The "neuroscientific" approach to composition?

[cuberdrift]

Please, I do not profess to have a very wide knowledge on both disciplines, but here's a thought that constantly plagues me.

Suppose we study, and are able to discover, the proper chemicals or neurons triggered by music. We get to identify them, and are able to analyze great compositions or songs and the chemical arrangements they trigger resulting in enjoyment from said piece from the listener.

Then, we would compose based on not our whims, our creativity, or ideas, but from the perspective of one who is familiar with how these "chemicals" work in the brain.

For instance, let's say Chemical A is associated with happiness, B with sadness, C with anger, etc. Not even knowing how my piece will sound like, and, because of my profound scientific knowledge with how these chemicals work through music, I start jotting down notes on a musical sheet that I know are arranged in a way that they activate a mixture of those chemicals to incite the reaction I intend to receive from the listener's brain. Of course the process defeats the purpose of all art, but if music is a drug, why not?

Have there been tests about this? What results have they yielded? What is your opinion about it?

It's a disturbing thought.

[outin]

Please, I do not profess to have a very wide knowledge on both disciplines, but here's a thought that constantly plagues me.

Suppose we study, and are able to discover, the proper chemicals or neurons triggered by music. We get to identify them, and are able to analyze great compositions or songs and the chemical arrangements they trigger resulting in enjoyment from said piece from the listener.

Then, we would compose based on not our whims, our creativity, or ideas, but from the perspective of one who is familiar with how these "chemicals" work in the brain.

For instance, let's say Chemical A is associated with happiness, B with sadness, C with anger, etc. Not even knowing how my piece will sound like, and, because of my profound scientific knowledge with how these chemicals work through music, I start jotting down notes on a musical sheet that I know are arranged in a way that they activate a mixture of those chemicals to incite the reaction I intend to receive from the listener's brain. Of course the process defeats the purpose of all art, but if music is a drug, why not?

Have there been tests about this? What results have they yielded? What is your opinion about it?

It's a disturbing thought.

What disturbing about it really? I don't think past composers wanted to compose for artistic reasons first and foremost either, they composed music for people to enjoy and give them fame and money in exchange

But I'm afraid it would be rather difficult to consistently do what you describe because both the chemical cocktail and it's effects can be individual. Also the associations in the brain that affect what kind of feelings are triggered are heavily modified by culture and life experiences.

However you could of course attract groups of people. Music is already composed to appeal to masses, which utilizes what is known about an average listener or a certain group.

[cuberdrift]

What disturbing about it really?

Disturbing in the sense that it seems to erode all notions of creativity and artistry, and the beautiful mysticism behind it, in favor of identifiable chemicals and scientific formulae.

[outin]

Disturbing in the sense that it seems to erode all notions of creativity and artistry, and the beautiful mysticism behind it, in favor of identifiable chemicals and scientific formulae.

I don't care for mysticism and I think it would be a very creative process indeed...

[cuberdrift]

Sure? If we found one single ingredient that could bring up all the finest tastes from all the finest dishes in the world then stuff gets boring.

The point is this method would involve the compromise of emotional honesty for a purely scientific means to musical ecstasy. I don't feel ok with that.

[outin]

Sure? If we found one single ingredient that could bring up all the finest tastes from all the finest dishes in the world then stuff gets boring.

The point is this method would involve the compromise of emotional honesty for a purely scientific means to musical ecstasy. I don't feel ok with that.

Of course it would be a problem if the end result would be boring. But would it?

I find the scientific process really fascinating and creative as such and I do not value emotional honesty any more than scientific honesty. Less actually...

Don't you think this already happened in musical history? Someone invented a formula that can be used to almost endlessly compose music that people like. That's what the tonal theory system is really, a formula for music that sounds good to an average listener... It's not so fundamentally different to someone finding out why certain music sounds good to an average listener on the brain function level and then taking advantage of the information.

[hardy_practice]

You're talking Empfindsamkeit Stil - an 18th century thing.  If all music gives you is a 'hit' then you're quite shallow (present company excepted of course)

[awesom_o]

This would work if composing music was only about the creation of aural bliss.

Of course, it's rather more complicated than that, I'm afraid, which is why we will always need capable artists!

[hardy_practice]

It's a theory of mine - remember you heard it here first! - that some day Mozart's music will be properly analyzed.  The secrets of the universe will open up!

[mjames]

ew please no

[ted]

As some other posters have implied, the effect of music on a brain is highly individual. Even further, it can vary greatly from one listening to the next for the same music and the same person. It is sufficient to read the diversity and variability of opinion on our own forum to realise this. Over a lifetime you get a shrewd idea of those classes of musical sound which are likely to bring about enjoyment for you in particular. But then, at sixty-seven, I seem to take increasing delight in surprise and serendipity, in constantly reaching out in my own music. Whatever is involved for me is neither static nor predictable, and much closer to mysticism than to algorithms. Were this not so I seriously doubt I would bother playing the piano at all.

But, a scientific approach is as valid and rightful a personal creative option as any other. 



 

[superstition2]

There are universal qualities to everything since we're all human, though.