Train your ears better then ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
"Music Theory" is about observing what a bunch of composers did back in the day and making it into a dogma.
Learning what intervals feel like is about the basiest basics of human perception.

I've been saying exactly the opposite for the whole topic tho. There must be (again) something wrong with the way I'm saying things if it comes off like this.

I've been pointing at the grey area for the whole discussion...

Okay now, I'm for many years convinced there's something wrong with my way of saying things, but, in stis particular case, what makes you think I haven't? And where exactly is the mental gymnastics? Let alone insane. Holy shit, I haven't even touched the complex stuff, constraining myself to describing the very basics in general details.

Is defined by being pissed off and frustrated. On top of being irrelevant, that is, but I'd rather not get any more psychological here.

Da fuq was this, lol? I've not been traumatized by theoists, I was poking fun at a certain someone.

 

With the tension and resolution part of your speech.

Who has said that music works or has to work with Tension and Resolution? Can you show me the person who introduced this phrase to the music community?
I don't accept this phrase. This phrase has caused speculative errors among musicians.



So sorry...

 

Hi Coreal,
I think if we make the term "tension/resolve" include not only melodic and harmonic components, but the whole song as well, then the whole thing is about tension and resolution, right?
A change of instrument, a crash at the end of a snare roll, repetition that suddenly changes, the arrangement itself, etc. What do you think?
Unless it is a pure ambient piece, there is always a tiny bit of tension and resolution, yin and yang, up and down, 0 and 1, etc. I think it's a basic contrast, what is your opinion?
Cheers

 

Thing is, you cannot learn to be creative in any task, craft or artistic medium that can be done under the sun. On the outside chance that one can learn the basic or advanced skill to actually do such a thing, in the end you either have it or you don't, that spark...or lack thereof. Yet, the basic building blocks are all there, the same for everyone that chooses to seek them out, though of course the outcomes will be vastly different from individual to individual.

Some will soar high
Toward the liberating
Beacon of their personal
Vision of beauty...
While others armed
In same tools and raw materials
Will be captured by the stifling draw
Of gravity's reach...
Bound to ground
Never hearing the lilting voice
Of a Muse that whispers
Songs of love...
A melody to hear.

 

Okay. We clearly have different pictures in mind when we talk about tension and relief. I won't argue with what you have to say about yours.
The concept itself is pretty old tho, I can't even confidently tell who was the first to popularize it. I'll take a shot in the dark and say Johann Joseph Fux.

True. To become creative, you have to love what your're doing first. And you can't force it upon yourself.

Yes! One can stumble upon some on their own, or look them up in other's work, but there are more effective ways of building up your vocabulary if you're interestid in it. And as a composer or a musician, you should be interested in it.
In any case, understanding what's actually going on will only improve your learning rate and mastery.

 

I'm not disagreeing - just tossing a fun spanner into that discussion.
Below is a mish-mash of some extracts from an article and some of my comments scruffily thrown in.

Can Creativity be Taught
https://www.creativityatwork.com/can-creativity-be-taught/
Extract: "In 1968, George Land conducted a research study to test the creativity of 1,600 children ranging in ages from three-to-five years old who were enrolled in a Head Start program. This was the same creativity test he devised for NASA to help select innovative engineers and scientists. The assessment worked so well he decided to try it on children. He re-tested the same children at 10 years of age, and again at 15 years of age."

Test results for Creative / Imaginative
amongst 5 year olds: 98%
amongst 10 year olds: 30%
amongst 15 year olds: 12%
Same test given to 280,000 adults: 2%
"What we have concluded," wrote Land, "is that non-creative behavior is learned."

I reckon "no surprises there - so can the damage be undone? Can damaged creativity be re-learned?"

The authors say "Yes, creativity skills can be learned. Not from sitting in a lecture, but by learning and applying creative thinking processes." This is just classic 'active learning' philosophy - you don't learn to juggle by only watching videos!

Personally, I reckon the chances of restoring creativity is a sliding scale based on age.
If you can stop the rot early enough, then maybe the damage to creativity can be repaired.
But looking at typical adults - dream on!
How does that tune go again? - dum, dum, dum, dum.

 

A study of jazz musicians shows in which part of the brain creativity arises - there is a difference between amateurs and professionals

Many people would like to be more creative. But how does creativity come about - and where? Researchers have long worked to solve this puzzle. But just as it is to define creativity, it is also to find its origin.

A common assumption among laypeople is that the right hemisphere is responsible for creativity. It is believed that there is a “rational, logical” left hemisphere and an “intuitive and creative” right hemisphere - and that one of these halves dominates in humans. This idea is catchy, as it would also provide an explanation for different personality types. Neuroscientists are skeptical of this theory due to the lack of evidence.

A study by the Creativity Research Lab at Drexel University in Philadelphia, which was published in the specialist journal “NeuroImage”, now provides new insights - and brings us one step closer to the answer to the question of the origin of creativity.


Researchers studied the brain activity of musicians

The research team, led by David Rosen and John Kounios, recorded the electrical activity of the brains of 32 jazz guitar players using electroencephalography (EEG). Each of them had to freely improvise to unknown jazz songs, accompanied by drums, bass and piano. Participants included both professionals and less experienced musicians.

The resulting recordings were then played individually to music experts so that they could evaluate the improvisations according to creativity and other factors. The researchers then compared the EEGs of those whose improvisations were rated particularly well by the experts with those of the musicians whose performances were rated as less creative.

The comparison showed that when performances were rated very well, activity was higher in the left hemisphere, especially in the rear area. In the case of the musicians with rather poorly rated performances, on the other hand, the activity in the front area of the right brain hemisphere was higher.

What does this result mean? Does “worse” artists create creativity on the right and “better” artists on the left? The researchers had a different idea and did not stop at this analysis.


Experience also decides which half of the brain is more active

It was obvious, they thought, that the task would be easier for musicians who already had more experience with improvising than for those who had not done it often - and, above all, less often in front of an audience. Presumably, therefore, the recordings by experienced musicians were more often rated as more creative than those by rather inexperienced musicians. In other words, the question of creativity was mixed up with the question of how much experience the jazz musicians already had.

One indication that this was true was the finding that more creative images were associated with the left brain and less creative images associated with the right hemisphere. Because what we know for sure is that well-trained skills are often automated by the brain and "shifted" to the rear left part of the brain. These are skills that you don't have to think too much about when you use them. In the front right of the brain, on the other hand, what still requires a lot of concentration and focus is processed: skills in which one is not yet a master.

Therefore, in a second step, the researchers separated the effect of experience - defined by the number of public appearances - from the effect of higher creativity. This is computationally quite easy in a statistical model. Lo and behold, after doing that, the results showed a clear association between higher scores on creativity and brain activity on the right front page.


In the end, it comes down to how you define creativity

What does it all mean now? The results of the study show that musicians with a lot of experience in improvisation automate part of the activity when improvising and relocate it to the rear left hemisphere - presumably the more technical and knowledge-based part, such as which scales can be used when. This makes it easier for them to quickly use good ideas for improvisation.

The actual creative process - here improvising on a new, unknown song - always seems to need the activity of the right front hemisphere. The scientists conclude that which half of the brain is more important for the creative process depends on how creativity is defined.
“If creativity is defined by the quality of a product, for example in a song, poem or painting, then the left brain hemisphere plays a key role,” says Kounios. "However, if it is understood as a person's ability to deal with new and unfamiliar situations, as is the case with beginners in improvisation, then the right hemisphere plays the leading role."

www.businessinsider.de/wissenschaft/kreativitaet-studie-zeigt-wo-sie-bei-musikern-entsteht/

 

I see it the same way...!

The left half of the brain is responsible for analytical thought processes and numbers, the right half for holistic understanding and intuition. Is that correct?

In recent years science has discovered a great deal about the processes of learning that more than question the idea of the brain as a simple store of information. Every cultural development is based on the fact that what has been thought is retained in the memory. It is no different with individuals. Learning and remembering are therefore the basic building blocks of spiritual progress.

Our brain and its two halves

Walking lexicon, photographic memory - our paraphrases for perfect memory still convey the idea that memory is primarily a repository in which knowledge and objective facts are stored. The greater the scope of this knowledge, the better our memory performance. This idea still shapes the ostensible ideal in school to teach children as much knowledge as possible.

In our western world, the left hemisphere is usually much more challenged than the right. Think, for example, of school - the focus here was on logical-analytical thought processes and the focus was on language and numbers. Excellent and creative thinking can only arise if both hemispheres of the cerebrum work well together and complement each other. This is why it is so important to also challenge the right hemisphere of the brain in thinking and learning processes .

According to current scientific knowledge, however, it is not a question of how much you know in order to remember something or to memorize something, but how well the information that has been saved (learned) is networked with one another.

Functions of the cerebral cortex

This networking is the task of the cerebral cortex. Our memories do not reside in any nerve cells, but essentially consist of an intensified connection of nerve cells - whereby the individual cells are partly on the different halves of the brain and therefore “far” from each other. These nerve connections, called synapses , have to be strengthened in order to achieve optimal learning and thus the greatest possible memory performance.

A number of scientists suspect that above all people who act successfully or are creative in networked systems, in whom the left and right hemispheres of the brain communicate well with each other, i.e. when systematic thinking (left hemisphere) and intuition (right hemisphere) associate. Because the amazing thing is that, for example, new realities often push their way into our consciousness when we are busy with something completely different (the so-called “flash of inspiration”).

Silently pressing a school desk is therefore not exactly the ideal position for learning. The new findings regarding the neurobiology of memory confirm the teachers, who have long been applying variable methodological concepts, for example to help students acquire experience and knowledge in the sense described.

Link the left and right hemispheres of the brain

There are several ways to strengthen the interconnectedness of our brain halves:

• Mind mapping (visualizes and structures "chaotic" creative thoughts)
• Carry out activities that address both hemispheres of the brain at the same time (listening to music in addition to analytical tasks or walking up and down while studying)
• Kinesiological exercises (right elbow to left knee and vice versa or circling with one hand on the stomach, tapping the top of the head with the other, etc.)

https://dieprojektmanager.com/linke-und-rechte-gehirnhaelfte-test/

 

I think we should stick to the widely accepted standard scientific definition

 

Regarding creativity: "I would say either you have it or you don't have it." Creative people are mostly bad at math, but they have a lot of imagination. Society needs all people rational as well as creative. I don't need a surgeon who has a lot of creativity, he should be able to do his craft. I need musicians and painters who are creative and create something new. Art is when you don't know what's coming out.

No, we don't need a scientist, because creativity cannot be measured. Love cannot be measured either. And if you want to measure that, then please not from scientists, but from people who understand something about it, i.e. creative minds.

 

I don't see creativity as tied to any specific cultural areas. I can see creativity in all disciplines. I certainly would never imply (as above) that mathematicians or scientists are not creative - that just seems absurd to me.

 

I'm sorry, WHAT. Who do you fucking think created the computing device you're writing this from? People that are bad at maths? Or uncreative people?
People who are good at maths are also always creative. Because you can't be the former without the latter. I'd go as far as saying most creative people are intuitive at maths, and even if they are uneducated, they'll catch up quickly should the need arise.
Especially those who are creative with music, since music is basically maths. You can't create music without your brain intuitively understanding it.
The problem lies with how the mathematics is being taught, but that's another topic entirely.

Oh, and creativity can be at least measured statistically, tho I'd understand if one would not be satisfied with this methodology. Surely with the progress in human brain research, other objective methods will be developed.

 

I do not agree with any of your sentences.

 

Well you certainly are bad at maths.
Calling scientists and engineers uncreative is really something else entirely.

 

That is a prejudice and a devaluation of the other. So they are in a good position by devaluing others.

 

Calling somebody uncreative because they are good at maths is.
I hold a Master's in applied maths by the way. And I can say when you talk about maths and creativity, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
Before offending others on a whim because of your own prejudice, maybe learn the fucking subject you're about to speak on.

 

Without the creativity of a surgeon 10 years ago - I would be dead!

Anyone who assumes that people are either rational or creative but not both demonstrates both a stunning lack of imagination and a detachment from reality.

If you just said many people are intimidated by maths education then OK, but to single out 'creative' and put it in opposition to maths is just prejudicial bollox - and that's being polite. It's not a view someone that understands maths would hold.

 

Last edited: Jan 7, 2022

I am a sound designer and artist by profession. I understand something completely different about art and creativity than you do!

 

What is creativity
Creativity is more than just painting a picture or writing a song. We need creativity every day. Always. And it can even be trained a bit.

What is creativity
Creativity means creating something new.
That sounds simple, but it has many facets. The “new” can mean anything from a thought to a complex piece of music. To make the whole thing a little more tangible, science and psychology often distinguish between two types:

“Big C” creativity (sometimes also called artistic creativity) describes what we see in artists, for example. Professional appearances that change how people feel, think or live. For such creativity, we need special talent and expertise. To do this, we have to be extremely committed and love the public's attention. A musician who plays by himself in a garage may be as talented as Freddie Mercury. As long as only friends and family can enjoy it, we still do not speak of “Big-C” creativity.

The second type is the "little-c": something we all have. Creativity in everyday life that allows us to solve problems, try new recipes, come up with jokes. This includes the garage music. But also the question: “My car has to go to the workshop. How do I get home from there? "

 

@Valnar How can one read this bullshit and not get mad?
Fucking hell.
@Ad Heesive Can you keep doing what you were doing for a little bit longer, please? I feel like this is too important to let go but I lost my composure an hour ago.