Tfw you share the single most important / beautiful piece of music with someone you think might appreciate it and their...

>tfw you share the single most important / beautiful piece of music with someone you think might appreciate it and their reaction is "...okay"

Even worse is "You have shit tastes"

>sharing something as personal and subjective as music with others
There's your problem.

Is it so wrong to want to connect on some level with another human being

I've never done so but it seems like it would make my life more than the solitary nightmare journey that it is

>be me
>hanging with friends
>we all gettin high af
>"user put on some music"
>"okay man, i have something really cool"
>put on Brian Eno's "An Ending (Ascent)"
>half way through song
>euphoria sweeps over me listening to the beautiful string and synth arrangements crescendo
>"user, what the fuck are we listening to? lord of the rings?"

I know how that goes...
Eno is great.
Honestly though, when it comes down to it, I just haven't met anyone who digs that sort of thing. It's all cultural saturation people who never, for whatever reason, took the time to find music/sound that really tingles their nerves in a way that speaks to their soul rather than to their status-person. I feel like so many people listen to this or that type of music just because they think they ought to and they get high off the idea that they're joining an easily accessible community of people who also listen to this music. Pop music is what I'm getting at but it bleeds into all genres.

Music is actually important to my life I'd have committed suicide long ago without it,... people, man. give life back to music

the core of this problem is that most people just see music as background noise. I've even noticed this with people that "like" music.
Most of us are much more sensitive than the average normie. They just simply don't hear what we hear or feel it on the same level.
and even if they like similar music it might be for more simplistic reasons. like a particular mood. I've noticed that they are much quicker to describe certain types of music with overly simplistic terms. all ambient and experimental music is just "chill" etc.

>chilling with friends
>put morton feldman's second string quartet
>confront myself and my self (as an ontological historical entity) with the mirror of atonality (as a mirror is not an empathic but a reflexive entity, alien to the space and time it reflects and only existing by itself in relation to the other) and realize the boundaries of human thought, comprehension and consciousness
>reach rational ecstasy
>pleb friend gets up and says "what is this silence shit, lmao, put some nirvana"
>get angry at their rockist subaltern consumption conditioned by the structures of power of the imperialist white economies, but contain it
>calm myself down by remembering quotes from finnegans wake, my favorite book since i was a teenager
>mfw can't express myself because i'm a spectator in the society of spectacle

"It is not the slumber of reason which engenders monsters, but vigilant and insomniac rationality. - Gilles Deleuze"

>the core of this problem is that most people just see music as background noise.

To put that another way, I can never hear music and ignore it. Meaning, if music is playing over the speakers in a restaraunt, department store, fuckin gas-station w.e, I hear it clearly. I can't dismiss music. It means too much to me. It seems though, like you said, that music for most people is a kind of static noise that is just "there", in a really depressing kind of distraction sort of way. It's there as the backdrop of sound to keep them from finding anything really worth thinking about. If the music were actually good it'd fuck with people's lives so its all bland singsongy lull you to sleep with its lack of creativity la la la na na na ukeleles and tiny bells nissan car ad nonsense.

>>calm myself down by remembering quotes from finnegans wake,

was it "Now, patience; and remember patience is the great thing, and above all things else we must avoid anything like being or becoming out of patience." ?

Unfortunately, you sort of have to lead it with the reason why you think it's special. It'd be nice to be able to play something for someone and have them organically realize the same thing you did, but the chances of that are close to nil. So rather than get shit on, I now introduce songs to people with statements like, "Listen closely to the lyrics, I think they bring up an interesting point/are really clever/flow very nicely."

>"Listen closely to the lyrics, I think they bring up an interesting point/are really clever/flow very nicely."

Okay... that's probably way easier than just straight music. Non-lyrical, instrumental, classical, jazz, electronic, w.e. Which is 99% of my playlist.

Can people appreciate sound without words these days

Do people really listen to music for the lyrics?
Why not just read them?

I mean, that's just one example. You can replace those words with whatever other facet of the music you'd like. "I think the melody at [random moment of your choosing] is really pretty," or "Man, the drums sound really cool here." Just be specific.

I think when you have to guide the person through the process of digging it then the point is lost

You're never going to win there. The average person is exposed to so much stimuli each day in our modern world that it won't even be a blip on their radar unless you make the experience stick somehow.

The alternative is to make new friends.

Because the really interesting about language and speech is that the same sentence can take on completely different meanings or reveal completely different things about the person saying it. But that's just language itself, within the context of music, the delivery of the lyrics can be manipulated in such a way as to have some sort of relationship with the instrumentation they accompany, whether it be harmonization, dissonance, or some other third thing, or all three at different points, or all three at once via different singers. That musical connection would be lost if you just read the lyrics. People who listen to music for the lyrics likely listen to music to find that connection, even if they can't describe its existence and can only "feel" it subconsciously.

I don't have any friends to begin with but sometimes an acquaintance has something resembling similar taste.

It doesn't really matter that much, it's just rather incredible that I've never met another human with some semblance of similarity in taste in things in my twenty seven years of living. It's not like my happiness is contingent upon meeting someone like that, it'd just be nice and seems like avoiding anyone remotely similar to me is a feat of chance far greater than meeting someone with an ounce of similar interests. Like god hates me or something.

Man, I really fucked up that first sentence, what I meant to say was
>Because the really interesting thing about language and speech is that the same sentence can take on completely different meanings or reveal completely different things about the person saying it, depending on how the person says it, i.e. the delivery.

I understood it. Your point is a good one and answers that question adequately.

well put

There's some gaps in your self-awareness, I think. I'm gonna take a guess that you feel more comfortable in text than in person, because it's much easier to be articulate in writing. The same is true for many others out there. There's some pretty lucid and thoughtful people here in Random Thread #73976138, but in your everyday life you are meeting people that aren't casually prepared to make off-the-cuff assessments of things.

Couple that with the fact that it's tough to make careful observations of anything after one listen, whether you're in your comfort zone or not, and you may just be making hasty judgments.

Don't get me wrong, there's some humongous retards out there, but some good people can seem fairly shit at the acquaintance stage.

I think perhaps I'm playing the victim too easily. I think most people probably have difficulty in really getting the gold out of others beyond the superficial level. I am always expectant to move beyond comments about the weather, and maybe they can subtly sense the weight of my expectancy in my silence after casual flippant remarks about this or that.

I'm so bored of polite behavior.

>mfw i live in a very shitty, small, recondite town in Mexico
>but i still managed to find people with the same musical interest, or at least, they don't mind listening to weird shit

God atac me but he also protec me

the issue is one of extroversion vs introversion

it's been scientifically proven that extroverts require more stimuli to be comfortable where as introverts require less. If you're a true introvert showing an extrovert your music and expecting them to feel it at the level of detail you do simply is not going to happen.
plus the fact you're an introvert means that you probably have an entirely different outlook on life than they do thus whatever themes you feel won't resonate with them.

They don't understand your music like you don't understand how people have fun in crowds listening to shitty edm

So can we finally just all agree in chorus unison that extroverts suck and introverts are going to save this planet from their idiocy ? good thanks beforehand

ya toltec bastard

props for not going with the easy one (aztec)

Why not just listen to vocal performances? Why does there have to be lyrics?

Because the possibilities of a relationship between lyrics and their instrumentation is something that's explored every time they're paired up together. You do not have this in strictly vocal performances. The possibilities can roughly be grouped under "what you say" and "how you say it." Not only do these two have a relationship with each other, but they also have a relationship with their instrumentation.

It all comes down to authorial intent really. There doesn't HAVE to be lyrics in a song. But the advantage of lyrics in a song to an author is that the author/composer felt like the language he wants to convey that already has a linguistic meaning (what you say) and a more situational rhetorical meaning (how you say it) would gain either a potential unique third layer of meaning and added complexity within the context of instrumentation, or a more concrete expansion of either the linguistic or the rhetorical meaning of his language (which is more important/more correct in the context of the song based on the instrumentation, etc.), and with lyrics, he has the potential to explore the relationship between the three. If the author wants to explore the possibilities of language by doing so within a musical context via a strictly vocal performance, the author loses that potential of further complexity given by outside instrumentation. And if the author forgoes lyrics, he loses out on potential complexity as well, since the instrumentation loses out on the kind of complexity language can aid it in conferring. Either way, the fundamental answer to your question is that excluding one or the other because of some arbitrary standards instead of either not being apt for the concept you're trying to portray limits creativity.

I hope this makes some sort of sense; it's 4 AM and I feel like I'm rambling right now.

kek

There is an old artistic performance art called Opera...

I feel like that's the ultimate in what you're getting at,

we need an evolved dramatic musical artform

imo Muse does that in a pretty interesting way
they're rather operatic when they care to be

this is retarded, a lot of extroverts are deeply into music

>it's been scientifically proven that extroverts require more stimuli to be comfortable where as introverts require less
wut

>all ambient and experimental music is just "chill" etc.
This is one of my biggest pet peeves when talking to people about music.