Emotion doesn't create Music, Music creates Emotion.

[opus10no2]

A gifted musician on an emotionally uneventful day can write/play the most heartwrenching and emotionally affecting music, while a less gifted musician could be going through emotionally turbulent times and create unremarkable music.
Point is, it's the musical inspiration that creates a unique and appealing musical gesture, and that music in turn inspires an emotional reaction.
Music is only truly emotional when it's great.
I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.

[lostinidlewonder]

I word this like:  You play the music, the music doesn't play you.

Some people can get overly emotional while playing and this can actually allow the music to play you and not the other way around. As musicians we are trying to present "controlled emotion". This is not to say we can't be emotional while playing, I feel that it is like the icing on the cake. If you can play with great control but also "take a ride" on the emotional roller-coaster pieces might take you through this is what performing is about.

When you are alone at home by yourself does it really matter what you do though? Sometimes you want to let the music play you and you can be drunk with the music I know when I was younger I use to always think I had to impress people who where listening to me, which caused me to play pieces a little faster and with more energy, so there can also be a point where the audience actually effects your playing, the audience can cause an emotional response in you which effects your playing. I have found this is the most common culprit of uncontrolled emotional playing.

[ted]

I have always thought that music is a totally abstract art and any emotion or more broadly, meaning, is generated in the mind of the listener. It is not like language, which conveys information about common reality. Certain literature can be abstract, for example Joyce, but generally I believe we hear in music such emotions and associations as we create for ourselves. While it is true that a commonality of tradition exists about musical content and types, I tend to think communication, of emotion or anything else, in the absence of extra-musical knowledge, anecdote or tradition, based solely on primitive musical content, is an illusion. I know this view is unpopular, but my own bizarrely unusual reactions to music new to me have tended to confirm it over the years.

Emotion is surely a very small subset of musical meaning and is far too simple a label to describe even my own mental processes of reacting to music. In saying this, I do not refer to states perceived while actually playing, so I answer the question from a slightly different point of view to lostinidlewonder. However, when listening to improvisations, even close to the event of their generation, I am invariably affected, moved, stimulated, and see visions and the like, in ways unconnected and greatly out of proportion to anything I could have possibly experienced during playing them, at which time I am usually very neutral and cold.

So in this precise and personal sense, I think you are right, opus10no2, but of course it might not be quite what you meant.

Music is only truly emotional when it's great.

That is the only part I disagree with. I can be emotionally transported very easily and profoundly by second, third or fourth rate works of art. Granted, it probably says a lot more about me than about music, but it is true nonetheless.

[opus10no2]

That is the only part I disagree with. I can be emotionally transported very easily and profoundly by second, third or fourth rate works of art. Granted, it probably says a lot more about me than about music, but it is true nonetheless.

I mean music that has greatness in it, something striking and captivating, not necessarily completely 'perfect' works. I think if the music transports you, and you choose it over other works, then it must have greatness.

[10leungchuny]

That's how i mostly think
Emotion invokes music through performers' passion which allows music to creates emotion for audience. But it doesn't mean the music is dead.
hope it make sense, I know i never do though

[ongaku_oniko]

A gifted musician on an emotionally uneventful day can write/play the most heartwrenching and emotionally affecting music, while a less gifted musician could be going through emotionally turbulent times and create unremarkable music.
Point is, it's the musical inspiration that creates a unique and appealing musical gesture, and that music in turn inspires an emotional reaction.

This is a logical fallacy. Just because emotions alone does not create great music does not imply that emotions don't create music at all.

In your wording, the less gifted musician is still creating music; abeit one you find "unremarkable".

Furthermore, your sentence is purely based on assumptions; you're assuming an event and creating its ending.

I would argue that a gifted musician would have a deep emotional understanding of music; even on an emotionally uneventful day, whatever that is, will still be able to convey more emotions than the average person.

I would also argue hat a gifted musician would play better music on an emotional day than an unemotional one. I will go as far as saying all truly great music was created based on emotions; and I will give an example rather than blindly creating a scenario; Chopin wrote his 3rd etude based on his love for his motherland; it has been said that he personally thinks that he will never find such a beautiful tune again. It was his emotional love for his country that he found this melody.

[opus10no2]

It's interesting to think about, sure, and emotion plays a part, I just feel that more often than not a composer will be inspired with a melody that strikes them emotionally and not in reverse.
The reason I find this to be true is the near infinite variety of possible music ideas available to them, and the idea takes on a life of its own, it becomes an entity that affects its creator.

[10leungchuny]

haha i think i kind of starting to agree with you on this point, although i think this could be every hard for a composer to have a theme that does strikes everyone well; after all it's matter of opinion from the audience that stops the emotion to go through them. But to be honest with you as a composer even you carefully planned your music, at the end the interpretation will always different and that's probably why I have sometime left the soloist part not to dynamically dictated and allow them to just do what they want to it.

somehow i think i have misunderstood you...
sorry if i did :S

[ongaku_oniko]

It's interesting to think about, sure, and emotion plays a part, I just feel that more often than not a composer will be inspired with a melody that strikes them emotionally and not in reverse.
The reason I find this to be true is the near infinite variety of possible music ideas available to them, and the idea takes on a life of its own, it becomes an entity that affects its creator.

Your question is like "which comes first, the chicken or the egg?".

One thing you need to realize, is that emotions creating music and music creating emotions, these two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are complimentary.

If you say that composers are inspired by a melody that strikes them emotionally, I can't disagree. But do you think that they're more likely to be inspired by a beautiful melody while, oh I don't know, mowing the lawn or something as unemotional, or do you think they're more likely to be inspired by this beautiful melody while remembering their love for their homeland, while being filled with emotions?

Which comes first? I don't know. And frankly, I don't really care. I think emotions and music are complimentary; having a deep emotional understanding helps with music; music also helps strengthen emotions.

I guess they're a reason robots don't create good music.

[opus10no2]

Sure, it is a bit of a chicken vs. egg debate, but I thought it was worth making a bold topic about as it seems that most people believe the opposite occurs, truth is I think both occur but it's my belief that my scenario is more common.

If a composer is sad, a sad tune will come, but the unique qualities of the melody express its very own shade of mood. I've listened to pieces to be thrilled by experiencing unique sensations and emotions, often emotions I would dread to experience out of a musical context, and emotions I've never felt in life, only through entertainment and art.

[floydcramerfan]

You mean this etude?

This is a logical fallacy. Just because emotions alone does not create great music does not imply that emotions don't create music at all.

In your wording, the less gifted musician is still creating music; abeit one you find "unremarkable".

Furthermore, your sentence is purely based on assumptions; you're assuming an event and creating its ending.

I would argue that a gifted musician would have a deep emotional understanding of music; even on an emotionally uneventful day, whatever that is, will still be able to convey more emotions than the average person.

I would also argue hat a gifted musician would play better music on an emotional day than an unemotional one. I will go as far as saying all truly great music was created based on emotions; and I will give an example rather than blindly creating a scenario; Chopin wrote his 3rd etude based on his love for his motherland; it has been said that he personally thinks that he will never find such a beautiful tune again. It was his emotional love for his country that he found this melody.