Kind of philosophical question about making music.

Supportact

flying_pie said:

It's almost certain that if you wrote the perfect tune will then it would be utter shite to 97.5% of the population.

Explains a lot about my band's sales figures. 

jasonbone75

it's a moot point because perfection cannot exist. it evolves and morphs and stays constantly out of reach in all endeavours and thoughts and feelings and things. anyone who says something is perfect is either lying, deluded or doesn't know what perfection means. and you can't say "it's perfect in my opinion" because the very definition excludes any influence of opinion in place of absolutes.

humans are doomed.

Bezzer

flying_pie said:

In the same way there could never be a perfect porn film … 

There can, there is, I was in it. Sadly it was before the internet so lost to time 

flying_pie

Bezzer said:

flying_pie said:

In the same way there could never be a perfect porn film … 

There can, there is, I was in it. Sadly it was before the internet so lost to time 

@Bezzer does Bristol...

thecolourbox

I think of think the feedback of peers is what elevates a piece of music from merely "artisticly sound" towards "artistic perfection". I think the process of releasing a song, giving up ownership of it almost, allowing it to be passed around the public consciousness and seeing where it lands is part of what makes the song brilliant.

That all said, I don't release most of the stuff I write because people are mean and it makes me feel like shit to have my optimism dashed

digitalscream

Sporky said:

Though, rethinking, what if it was genuinely, unarguably "perfect"?

Would everyone else stop writing and recording, knowing without doubt that they'd never reach that pinnacle? 

With any luck, yes. There's so much dross being produced on a daily basis that it would, arguably, be a service to humanity if that could just stop.

LastMantra

thecolourbox said:

I think of think the feedback of peers is what elevates a piece of music from merely "artisticly sound" towards "artistic perfection". I think the process of releasing a song, giving up ownership of it almost, allowing it to be passed around the public consciousness and seeing where it lands is part of what makes the song brilliant.

I like that. 

monquixote

Taking a slightly different angle 

I feel that music is a kind of language and the place that music happens is in the brain of the listener. 
Of course it's fine to talk to yourself, but it's not the same as a conversation or a speech.

If Paul McCartney had forgotten the dream where he dreamed the melody to Yesterday or Dickens had burned the manuscript of Great Expectations it wouldn't be the thing that it is because the importance and brilliance of the emotions that it created in people's minds or the cultural legacy and works that it inspired. 

To put it another way if random quantum fluctuations cause a vibration which is the most perfect melody that could exist (Statistically that which would cause the most delight if played to the world's population if you need a pedants definition) and no one heard it would it have any value at all. I would suggest not.

Blueingreen

LastMantra said:

OK, let's imagine that you wrote, learned to play and recorded the "perfect" tune.

Could you be happy to just destroy the recording and never play it again or let anyone hear it, knowing that you, and, if you believe, God, have heard it, or do you think it wouldn't be complete until you let other people hear it?

I suppose it's a bit of a twist on the tree falling with no-one around thing. 

I suppose it all depends on your beliefs.  Neoplatonists would argue that the world we normally experience is not reality, but an inferior copy of it; but that you can experience reality by creating or contemplating a perfect work of art.  At that point you would become part of the One, and lose the illusion that reality is made up of separate individuals.  There would be need to let other people hear it because you have transcended the illusion of other people.  Some Eastern religions and philosophies have similar beliefs.

But not everyone agrees.

hollywoodrox

The notion that it’s the perfect tune is subjective if only you have heard it 
  For it to be perfect surely it has to be widely regarded , not just a chart hit either which is no measure of a perfect tune ( Joe dolce music theatre - shaddupya face ) but for it to be widely regarded by the public & people considered to be of good judgemental character over a wide range of genres.  Eg on here people may not like a tune but will admit it is a great example of music & deserving of the award.

also some people regard music/tunes to have been given to us as a gift & surely not to share it would be not in accordance with the natural order of things 

LastMantra

The "perfect" bit was just a device for a hypothetical question.
I know it can't literally exist. 

I suppose what it comes down to is seeking other people's approval or would knowing yourself be enough. 

thecolourbox

I suppose it depends on how much weight you give you "knowing" it was perfect, I can't always trust my own opinion as to whether I've got my pants on the right way around let alone to ascertain if something is artistically perfect!

LastMantra

thecolourbox said:

I suppose it depends on how much weight you give you "knowing" it was perfect, I can't always trust my own opinion as to whether I've got my pants on the right way around let alone to ascertain if something is artistically perfect!

I think in this scenario, and considering there is no such thing, we'd just have to assume you somehow know for sure.

Anyway, thanks for the replies. Some interesting comments. 

GoFish

2 am's perfecttion can be a vampire - turns to ash when it sees the light of day.

Cranky

For a long time I’ve been more of a musical graffiti artist.  I have no problem putting something together, hearing it and then walking away from it.

I guess if someone else liked what I made it’d be cool.  But that’s not an aspect of making music I think about much.  Hell, it was enough for me to just get comfortable playing anything around another human at all — performing is a pretty unsettling idea to me.

roberty

It just gives my brain something to chew on so it doesn't chew itself

hollywoodrox

LastMantra said:

The "perfect" bit was just a device for a hypothetical question.
I know it can't literally exist. 

I suppose what it comes down to is seeking other people's approval or would knowing yourself be enough. 

I guess it would  but it would be absolutely perplexing not being able to share it . The sad thing is there must be lots of pieces of perfect music out there on hard drives & tapes that have never seen the light 

flying_pie

I think that in order for a piece of music to be appreciated it helps if an artist is established and with a certain image. Sad but true.

It's almost certain that people would appreciate Yesterday far far less if it had been the Beatles debut single

sev112

Ralph McTell wrote Streets of (Paris) London, and the song is acclaimed and a major hit; still known by many many people the world over 40+ years on.
it is the song that is always asked for at gigs and everyone sings along to.  

Yet it caused Ralph lots of stress because he wanted to play blues and ragtime, and even tour with a proper band, yet all the marketing people and music companies wanted was Streets and similar.  So a burden, but a source of much income, fame and other good things.

he must hate playing it now, or for many years but he still always does, and always plays it well.

i usually play Ralph songs at open mics that most people have never heard of before.But the few times I play Streets (or The Boxer / I am a Rock / Fire and Rain / etc) everyone ends up joining in and singing along.  

I always thought the writers that stressed and focussed on the perfect song were Prog artists, whereas it seems that the simplest pop songs are the most popular

LastMantra

Anyone seen searching for sugar man?

I loved that movie.