subgenre. Someone who has excellent musical taste is likely to know what other people will like listening to even before they do.

On the other side, if someone tells you that you have excellent taste in music, it may also suggest that you share their preferences and appreciate the same artists and songs. Or that you have the same appreciation for the same things that they do. There are a great number of people in the world who concentrate their efforts only on music.

They devote each and every waking moment of their lives to collaborating with artists or those involved in the music industry.
Others make a living out of music by educating themselves in the field, making it their profession.
Some people call them music critics, while others call them music experts.
However, having a good taste in music is a matter of personal preference.

Some people might not appreciate the kind of music that appeals to you. However, only some styles of music may truly be considered artistically significant. It’s possible that some people will contend that certain kinds of music have greater artistic worth than others.

It’s possible that this is one of the reasons why having good taste in music is a subjective concept that might lead to different points of view.
You might also be interested in reading “What Your Ringtone Says About Your Personality,” which can be found here.
For example, there are a lot of different components to master in order to play classical music, and you have to study them first.

There is a possibility that some individuals who listen to classical music have considerable knowledge regarding composers, instruments, and classical music expertise in general. The same guideline is applicable to other types of writing as well. Despite this, there are some people who hold the view that particular styles of music do not contribute anything to the field of art.

In certain instances, they are even of the opinion that music is not something that should be listened to. When it comes to preferences in music, there are even statements dedicated to the subject. Quotes about having good taste in music may be found on a number of different websites. A good number of these quotations are attributed to well-known actors, artists, composers, and musicians.

Your musical preference is uniquely yours, regardless of how you could describe it. One of the many amazing things about music is the abundance of love that is contained within it. Because there are so many different sorts of genres to enjoy, there is no doubt that you will be able to find one that suits your tastes.

Your musical preferences are ultimately what make you who you are. There are also music quizzes that are specific to an individual’s musical preferences. The results of these quizzes might assist assess what kind of person you are based on the music that you listen to. When you have excellent musical taste, it goes without saying that you should respect the musical preferences of others.

It also implies that you have to give weight to their point of view and preferences, given that the existence of unique individuals is what keeps the globe turning. After all, it is what differentiates each and every one of us from the other people in the world.

What are the qualities of music?

Main Body Overview of the Chapter: In the first part of this chapter, an attempt is made to define music as a subject and to present viewpoints on music. These perspectives include fundamental terminology and what you need know about music in order to include it into your work with children.

The second part of the book begins with a concise introduction to the field of music education and teaching in the United States, which serves as the basis for the subject covered in the book.
One of the most challenging concepts to describe is “music,” in part because, even within the context of Western civilization alone, attitudes about music have evolved significantly throughout the course of history.

When we examine music from other regions of the world, we discover even more differences and conceptions of what music is and how it should be performed. The ancient Greeks, for example, defined music as “tones organized horizontally as melodies and vertically as harmony.” Other definitions range from more practical and technical to more philosophical (according to philosopher Jacques Attali, music is a sonoric event between noise and silence, and according to Heidegger, music is something in which truth has set itself to work).

There is also the social component of music that should be taken into consideration. “Music is a system of communication including organized sounds created by members of a community that communicate with other members,” says musicologist Charles Seeger (1992, p.89). John Blacking, an ethnomusicologist, stated in 1973 that “we may go further to say that music is sound that is humanly patterned or ordered,” therefore covering all of the elements with a fairly wide stroke.

“Music is sound that is humanly structured or organized,” Because of how culturally distinctive music is, some theorists claim that there simply cannot be a definition of music that is applicable to all situations. Many societies, such as those that may be found in the countries of Africa or among some indigenous tribes, do not have a term for music.

This may be difficult for us to comprehend because music is such an integral part of our lives.
On the other hand, because of the intimate connection that music and dance have to people’s regular lives, there is no need for people to cognitively differentiate between the two.
Bruno Nettl, an ethnomusicologist, asserts that many North American Indian languages do not have a term that can be translated directly to “music,” as opposed to a word that can be translated directly to “song.” Flute melodies too are characterized as “songs.” The Hausa people of Nigeria have an exceptionally extensive vocabulary for talking about music, yet they don’t have a term that directly translates to “music.” The Basongye people of Zaire have a comprehensive understanding of what music is, but they do not have a title for it.

The Basongye view music as a product that is uniquely and exclusively associated with humans. For them, singing is what you do when you are happy, and making noise is what you do when you are furious (2001). There is only one word, “song,” that the Kpelle people of Liberia use to describe a movement that is danced well (Stone, 1998, p.7).

Some societies place a greater emphasis on particular characteristics of music.
One example of this would be the absence of harmony in Indian classical music, which instead relies only on the three textures of melody, rhythm, and drone.
On the other hand, Indian artists more than make up for the absence of harmony by utilizing intricate melodies and rhythms, which are not conceivable in Western music owing to the presence of harmony (chord progressions), which call for less intricate melodies and rhythms.

What people in the West consider to be music may not be considered music in other parts of the world. For instance, if we were to listen to a performance of the Qur’an, it may sound like singing or music. We hear all of the “components” that we often associate with music, such as rhythm, pitch, melody, and shape, among other things.

The Muslim interpretation of that sound, on the other hand, is that rather than being music, it is really an elevated form of speech or recitation and hence belongs in a distinct category.
It is not possible to classify the recitation of the holy Qur’an as music for the following reason: in the Muslim tradition, the concept of music being performed for the sake of amusement is regarded as something that is beneath one’s dignity.

The 2A Activity Listen to Mishary Rashid Al-Efasi of Kuwait read the 22nd Surah (Chapter) of the Qur’an. Mishary Rashid Al-Efasi is a native of Kuwait. Melody, harmony, rhythm, timbre, pitch, silence, and shape or structure are all essential components of music, despite the fact that the precise concept of music varies greatly even within the Western world.

Sounds are the building blocks of music.
Both audible elements and spaces devoid of sound combine to form music.
Music is an example of art that was created on purpose.
Sounds that have been structured by humans are music. (Bakan, 2011).

For the sake of this discussion, the following might serve as a workable definition of music: Pitch (including melody and harmony), rhythm (including meter, speed, and articulation), dynamics, and the qualities of timbre and texture are the fundamental components of music, which is a purposefully ordered art form that uses sound and silence as its medium.

In addition to the conventional concept of music, there are other behavioral and cultural variables to take into consideration.
Music can be “made” in two distinct ways, as noted by Titon in his seminal text Worlds of Music (2008): first, it can be “made” physically, such as when we sing, when we sing, when we sing, when we sing, when we sing, when we sing, when we sing, when we press down on the keys of a piano, when we blow air into a flute.

We also create music with our brains by mentally building the concepts that we have about music and what we believe about music; for example, when it ought to be played or what music is “excellent” and what music is “poor.” For instance, people believe that classical music has a higher social status than popular music; the lead singer of a rock band is more valuable than the drummer; early blues and rock was considered “evil” and negatively influential; we classify some songs as children’s songs and consider them inappropriate to sing after a certain age; and so on.

The most important components of music are sound and timing.
It is a sonic event, which means it is a kind of communication similar to speech and needs us to listen, analyze, and respond.
As a consequence of this, it is a component of a continuum that describes how humans perceive all sounds, including noise, speech, and silence.

Where exactly does the line become drawn between music and noise? Between noise and speech? How does the incorporation of speech into some types of music, such as rap, present a challenge to our conventional ideas on the relationship between speech and music? How can works of art like John Cage’s 4’33” challenge our conceptions of artistic aim, musical style, and the role of silence in the creative process? continue reading Cage, John 4 minutes 33 seconds, please watch this.

What makes a bad music?

Published at 2:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time on May 6, 2017 90.5 This week, WESA’s sister station WYEP hosted a contest to determine which song is the worst one ever recorded. The station took the listeners’ nominations for their least favorite songs and narrowed the field down to 20 finalists.

Sarah Kovash from 90.5 WESA had a conversation with Mike Sauter, the Director of Content and Programming at WYEP, regarding the characteristics of a poor song and the top five songs that people dislike the most. Their discussion has been condensed and modified for brevity and comprehension. SARAH KOVASH: Are there any of these entries that took you completely by surprise? MIKE SAUTER: Oh, without a doubt.

The fact that there are those who believe a certain song to be the worst one ever written befuddles the intellect. There were several individuals who suggested tunes such as “Imagine” by John Lennon. KOVASH: “So this is Christmas” is one of his songs, and it’s one of my least favorite Christmas tunes of all time.

SAUTER: That was also considered for the award. KOVASH: I can’t take it any longer. SAUTER: Well, there is an aspect to that song that crops up a lot of the time in songs that crawl under people’s skin and just really bothers them, and that is silly voices, goofy voices, children singing, and children’s choirs.

That is something that is included in that song. KOVASH: Well, that certainly makes me question what, precisely, it is that gives a music a negative reputation. SAUTER: I’ve given that a lot of thought, and it seems that there are some factors that are consistent across the board.

Now what’s needed is for the song to become popular.
It needs to be something that a lot of people recognize as being in the running for the title of the worst song ever, and it has to be a song that has some aspect of its lyrics that are problematic.
It must include lyrics that are either simplistic and obvious, rude, or extremely maudlin and sentimental for it to qualify.

None of the other options qualify. It would appear that a significant number of these factors are at the root of people’s reluctance. But the most important thing is that it needs to have a really infectious and catchy melody, because the thing that really riles people up and gets under their skin is when a song that they despise gets stuck in their head and they can’t get it out.

This, in my opinion, is one of the requirements for a song to be considered the worst song ever.
OVASH: So on, and tell us what you found out.
Which song was the very worst? SAUTER: Well, let me really run down the top five songs to build up to the number one song, because this is a really amazing musical rogue’s gallery, so let me begin with the song that is currently at number five.

The song “Achy Breaky Heart” by Billy Ray Cyrus from 1992 came in at number five on our list. It was a major smash on the pop charts for a country artist to perform. Those incredible lyrics: “If you tell my heart, my achy breaky heart, he could explode up and murder this man.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byQIPdHMpjc At number four we had “Disco Duck” by Rick Dees, which was more of a novelty tune, but it was a number one pop smash, and a lot of fury was centered on that song from the whole disco era.

This song was from an older age, and it was at number four on our list.
Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97RjuC9YeXg The song “Friday” by Rebecca Black from 2011 came in at number three on the chart.
She became a YouTube sensation, and despite the fact that many people disliked her music, it helped her song to skyrocket to the top of the charts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfVsfOSbJY0 And in second place, a track from the year 2005 by the band Nickelback titled “Photograph.” And at this point, they have nearly reached the status of a cliche due to the fact that they are a band that people cite as a band that is horrible or a band that people detest, but that is also quite well-known.

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3rXdeOvhNE However, “You’re Having My Baby,” a duet performed by Paul Anka and Odia Coates in 1974, is considered by WYEP listeners to be the worst song ever recorded.
These listeners ranked it as the number one worst song ever.
Although it reached number one in the charts, several people found it to be disrespectful.

There is a pervasive air of misogyny throughout it. Paul Anka is singing, “You’re carrying my kid, what a great way of telling how much you love me,” and you probably already know the lyrics. There is one more aspect that many of the songs that were nominated possessed, and that was a sort of creepiness that was simply boiling under the surface.

What makes a bad singer?

The Truth That Has No Melody – When we hear poor singing, we can all identify it immediately. In my memory, there was a game in the minor leagues of baseball where a sincere but terrible rendition of the national anthem scared the bald eagle that was meant to soar majestically up to the pitcher’s mound.

Instead, he withdrew high into the outfield bleachers until the song was done. However, there is a scientific explanation behind poor singing as well. It is characterized by a lack of competence in all three of the following areas: pitch accuracy, the capacity to keep time, and note memory (remembering the words and how long a note is sustained).

According to the findings of the research, the majority of people, regardless of their level of musical training, have a solid handle on two of the three aspects: timing and note memory. That is the reason why you are still able to identify the music that I am attempting to sing, despite the fact that you may be sorry to hear it.

Instead, issues with pitch accuracy, sometimes referred to as intonation, are typically to blame when a singer’s performance is less than stellar.
A pitch error may be defined as the amount of cents a sung note departs from the intended note.
Pitch is measured in cents (100 cents = 1 semitone = 1/12 octave), and pitch is measured in cents.

It is considered bad singing if the pitch is wrong by more than a half semitone, which is equal to 50 cents. According to Hutchins’ findings, over sixty percent of people who are not musicians are capable of being labeled as poor vocalists due to pitch accuracy issues.

It has been demonstrated by scientific research what is already common knowledge to everyone who has ever watched American Idol: the vast majority of individuals are unable to sing in tune.
In 2008, Hutchins began investigating the reasons behind why so many of us have difficulty determining pitch accurately.

He began by eliminating the most obvious possibility, which was that poor singers simply had unhealthy voice chords (more accurately, vocal “folds”). It didn’t take him long to figure out that the muscles in their necks weren’t to fault; in fact, all of them had the physical ability to strike a note.

That brought the number of possible culprits down to just two. It’s possible that individuals were just not hearing the notes correctly to begin with, which would explain why the singing was so bad. Or there might be a problem with motor control; poor singers may not have adequate control over their vocal chords to reproduce what they hear.

Hutchins conducted an experiment to test both of the hypotheses. He began by investigating perception. Hutchins put both non-musicians and musicians with at least seven years of expertise through a test in which they were required to recreate synthetic voice tones that he had created on a computer.

To begin, they matched the note by using a slider, which is a basic gadget in which a sliding button adjusts the pitch of a sound.
It works similarly to how a finger may be moved up and down a guitar string.
Both groups were finally successful in making the connection, which suggests that the issue was not one of perspective.

Hutchins argues that people were able to pick up on the appropriate nuances. Although the skilled musicians were able to match the notes more quickly, all of the participants were able to do it precisely. Non-musicians, on the other hand, were only successful 59 percent of the time when they were asked to use their own voices to match the note.

Why was there such a disparity between the two? Hutchins had a sneaking suspicion that the fundamental issue was with error correction, which is the capacity of the brain to evaluate its own output in relation to a target and modify its activity level accordingly.
The non-musicians who guessed incorrectly the first time were unable to repeat the pitch no matter how many times he played the identical note.

It is instructive to observe that they frequently sung the same incorrect note over and over again, as if they were trapped in place. He went as far as allowing them to use a computer for assistance, which was equipped with software that displayed a bar on a screen that corresponded to the pitch of their voice.

Why does music sound good to us?

Why do we like music? This one is excellent on a number of different levels, much like the majority of fantastic questions. On some levels, we have answers, but not on all of them. We enjoy listening to music since it has a positive effect on our mood.

Why does it make us feel good? Anne Blood and Robert Zatorre, both neuroscientists at McGill University in Montreal, presented a solution to this question in the year 2001. Through the use of magnetic resonance imaging, the researchers were able to demonstrate that people who enjoyed listening to music had activated brain regions known as the limbic and paralimbic areas.

These areas are linked to euphoric reward responses, such as those we get from engaging in sexual activity, eating delicious food, or taking addictive drugs. These gratifications are brought on by an influx of the neurotransmitter known as dopamine. Music, as DJ Lee Haslam informed us, is the addictive substance.

However, why? It’s not hard to figure out why sex and food should be rewarded with a rush of dopamine: it makes us desire more, which is beneficial to our continued existence and reproduction, and it makes us want more.
The stimulation of dopamine release under false pretenses is one tactic that certain medicines use to undermine the survival instinct.) But why would a string of noises that doesn’t seem to have any evident purpose for survival achieve the same thing? The honest fact is that nobody is sure.

On the other hand, we now have a lot of insight into the reasons why music may evoke strong feelings. In 1956, the philosopher and composer Leonard Meyer proposed that the experience of emotion in music is all about what we expect, and whether or not we receive it.

This theory is the current favorite among scientists who research the cognition of music, which is how we process it cognitively. Meyer drew on earlier psychological theories of emotion, which argued that feeling occurs when we are unable to satisfy a want. Meyer’s research was based on these beliefs.

That, as you would think, results in irritation or rage; nevertheless, if we eventually discover what it is that we’re seeking for, whether it love or a cigarette, the payout is all the more satisfying. Meyer contended that this is also what happens when one listens to music.

It establishes acoustic patterns and regularities, which urge us to make unconscious predictions about what is going to happen after that. If what we think is true, the brain would give itself a modest reward, which would be, in our current understanding, a spike of dopamine. The continuous back and forth between anticipation and realization excites and amuses the brain with its rich and varied repertoire of feelings.

However, why should it matter to us if our musical expectations are accurate or not? It’s not like our lives were in danger because of them. David Huron, a musicologist at Ohio State University, argues that possibly at one point in time it did. It is possible that making predictions about our surroundings, which involves interpreting what we see and hear, say, on the basis of just incomplete knowledge, was formerly vital to our survival.

In fact, this is still the case very frequently, such as when we are attempting to cross the street. And factoring in the feelings that come along with these anticipations could have been a good idea. On the African savannah, our ancestors did not have the luxury of second-guessing themselves about whether or not the cry they heard was produced by a monkey or a lion who was about to attack.

The mental processing of sound may cause a rush of adrenaline, also known as a gut reaction, which prepares us to leave the area regardless, by going around the “logical brain” and taking a direct route to the primitive limbic circuits that control our emotions.

This is accomplished by taking a shortcut. Everyone is aware of the direct connection that can be made between music and one’s feelings; after all, who hasn’t been embarrassed by the tears that fill up as the strings swell in a romantic picture, even when the rational brain argues that this is merely cynical manipulation? Even while we are aware that there is nothing that may endanger our lives in a Mozart sonata, we are unable to switch off this anticipatory sense, nor can we severe its connection to our feelings.

According to Huron, the propensity of nature to overreact presents artists with a once-in-a-lifetime chance. “Composers may construct moments that manage to generate surprisingly intense emotions utilizing the most harmless triggers imaginable,” the article states.

“[T]hese passages can be found in many different kinds of music.” Sound check The hypothesis that our emotional responses to music result from little deviations from and manipulations of our expectations appears to be the most viable candidate explanation; nevertheless, validating this hypothesis is extremely challenging.

This is due, in part, to the fact that music, in and of itself, provides an abundance of opportunities for both setting and subverting expectations, making it unclear what it is that we should be measuring and comparing. We anticipate that rising melodies will continue to increase, but not necessarily indefinitely since they never have in the past.

We are more accustomed to hearing harmonies that are appealing rather than dissonances that are upsetting; but, what we consider to be attractive may have been heard as discordant two hundred years ago.
We anticipate that the rhythms will be regular, but we are taken aback as rock and roll’s signature jumpy syncopation unexpectedly shifts into oompah time in a heartbeat.

The way in which the work we are now listening to has progressed up to this point, how it relates to other pieces and styles that are analogous to it, and how it compares to everything else that we have ever heard all come together to form our expectations.

As a result, one of the implications of Meyer’s thesis is that the expression of emotion through music will be predominately culture-bound. In the first place, in order to have any expectations about where the music will go, you need to know the norms and have an appreciation for what is usual. This is something that differs from culture to culture.

The people of Western Europe consider straightforward meters such as waltz time to be “natural,” but the people of Eastern Europe are quite content to dance to meters that appear to others to be extremely challenging. Everyone develops a strong, almost unconscious feeling of which notes sound “correct,” whether in succession in a melody or sounding together in harmonies.

This is true whether the sounds are being heard alone or simultaneously. But because different cultures employ different scales and tunings – for example, the scales of India and Indonesia don’t respect the tunings of a piano – there is nothing universal about these expectations. These scales and tunings are used by different civilizations.

A piece of happy music from Indonesia might be misunderstood as being “sad” by Westerners merely due to the fact that it sounds like it could be in the minor scale, which is considered to be a “sad” scale. This image also suggests that music is about more than simply happy vibes; it may generate other sensations as well, such as worry, boredom, and even rage.

This is implied by the fact that the image contains a guitar.
Composers and performers walk a precarious tightrope since they are responsible for adjusting audience expectations to the optimal level.
It’s not enough, and the music is uninteresting and predictable, like how adults could see nursery rhymes.

When there is too much, we are unable to form any expectations at all; this is one reason why many individuals have difficulty with modernist and atonal music. All of this can help to explain, to a certain extent, why we experience certain feelings in response to specific musical passages and performances.

The findings of a brain-scanning study conducted by Zatorre and colleagues, which showed that the rewards stimulated by music heard for the first time are particularly dependent on communication between “emotion” and “logic” circuits in the brain, provided further support for Meyer’s ideas very recently.

The study was published in the journal NeuroImage. However, this does not tell the complete story. Our emotional response to music may also be influenced by a great number of other factors, such as whether we are listening to it alone or in the company of others, or whether we connect a specific piece with a previous experience, whether positive or negative (a theory that has been dubbed the “Darling they’re playing our tune” theory).

The fact that we are not even certain of the type of feeling that we are discussing is at the foundation of all of these theories. We are able to recognize sorrowful music even when we are not feeling sad. Even though we do feel sad, it is not the same as the grief that comes with a loss; it is possible to find pleasure in it even if it causes us to cry.

Certain pieces of music, such as those composed by Bach, have the ability to elicit strong feelings in listeners, even if they struggle to adequately describe the nature of those feelings. Therefore, unless we have a clearer image of what our emotional world actually looks like, we won’t be able to comprehend why listening to music may evoke a range of feelings in people.

What music do attractive people listen to?

It doesn’t matter if you’re dancing the Electric Slide at the family reunion or guarding the aux plug while on a road trip: music has the power to establish connections and deepen relationships. until it doesn’t. TickPick, an online ticket vendor, has published “Music Deal Breakers,” a poll that examines how individuals’ musical preferences impact their personal relationships.

View image bigger here,
An extract from the poll reads that “our data demonstrates the strong effect that music has on relationships.” (Our data indicates the strong influence that music has on relationships.) “When both partners listened to radically distinct music, just 2% of relationships were able to endure.

In addition, researchers found that partners who had musical interests reported more pleasure in their relationships, a deeper emotional connection, and even improved communication.” The following are some key findings from the survey: * Roughly one in five persons said they wouldn’t date someone if they perceived to have “poor” taste in music.

* * * Only 46% of women and 54% of men would contemplate dating someone whose musical preferences they deemed to be “poor.” Hip-hop is viewed as the least attractive genre of music by 45% of males, whereas heavy metal is seen as the least attractive genre by 37% of women. For males, the most attractive musical genre is classic rock (41%), while women find hip-hop to be the most appealing musical genre (39%).

* Couples that had similar musical interests, such as classic rock, oldies, jazz, country, or folk music, reported a higher level of pleasure in their relationships. * Men and women alike find that listening to classic rock is one of the most appealing musical preferences. What Is Good Music

Why do we like music?

Joy derived from music Dopamine can be released in the mesolimbic reward system as a result of the experience of listening to music that is extremely enjoyable (Salimpoor et al, 2015). Engaging with music can elicit the same physiological and psychological reactions that are linked with other fundamentally rewarding activities, such as consuming food, engaging in sexual activity, or receiving monetary compensation.

How do you describe music?

The “color” or “sound” of music is referred to as its “timbre,” which is a musical phrase. Even if two instruments, like a cello and a clarinet, play the same note at the same volume, it is still possible to distinguish between the two in terms of the music that is produced.

Loud	Soft	Brassy
Gentle	Natural	Melodious
Raucous	Strong	Smooth
Rich	Distinct	Deep
Thick	Mellow	Shrill
Reedy	Thin	Breathy
Rounded	Full	Clear
Piercing	Strident	Harsh
Warm	Resonant	Bright
Dark	Flat	Light

What does true music mean?

Mu·sic | \ ˈmyü-zik \ 1 a: sounds produced by a human voice, an instrument, or a mechanical device that have rhythm, melody, or harmony music sung in a choir piano music recorded music b: the science or art of arranging tones or sounds in succession, in combination, and in temporal connections in order to generate a composition that has unity and continuity in its overall structure 2: a specific genre or subset of music According to Eric Salzman, there is a genre or subgenre of music for everyone.

What makes a musician great?

5. Patience and a Refusal to Give Up Having a lot of patience is one of the most vital attributes of a good musician, especially when it comes to not giving up. One cannot achieve instant success, especially when it comes to an art form such as music. It takes time to become skilled at music, and throughout that time, one must be patient.

Every musician that is now at the top of the charts did not achieve their level of popularity overnight.
They have spent countless years training and developing their abilities, yet they recognize that they still have much to learn.
One can tell whether someone is a genuine musician by the way they study new things and develop themselves on a regular basis.

They are well aware that it will be several years before they would be able to compete with the multitude of musicians that are vying for success all over the world. The most crucial thing to keep in mind is that quitting too soon might result in the termination of one’s career.

Who said there are only two types of music good and bad?

There are two distinct categories of music: good music and awful music. I engage in virtuous behavior. Louis Armstrong

Are musicians born or made?

The book “Music, the Brain, and Ecstasy” (published in 1997) by Robert Jourdain gives readers a strong foundation as well as insight into the developing discipline of music cognition. In order to provide readers a comprehensive understanding of what music cognition is all about, this book dives into a range of subfields that fall under the umbrella of the topic.

On the other hand, a large amount of study has been carried out on music and its power to influence our thoughts and feelings ever since it was first published in 1997. Jourdain’s book on “up-to-date” research on music cognition is no longer accurate, as can be shown by even a cursory examination of current themes being discussed in the area.

Is the ability to play an instrument innate for musicians, or does it develop with formal training? Is there a predetermined level of musical ability that certain people are born with? In the following article, I will make an attempt to address these concerns using research that has recently been conducted in the subject of music cognition.

The remark that Jourdain made about music composers prompted the posing of this inquiry.
According to him, in order to be a great composer, one has to possess all of the following qualities: “superb neurology for music, high overall IQ, extensive instruction, endless support, and the appropriate sort of disposition” (Jourdain, 1997, p.186).

Research lends credence to the idea that each of us is endowed with a certain personality (Tellegen, 1988) as well as a predetermined capacity for hearing music (Gordon, 1998). This indicates, in essence, that in order to compose music well, one must be born with the essential skill.

This is necessary in order to write music successfully. To this, I have a question: what about musicians who perform? Is it possible for anybody to become a musician with the appropriate amount of instruction, or are certain attributes necessary for success in the field of music must be present from birth? Jourdain based his claim on the most successful composers of all time, notably Mozart.

As a result, it appears acceptable to ask if a comparable amount of experience is required in order to be inclined to music talent. To get things rolling, let’s begin by defining exactly what it means to be a skilled musician. There are a lot of different ways to envision a skilled musician, and the definitions don’t always agree with each other.

For the sake of this article, I shall define an expert musician as someone who is capable of a high degree of technical competence, who can easily embody the emotion that is conveyed via music, and who has considerable training in music.
It is essential for a person to have had music instruction in order for them to be considered an expert musician.

But there is still the question of whether or not skilled musicians were able to achieve that level via training alone, or whether or not they were born with a natural aptitude to comprehend music better than others. In order to have a better grasp on this topic, let’s take a look at some recent studies that were conducted in the field of music cognition on naturally occurring musical skill.

To be musically gifted is not the same thing as being a musician, and being a musician is not a prerequisite for having musical skill.
There is a possibility that there is no such thing as a “non-musician,” given that the term “non-musician” does not suggest that the person in question is incapable of comprehending music in any way.

It is possible that natural musical skill or talent has not been identified, or that external factors have inhibited its development (Law & Zentner, 2012). This inborn talent for music is referred to as “music aptitude” in the academic discipline of music cognition.

Music aptitude is a phrase that covers natural music talents as well as the intrinsic potential to be successful as a musician (Schellenberg, 2013). In his work, Robert Jourdain does not touch on the subject of musical ability; yet, the area of music cognition seems to be rather interested in this particular subject.

Carl Seashore (1915) and Edwin Gordon are credited with the development of the first musical aptitude tests (1967). The goal was to identify which youngsters had the most potential to thrive via participation in music instruction (Gordon, 1998). In spite of this, these tests were later put to use in the field of music cognition research as a means of gaining a deeper comprehension of the ways in which musicians and non-musicians alike hear music.

Because researches have found that people are born with a certain level of music ability, music aptitude is crucial in determining whether musicians are born or made.
Musicians are born with a certain amount of music aptitude (Gordon 1965).
It is probable that someone who is born with a high music aptitude is predisposed to enjoy music lessons more than someone who is born with a low music aptitude, which would result in the former person continuing in music lessons longer and the latter person attaining a higher level.

In keeping with this notion is the observation that professional musicians often score higher on music aptitude tests than do amateur musicians (Schellenberg, 2013). The most significant thing to take away from this study is the possibility that musical aptitude might explain why some people have a greater ear for music than others do.

However, research has also shown that music training may boost results on music aptitude tests; hence, it is evident that music training has an influence on music ability in addition to naturally occurring musical skill. The “10,000 Hour Rule” is yet another approach to answering the age-old question of whether or not artists are born or made.

After reading a research that had been done by Ericsson and colleagues (1993), which suggested that ten thousand hours of practice was the magic number needed in order to become an expert, the author Malcolm Gladwell came up with this term. He did this after reading the study (Gladwell, 2008).

The implication of this rule is that in order to become an expert in any profession, you need to have spent at least 10,000 hours practicing that field. This supports the way that musicians are formed. It also gives the impression that if you don’t have that many hours of practice, you can’t possibly be an expert, or that if you haven’t put in any effort, you can’t call yourself a musician.

The issue with this is that studies done on people’s aptitude for music have demonstrated that even people who are not musicians can have a very excellent ear for music. Jourdain takes Mozart as an example to illustrate the attributes that distinguish a great composer and employs these qualities in his discussion.

There is no possible that Mozart could have had 10,000 hours of practice at such an early age, despite the fact that he was already regarded an experienced performer throughout his infancy. As a result, the 10,000-Hour Rule might not be a convincing enough reason for artists to make it into the industry.

Recent study lends more discredit to the notion that one may improve one’s musical ability by practice alone. [Citation needed] [Citation needed] According to the findings of a research that was carried out by Macnamara, Hambrick, and Oswald (2014), training only accounts for 21% of one’s musical skill.

This indicates that other factors, such as one’s innate musical gift (or aptitude), more adequately explain musical ability.
It is obvious that there is a great deal of information that contradicts itself on both sides of this nature vs nurture issue; hence, a response cannot be as straightforward as we would like it to be.

The study of music cognition has recently shown that we are all born with some amount of musical ability. This finding suggests that everyone may become a musician, although some people are born with a stronger potential than others. According to the 10,000-Hour Rule, in order to become an expert in a field, you need to devote that amount of time to it.

However, more recent research contradicts this assertion.
It is possible for us to draw the conclusion that a high level of musical ability is required in order to achieve success as a performer.
Is a musician’s talent innate or can it be developed? It is likely not either nature (innate aptitude for music) or nurture (music training) alone that creates an expert musician; rather, it is the combination of the two that forms a winning combination in leading us to achieve mastery of our craft.

Nature (innate aptitude for music) and nurture (music training). Bibliography The authors’ full names are Anvari, S.H.; Trainor, LT; Woodside, J; and Levy, B.A. (2002). Relationships among early reading ability, musical ability, and phonological processing in preschool children who are already reading.111-130 in the Journal of Experimental Child Psychology volume 83.

Gladwell, M. (2008).
The story of success is told in the book “Outliers.” Little, Brown and Company, located in New York.
Gordon, E.E. (1998).
The Imprint That Carl E.
Seashore Left Behind.
In the beginning of the course entitled “Introduction to Research and the Psychology of Music.” Chicago.
Gordon, E. (1967).

The Musical Aptitude Profile is shown here. The Music Educators Journal, Volume 53, Pages 52-54 Ericsson, K., Krampe, R. & Tesch-Romer (1993). The function that purposeful practice plays in the process of moving from novice to expert performance.363-406 in Psychological Review, volume 100, issue 3.

Law L.N.C, Zentner, M. (2012). Developing an Objective Method for Evaluating Musical Capabilities: The Construction and Validation of the Profile of Music Perception Skills The University of York’s Department of Psychology may be found in York, United Kingdom. Macnamara, B., Hambrick, D. & Osawald, F. (2014).

A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Deliberate Practice and Performance in Music, Games, Sports, Education, and Professions Psychological Science, 25 (8), 1608-1618. Schellenberg, G. (2013). The connection between music and cognitive abilities In the third edition of D.