Gep, i already suspected you were dutch after your remark about André Rieu, but with the so called 'dutchism' about apples and pears may i conclude you are?
Referring to André Rieu might mean I could be German, American, Japanese or Australian too, but I plead guilty....
Assuming you are Dutch too (since you recognise my Dutchism), shal we agree on still writing in English, for the amusement of the rest (insofar as they are non-Dutch)?
About rabbity baxter's question, of course you dont need intelligence to listen to music, i can imagine however that you need some intelligence to be able to identify it as being music. This minimum intelligence level is however very low since babies are already known to appreciate music.
I must say I'm a bit surprised that so many people insist that listening to music does not require (much) intelligence. True, you only need working ears to listen to it, but what I meant (and mean) with listening is something on the line line "fully appreciating/understaning/being able to follow/etc. that what you are listening to". Babies are quite fond of music in the sense that they respond rather strongly to music that is rhythmically pronounced (more Orff than Wagner, say). But the more you are able to understand the music the more fully you can appreciate what the composer has done. A small black-and-white photograph of a Rembrandt painting gives you some idea about the painting, a colour version more so, a full-sized one even more, standing in front of said picture to look at it yet more still and if you were able to actually touch the painting in order to feel the texture perhaps still more, although in the last case you might find you got a really good understanding of jail-life in a hurry. And if you are a painter yourse you will be able to understand even more
Likewise, the more concentrated you listen to a piece of music, the more you hear. Listening more concentrated means using more brainpower. Listening fully concentrated means using your intelligence (i.e. mental capacity) to its limits. And I fully acknowledge having limits in my intelligence when it comes to Listening (not the L!) to music, if only because I lack the ability to play music myself. It can be quite frustrating when you have to struggle and strain in order to try to fully hear everything (how/what/why/etc). As said earlier, I was at a concert featuring the complete late Beethoven Quartets, and listening to them was quite exhausting hard work, mentally.
This minimum intelligence level is however very low since babies are already known to appreciate music.
They do indeed, but babies don't have low intelligence! They learn to speak a language quite quickly, try to do so that quick later in life in school!
What perhaps is more interesting is the fact that music (and classical music in particular) is known to enhance some of your cognitive abilities.
I've heard about that too, listening to a piece by Mozart (whom you refer to too) seems to enhance (temporarly?) ones abilities in math. So perhaps I should put Mozart on when doing my tax returns...
Especially your spatial visualization ability is enhanced by listening to and making music.
This is intriguing, never heard that before, do you have a link to some more info on this?
I'm no brain expert but i can imagine this has to do with the fact that music usually has a logical structure. If one (unconsciously) identifies this logical structure, u put your brains at work.
This sounds logical(!). Turn that around and you get that putting your brains at work you might better "see" that logic in music. So it may be a self-enhancing mutual benefit.
You get expectations of whats coming next based on what you've heard beforehand. This is probably one of the reasons why Mozart is often mentioned in this context. His music always sounds logical to me (probably one of the reasons i start to find it boring not long afterwards).
Now this is quite funny, because Mozart for me isn't the musical god he seems to be for so many. Of course, he was a musical genius, but for some reason I don't respond to his music so much. I like Haydn more, perhaps in his music your expectations get not always (quite often, actually) fulfilled. And I like the humour he put in.
So concluding i do think you need a certain intelligence to identify music,
True, but I was talking about
appreciating (which is not necessarily the same as
liking, by the way) music.
but i think every human is capable of doing so.
Almost, there is a condition called something like "amusa" (don't know the correct term), in which people cannot distinct different pitches, or percieve a rhythm. Tonedeafness so to say. But besides that, you're probably correct.
Classical music is known to enhance your intelligence in some ways,
I think it does, and that it works the other way round too, as said. But training your brain is always a good thing, and listening to (classical) music quite a good one in general.
but luckily that does not mean all those pompous pricks are smarter than metalheads .
True. In fact, I think I read somewhere that "metalheads" have are, of all pop-lovers, most likely to appreciate classical music, perhaps because some of that type of music can be quite complex. Besides that, smarting pricks are to be avoided whenever possible!
Quote from: hansscherff on Today at 09:34:09 AM
but luckily that does not mean all those pompous pricks are smarter than metalheads .
Unfortunately, there are some here who appear to think they are.
Thal
Only if you are determinded to understand those "some" in that way. Whatever music you like or not has nothing to do with whether you are smart or not. But I will and do stand by my opinion that you need (to use) a certain level of intelligence to (fully) appreciate a certain music. Britney Spears requires less than Anton Bruckner, even though Madam Spears may be more pleasing to the eye....
Topic: Question to A. Hinton