Thread: Timeless Melody

Originally Posted by Xei

What is a melody?

Well, I suppose we can reduce it to a list of numbers, where 1 corresponds to the note of the key and then up through to 12 for the other semitones.

It is a matter of common experience that some sequences of notes, or numbers, are melodies, but different sequences are not.

Is there some rule for this? How might we derive it? Why does it exist?

And I am not talking about sequences of notes which are not in any key. If I had, for example, the chords G, D, C, C, and I only played random notes within that chord sequence, the vast majority would be still meaningless. One, however, would be There She Goes by the La's. Another would be Waterloo Sunset by the Kinks. This is what I am talking about.

Why do they form qualia? Why is there an inherent meaning to the sequence of notes/numbers {1 5 1 7 1 4 1 5 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 -7 1} of joy and optimism? Why is there a different quale associated with Waterloo Sunset, of peace, apathy, and contentment?

Is there some sort of evolutionary advantage to this? It is extremely hard to see why. So is there some sort of objective pattern to melodies?

I don't have any clear answers.

EXTRAPOLATING QUESTION FROM POST:

Error: SomeGuy.exe cannot find a question to answer that is clear. Please try again with simpler questions. Or list them in 1-x order.

Sorry but my language was completely clear, and there are several perfectly well defined questions for you to answer.

-Is there a mathematical pattern to melodies?
-If yes, what causes the pattern?
-Why does a particular pattern evoke paticular emotions?
-Is there an evolutionary advantage to appreciating melodies?

If you are unable to answer just say so, don't be a jerk about it. There's nothing ill defined about these questions and it's a very interesting issue, I think.

Originally Posted by Xei

-Is there a mathematical pattern to melodies?

Yes, in the sense that there is a mathematical relationship between all the notes in an octave; and so all the consecutive (and previous) octaves. Mathematics can be used to describe and compose a melody. Though if it is unpleasant melody, for example, there is simply a different application of mathematics.

Originally Posted by Xei

-If yes, what causes the pattern?

What "causes" any pattern? The notes/semitones in an octave share mathematical relationship to each other by design. This allows for degrees of harmonies/consonance and dissonance. E.g. The frequency of A1 is half the frequency of A2; A1 = 55hz therefore A2 = 110hz. As the ear perceives the nonlinear notes/frequencies in linear fashion, the doubling (octaves) of a frequency is shown exponentially.

The various notes in between this octave share different relationships, such as phase correlations; the periods of the waveforms that share air-pockets. It is comes down to how close the air pockets are of a given note's fundamental frequency. Groups of frequencies as chords give a color depending on their relationships; such as happy for Major and sad for Minor.

Originally Posted by Xei

-Why does a particular pattern evoke paticular emotions?

Considering the above, it has something to do with how the mind experiences the relationships between different frequencies, and furthermore, the individual timbre or voice thereof. Quite an intricate topic, beyond that.

Originally Posted by Xei

-Is there an evolutionary advantage to appreciating melodies?

What do you mean?

Positive, Happy, Excited, Relaxed and Peaceful music has positive effects on the body/mind. Classical music shows to be the one of the most "healthiest" music genres to listen to. I feel this has evolutionary advantage; listening to positive music.

Originally Posted by Xei

Sorry but my language was completely clear, and there are several perfectly well defined questions for you to answer.

-Is there a mathematical pattern to melodies?
-If yes, what causes the pattern?
-Why does a particular pattern evoke paticular emotions?
-Is there an evolutionary advantage to appreciating melodies?

If you are unable to answer just say so, don't be a jerk about it. There's nothing ill defined about these questions and it's a very interesting issue, I think.

That was much easier to read. I wasn't trying to be a dick, thought you would find it funny. Sorry man, didn't mean to offend you.

1. Yeah, I believe so. All rythms are subdivisions of the note above it. Each type of rythm gets split into two cmaller, shorter notes. Also, each note change is an interval. You could make many different scales with equations, taking that number, and using the interval to creat a scale from it. There are plenty of mathematical properties in music.
[EDIT]
I forgot about the frequencies that the notes vibrate at. That's all tied into math too.
2. Music is based on math. So pretty much, math causes the music, not the other way around.

3. Different intervals can cause different feelings. A minor third might sound sad. It depends on who you are, and what you feel that day. An augmented 4th might sound angry on some days, to some people, but it might sound scary to some people. it all depends on the person.

4. The music you listen to and appreciate pretty much shows in the simplest form, who you are to others. You exxpress yourself via the music you play or listen to. So, I see that music evolves around the people of the time. More like a timelne of feeling. Look at the sixties. Sixties make me think of LSD and Cream/Jimi. Their music was based aroud the style of the period. So, it's more like music evolves around what the humans are doing at that time, not the other way around.

Interesting thread. Made me think a lot.

really: Ah no, you're on to something different. You're talking about the exponentiation of frequences with regards to pitch, which is of course a very well established mathematical model.

What I'm talking about is why only a few of the possible sequences of pitches form 'hooks'.

Perhaps it is due to the frequency, but I have a feeling that actually it's down to something discrete, as neural networks are discrete objects. We don't actually remember the particular pitches of a melody (unless you have perfect pitch which is very unlikely), only the relationships; it is pretty clear that we have the circle of fifths encoded somewhere in our brains.



Taking There She Goes as an example; those three chords are all joined by only one line; they're right next to each other. The notes of the melody, D G D A D F# D E D E D E D G E, are also close in sequence.

Considering the above, it has something to do with how the mind experiences the relationships between different frequencies, and furthermore, the individual timbre or voice thereof. Quite an intricate topic, beyond that.

Well yes, this is what I'm interested in.

What do you mean?

Positive, Happy, Excited, Relaxed and Peaceful music has positive effects on the body/mind. Classical music shows to be the one of the most "healthiest" music genres to listen to. I feel this has evolutionary advantage; listening to positive music.

But of course, modern human brains evolved about 2,000,000 years ago. Melodies are much more recent. It is hard to see how an appreciation of melody helps you to survive or mate.

There is also the fact that everybody understands what a melody is; there is no disagreement between what is a hook and what is not. This is why I find the question of what is so special about the sequence very interesting.

SG; argh, sorry. It's just become usual on DV to assume that somebody is being an asshole nowadays. Apologies.

As for your comment about different periods; the thing I find interesting is that, I listen to a lot of that music, and it's really exactly the same as modern music, with regards to what makes something hooky. What was a successful hook back in the 60s is still appreciated and understood in exactly the same way... this is what makes me think there is some kind of objective quality to melodies, although what it is or why on Earth it should exist is intriguing.

Originally Posted by Xei

Well yes, this is what I'm interested in.

[...]

There is also the fact that everybody understands what a melody is; there is no disagreement between what is a hook and what is not. This is why I find the question of what is so special about the sequence very interesting.

Ok, I see. Me too. My mistake, I was more focused on harmony than melody. Which reminds me that melody is emphasized through rhythm and harmony! So I guess you're really asking is about the melodic relationships over time.

Originally Posted by Xei

But of course, modern human brains evolved about 2,000,000 years ago. Melodies are much more recent. It is hard to see how an appreciation of melody helps you to survive or mate.

Music can be an affirmation for the introverted world. It can improve confidence, concord and move one with emotion, and help people run on exercise bikes. Also, it is useful to impress women with pride, seduce men, depress or reaffirm the suicidal mind, calm the frantic mind, inspire the dancing mind; overall it brings atmosphere and can change the vibe. Music is powerful! It is everywhere you go (in modern culture), a part of every day living and cultural/political influence (media). Perhaps it has a much direct influence as it does indirect.

What you are most likely refering to is called Consonance and Dissonance in music. Melodies that are pleasing to the ear have consonance, and it relies upon several factors.

I was going to try to explain it myself, but Wikipedia has a pretty good article on it already, so whatever.

Its basically based around harmonic patterns and low frequency ratios between notes.

It is important to note that dissonance can still end up being pleasing, but only when it is finally resolved with consonance.

I think the parallels to our lives and even how our brains work should be pretty evident. Our thoughts naturally distill into standing waves of harmonic frequencies. The sounds that we enjoy are sounds that mesh well with the frequencies of our brain.

Originally Posted by Xei

SG; argh, sorry. It's just become usual on DV to assume that somebody is being an asshole nowadays. Apologies.

As for your comment about different periods; the thing I find interesting is that, I listen to a lot of that music, and it's really exactly the same as modern music, with regards to what makes something hooky. What was a successful hook back in the 60s is still appreciated and understood in exactly the same way... this is what makes me think there is some kind of objective quality to melodies, although what it is or why on Earth it should exist is intriguing.

a. I know what you're talking about. I was just being me.

b. Really? I consider them much different. Compare Cream to the Jonas Brothers. The latter learned four chords, and how to whine into a microphone. Cream and Eric Clapton mastered everthing it seems. The way their music flows so smoothly, I find it so much different than today. Complicated rythms, solos with feeling, and they have actual skill. The other crap today is "Hey, I wanna be in a rock band so chicks dig me.", so they pick up a guitar, and get their freaky ass looking emo friend to whine about something, mostly love. They don't know jack-shit about love. Most teenagers think they understand it. Well, they don't and it pisses me off that they thing they know what they are talkgin about, when really they are just adolecent boys overflowing with sexual fantasies about chicks carrying them off the stafe to do strnge things to them. Sorry buddies. YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT MUSIC.

Sorry, rant. Got carried away.

Anyhoo, music in the sixties and seventies was so much more emotion filled, and creative. The Doors, Jimi Hendrix, and Cream are my favorite examples. But, there are bands today with epic proportions of greatness and passion that cannot even be compared to those losers with their deals with Disney. For example, DMB (Dave Matthews Band). Well, they were in the ninties, but hey. Close enough. They are original. You can hear passion and feeling behind every chord. And The Gorillaz. They are much different. Sure, they use some of the same sytles as the losers today, but they put a twist on it and make it original.

Also, I like Biggie Smalls. His stuff had stories. It had inventive, unique words and rhymes. His music flowed so easily. Now, he knew his shit.

The Notrious B.I.G., Mozart, Brahms, Beethoven, DMB, Cream, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, The Doords, Gorillaz, DMX, Wu Tang Clan (and members of it like Method man, and Busta Rhymes), They know something about music and made it good. That's what I respect, and that's what I look for when I hear music.

Music is about dissonance followed by consonance and back again in a smooth pattern. For the notes, at least.

There's only a limited amount of notes you can play. Rythm is neverending. Rythm is what makes music music. Rythm is what makes a melody get stuck in your head. You've got to be able to dance to music. Music needs emotion. (Music needs c-minor.) Music doesn't have to be good or perfect or hard to play or skillful. Music just needs to be good, and if you can make good music with two chords and some screaming, then that's ok.

Well, maybe the little girls obsessed with Disney like it. It's just my opinion that they suck. But if you like it, then I'm not stoping you dude.

Good points. A big question would be, why from a biological/emotional/psychological point of view does a minor progression evoke a different response in a human than a major progression? Does that just apply to humans and if so what kind of hardwiring or circuity is there in the mind that causes us to be effected differently by varying degrees and combinations of melodic consonance and dissonance?
Would my dog know the difference between row row row your boat and
Beethoven's 5th? All tough questions here I've not seen Google answer yet.

Originally Posted by Lucid Lobster

Good points. A big question would be, why from a biological/emotional/psychological point of view does a minor progression evoke a different response in a human than a major progression? Does that just apply to humans and if so what kind of hardwiring or circuity is there in the mind that causes us to be effected differently by varying degrees and combinations of melodic consonance and dissonance?
Would my dog know the difference between row row row your boat and
Beethoven's 5th? All tough questions here I've not seen Google answer yet.

I don't think it's a biological response. Probably more of an idea adapted from stereotypes. Someone was probably sad at one point, and came up with the sad sounding minor keys. Ever since then, humans have been conditioned to feel sad when they hear music like that, because they have always seen minor used for sadness.

In short, we hear it on sad things. We think of it as sad.

I think you need to consider the importance of prosody to convey emotional meaning in natural speech. Personally I don't even know if music predates speech in evolutionary terms (does anybody know that?) but it would be an important aspect. Of course music is more than simulation of prosody, but the similarity could play a part in attaching emotional meaning to specific pitch relations.

Originally Posted by Serkat

(does anybody know that?)

I'm sure it does. Speaking music is much simpler than developing a language. Some caveman must have decided it was fun to get with his homies and slam away at rocks with clubs to make some sick beats.

Wow, I didn't think I'd be able to follow the technicalities of this thread, but my obsession with the platonic solids and sacred geometry kind of bleeds over into the musical area. I've often heard geometry described as "Frozen Music".

But how hell is it possible I've never hear of the wheel of 5ths!?!?!?



That thing blows my mind! Maybe it's just that particular picture that made the connection for me, but the possibility of applying any of the 5 platonic solids from my profile pic directly to that picture got me all excited.

Right away I started with the simplest shape, a three sided equilateral triangle, from C, to G, to E. Pull out the old guitar and what do I get? Smoke on the water!!!!!

I've been trying to come up with a structured geometrical approach to music writing for a long time. Gotta try some more shapes and see what I get. Apply different shapes, rotate them... Just wow!

Originally Posted by The Cusp

Wow, I didn't think I'd be able to follow the technicalities of this thread, but my obsession with the platonic solids and sacred geometry kind of bleeds over into the musical area. I've often heard geometry described as "Frozen Music".

But how hell is it possible I've never hear of the wheel of 5ths!?!?!?



That thing blows my mind! Maybe it's just that particular picture that made the connection for me, but the possibility of applying any of the 5 platonic solids from my profile pic directly to that picture got me all excited.

Right away I started with the simplest shape, a three sided equilateral triangle, from C, to G, to E. Pull out the old guitar and what do I get? Smoke on the water!!!!!

I've been trying to come up with a structured geometrical approach to music writing for a long time. Gotta try some more shapes and see what I get. Apply different shapes, rotate them... Just wow!

Smoke on the water!!!
Classic School of Rock stuff!

It's getting kind of scary now. Especially with the triangle that you pointed out. In color theory designers (particularly on the web and in print) use specific color combinations that are known to cause specific reactions in those that view their creations. They of course have their color wheel



But there is also a triangle similar to the one you just pointed out which is used to compute the exact 3 harmonious hex colors given a specific starting color. Maybe music, color and who knows what else are somehow linked in some inexplicable trans-sensory sort of web and somehow nature and us humans detect and respond to those specific patterns laid out on the wheels and 3 sided equilateral triangles of the cosmos.

Originally Posted by Lucid Lobster

Smoke on the water!!!
Classic School of Rock stuff!

It's getting kind of scary now. Especially with the triangle that you pointed out. In color theory designers (particularly on the web and in print) use specific color combinations that are known to cause specific reactions in those that view their creations. They of course have their color wheel



But there is also a triangle similar to the one you just pointed out which is used to compute the exact 3 harmonious hex colors given a specific starting color. Maybe music, color and who knows what else are somehow linked in some inexplicable trans-sensory sort of web and somehow nature and us humans detect and respond to those specific patterns laid out on the wheels and 3 sided equilateral triangles of the cosmos.

It seems obvious to me that they are connected through frequencies.

Sounds (music) have frequencies, colours have frequencies as well.
Let's combine ^^

But seriously, the feel of a song, the emotion, the heart of the song is in the rythm, not in the tones.

Originally Posted by ThreeLetterSyndrom

Sounds (music) have frequencies, colours have frequencies as well.
Let's combine ^^

But seriously, the feel of a song, the emotion, the heart of the song is in the rythm, not in the tones.

You've got a point there. Below is probably the simplest sequence of notes possible .. a straight sequence from e down g

e d c b a g

I'm sure lots of songs have played that sequence before but when some guy named Paul decided to use it he created one of the most beautiful melodies ever heard, Love is Blue.

Play edcbag as quarter notes and you've got a piano lesson. Play around with the DURATIONS of the notes and you may have a masterpiece. Which throws frequency AND time into the equation. You can build your masterpiece here on this online piano ..

http://www.apronus.com/music/flashpiano.htm

Originally Posted by ThreeLetterSyndrom

Sounds (music) have frequencies, colours have frequencies as well.
Let's combine ^^

But seriously, the feel of a song, the emotion, the heart of the song is in the rythm, not in the tones.

Its not just a matter of relating two things that have frequencies. Lucid Lobster pointed out that even the frequency ratios share a correlation. Its not just a coincidence that color theory and music theory both use the word 'harmonic' to describe intrinsically pleasing combinations.

The psychological effects of music cannot be attributed to just rhythm. All aspects of music; melody, harmony, tonality, rhythm, meter, and form, have real and non-cultural based effects on mood and state of mind. If it was as easy as relating any and all emotional effect to rhythm, then a snare drum alone would be capable of eliciting as strong emotions as a full concerto, but it isn't (unless you are a huge Ginger Baker fan).

You have a point. But I still think that what affects music the most, is rythm. I can't stand music which doesn't have a stroll in it

Originally Posted by Xei

-Is there an evolutionary advantage to appreciating melodies?

I have heard a few theories. One is that it evolved as a way to attract potential mates, similar to a bird's song or peacock's tail. Another is that it is an evolutionary accident, a byproduct of our big brains, linguistic capabilities, and our need to make sense of the world - "cheesecake for the senses," I've heard it called. I tend to agree with the latter theory. But who knows?

Ever since then, humans have been conditioned to feel sad when they hear music like that, because they have always seen minor used for sadness.

I very much doubt this. Back in the day when people's main exposure to music was through playing piano, there would have been nothing to relate to 'sadness' save the music itself.

I think you need to consider the importance of prosody to convey emotional meaning in natural speech. Personally I don't even know if music predates speech in evolutionary terms (does anybody know that?) but it would be an important aspect. Of course music is more than simulation of prosody, but the similarity could play a part in attaching emotional meaning to specific pitch relations.

It's a good point, although many hooks are simple streams of notes every beat with no real 'prosody' yet still a very defined emotional response.

And I think speech predated music... at least for humans. Neanderthals could speak but it has been noted that they had no capacity for art.

But seriously, the feel of a song, the emotion, the heart of the song is in the rythm, not in the tones.

I completely disagree to be honest. Otherwise the songs we hear might as well just be somebody singing the same note over and over with an original rhythm. As I mentioned a second ago, many melodies have no particular original rhythmic quality at all, only a series of notes.

I have heard a few theories. One is that it evolved as a way to attract potential mates, similar to a bird's song or peacock's tail. Another is that it is an evolutionary accident, a byproduct of our big brains, linguistic capabilities, and our need to make sense of the world - "cheesecake for the senses," I've heard it called. I tend to agree with the latter theory. But who knows?

Yeah, me too. Are there any organisms in our evolutionary history that have used any sort of structured music for singing? I can't even think of any mammals at all who do this.

But the fascinating question remains, which is why; why should our neural networks have such a profound response to these objects? It's almost mystical.

Originally Posted by ThreeLetterSyndrom

You have a point. But I still think that what affects music the most, is rythm. I can't stand music which doesn't have a stroll in it

I know...four-hundred million eighth notes piss me off.


And the connection between color and music is very interesting...never thought of it. Is there a program/java applet out there that generates a color based upon a frequency a user inputs?