why music "clicks" into place

[vkxwz]

Sometimes I have this experience when a piece of music just "clicks", meaning it suddenly makes sense in a way, im able to perceive emotion in it more clearly, and it feels like a unified thing with more meaning than before it clicked. While browsing online forums I've seen this phenomenon mentioned by a fair amount of other people, expecially with respect the music of artists like autechre, aphex twin, etc. One thing I haven't seen is any discussion of why this happens. So if you have any theories about how this whole thing works, I'd like to hear your opinion.

[toaoaoad]

A lot of the time with Ae it's because there is an underlying pattern or structure that's buried under a bunch of other stuff that obscures it at first. Sometimes the most prominent element of the track is all over the place, and the structural component only becomes more obvious with familiarity with the chaotic/confusing part. I'm thinking of osla for n, for example.

Growing familiarity with the confusing elements leads to recognition of underlying structure. The hi hats are swingin in 4/4 the whole time.

Also sometimes it's just a rhythmic thing. It can be hard to find "1" in some really syncopated beats especially if 1 is never explicitly given in the first place (some Barker tracks drove me nuts for this reason), and then it "clicks" when you finally establish where 1 is (or realize 1 is actually somewhere different than you've been counting it )

Or when you learn to count something in a strange meter (see jazz).

What are some songs/tracks that clicked for you, to be more specific? Interesting topic

Edited July 1, 2023 by toaoaoad

[vkxwz]

7 hours ago, toaoaoad said:

A lot of the time with Ae it's because there is an underlying pattern or structure that's buried under a bunch of other stuff that obscures it at first. Sometimes the most prominent element of the track is all over the place, and the structural component only becomes more obvious with familiarity with the chaotic/confusing part. I'm thinking of osla for n, for example.

Growing familiarity with the confusing elements leads to recognition of underlying structure. The hi hats are swingin in 4/4 the whole time.

Also sometimes it's just a rhythmic thing. It can be hard to find "1" in some really syncopated beats especially if 1 is never explicitly given in the first place (some Barker tracks drove me nuts for this reason), and then it "clicks" when you finally establish where 1 is (or realize 1 is actually somewhere different than you've been counting it )

Or when you learn to count something in a strange meter (see jazz).

What are some songs/tracks that clicked for you, to be more specific? Interesting topic

Agreed about it being about an underlying simplicity, I think this is probably what sean was talking about when he said he's more interested in complexity arising from simplicity. it's very satisfying when something complex gets reduced to something simple. I'd argue that for what you're describing with the most prominent element being all over the place, it's actually just an extension of the underlying pattern which is in fact simple, but you can't encode that more prominent element in that simple way without understanding the less prominent elements first. The question is how can these tracks be constructed from something really simple.

As for tracks that have clicked for me, from autechre at least it's a lot of lp5, some of exai, some of sign, some of draft, bits of everything really, but some of it has unclicked. I'm still working my way through their discography honestly. And most of aphex twins more complex tracks have clicked at some point or another. Anyway acroyear2 would be one example, as would fleure, vordhosbn, rae.

I think the difference with aphex is that his tracks are mostly imagined and the structure is something he's rendering from his mind into sound whereas with autechre they build that structure into "machines" that then render the music.

For that clicking effect I think you need the sound to able to be explained more simply than just a sequence of sounds you have memorized. Like there is a model that once grokked by your mind is a far more simple and elegant encoding of the music than what you had before, and this is what's satisfying.

Edited July 1, 2023 by vkxwz

[logakght]

Interesting topic which I'd like to dive more, but for now I'll just say it definitely has relation with the neurogeometry of our respective brains—I kind of believe it's more empirical rather than subjective the appreciation of music

[hoggy]

Love this topic! I think part of it is learning the meta-language the music speaks in, it's like when you meet someone who has a really weird way of talking, and at first they make no sense, but the more you get to know them, the more you understand what they're expressing and why they talk the way they do, and there's something about the way they communicate that bypasses the habitual ways of communicating that can make meaning and emotion less accessible.

 

12 minutes ago, Summon Dot E X E said:

Also, it's interesting how people hear music differently. I know very few people IRL that like experimental electronic music -- most just hear what they call "noise"...

I played Omgyjya-Switch7 to a metalhead friend and they said "can we listen to something with music in it?" haha it was funny because I knew exactly what he meant but it's so different from how I hear it

[YEK]

I wonder if our brains ever add click tracks to very busy hard to understand music once we’ve figured them out. Like a hallucination… I know that stuff is possible because I’ve learnt song lyrics one way for years and then when I learn the real lyrics I find it hard to unhear my way.  It’s like hallucinations in waking life is a constant thing we know now and like what, half of what we see around us is our brain just guessing, filling in gaps.  
It’s possible that two people could get an autechre track but what they get could be slightly oh so different because you know, different brains. 

[Boxus]

For me set and setting have a lot to do with it. Some albums and songs have only really clicked for me when listened to in a particular mood, or a certain place, or while doing some specific activity. Also time of day can make a big difference. Sometimes I'll check something out, like it, but think "oh wait I'm REALLY gonna get into this if I blast it at 7am" and then save it for the next day.

I've also gotten a lot better over the years at determining on first listen if something might grow on me later. I guess that's just knowing your tastes, but I used to be more dismissive if stuff didn't click right away and now I can tell more easily if it has grower potential and deserves to go into rotation and get a few more chances.

[beerwolf]

Interesting subject and one I’ve been interested in since a late teenager when I first started to experience it. I noticed that increasingly the best music was stuff I didn’t like that much on first listens. I think (I could be wrong) the first time I experienced it was weirdly with Led Zeppelin’s compilation Remasters. I had that tape for maybe a year or so and never really liked it but for some reason would always go back and give it another go. Then one day BOOM the whole thing made sense to me and funnily enough I became obsessed with them. Strange when I could listen to something like Animals by Pink Floyd which is dark, quite complex and 10 minute long tracks and instantly love it. Of course BOC, Aphex and Autechre are masters of this. It’s similar to those Magic Eye pictures. Untilted had a huge impact on me when that revealed itself. It’s rather thrilling when it happens.

Edited August 18, 2023 by beerwolf

[hoggy]

3 hours ago, Boxus said:

For me set and setting have a lot to do with it. Some albums and songs have only really clicked for me when listened to in a particular mood, or a certain place, or while doing some specific activity. Also time of day can make a big difference. Sometimes I'll check something out, like it, but think "oh wait I'm REALLY gonna get into this if I blast it at 7am" and then save it for the next day.

I had one night where I had been drinking for so many hours, and I was feeling so merry, and they played Lust for Life in a club I was at and Iggy and the Stooges suddenly made sense to me - never got it before - I guess because I didn't have a frame of reference, it wasn't punk, it wasn't metal, it wasn't any kind of rock I was used to - but once I was in the right frame of mind, it just felt so right

Another thing is just adapting to unfamiliar sounds - like when I first heard Type O Negative, Pete Steele's voice sounded kinda cringe and weird, but after I heard it a few more times when friends played it I started to hear the songwriting and the layers in the soundscape, and I realised they weren't just a cheesy novelty band, and I started to notice how they use irony

Here's another thing I wonder - do you ever try and try to get something, but you never can - like I have put so much time into trying to get Ween after Pure Guava, or the middle era Autechre stuff (Draft, Untilted etc. - I love Confield, but after that until around Exai I don't get), and it just doesn't click
 

[vkxwz]

On 8/17/2023 at 11:42 AM, hoggy said:

Love this topic! I think part of it is learning the meta-language the music speaks in, it's like when you meet someone who has a really weird way of talking, and at first they make no sense, but the more you get to know them, the more you understand what they're expressing and why they talk the way they do, and there's something about the way they communicate that bypasses the habitual ways of communicating that can make meaning and emotion less accessible.

I think that often the thing being expressed can't be expressed in a more accessible way, like the format is more intertwined with what is actually being expressed than if it was just an interchangeable language that you have to learn. 

 

On 8/17/2023 at 6:42 AM, logakght said:

Interesting topic which I'd like to dive more, but for now I'll just say it definitely has relation with the neurogeometry of our respective brains—I kind of believe it's more empirical rather than subjective the appreciation of music

Can you expand on this? I do believe that there is something in the music that is more concrete than just a subjective feeling dependant only on the listener, I think that with these kinds of tracks there is some sort of objective structure that holds some intrinsic meaning no matter who is listening or if they perceive it. Similar to a mathematical equation, or a video tape of some real world event. I think the question is then how can these objects be embedded in sound in the first place, and how do we reconstruct them from the sound, in our own minds.

I think it comes down to how our perception works, and how we are constantly contructing a model in our brains that serve to explain our senses and predict the next set of senses. If we cant model something, it's perceived as noise (what is probably happening with hoggy's friend), but through paying attention to something we build up an internal model that is able to predict it, and this model is the meaning we find. There are many ways to model and predict the same thing, for example a track can become entirely predictable just by you memorising the order of all the notes and sounds as one sequential thing, but it's proveable that the smallest / most compressed encoding of some data gives the best prediction of how that data will change next (there's a formalization of occams razor called solomonoff induction that has been proven). It seems like our minds are always trying to find this most simple encoding, in order to be able to understand/predict better, and with less information stored. In the case of music that clicks, I think it's because the music can be modelled in a relatively simple way despite being so complex, so when something clicks you experience reducing a ton of complexity to simplicity.

Something in this vein that I enjoy it when music has a momentum to it and feels like physical objects with weight moving around, bouncing off each other, being pushed and pulled and there being elasticity, like things are being stretched and then releasing by contracting again, throwing an object back to where it came from.

Edited August 18, 2023 by vkxwz

[vkxwz]

51 minutes ago, hoggy said:

Here's another thing I wonder - do you ever try and try to get something, but you never can - like I have put so much time into trying to get Ween after Pure Guava, or the middle era Autechre stuff (Draft, Untilted etc. - I love Confield, but after that until around Exai I don't get), and it just doesn't click
 

There are so many tracks that I just don't understand despite listening a lot, maybe some day they will click like the others. With draft I feel like the theme of the album is things falling apart and breaking down, so that's why it doesn't click in a way that makes everything seem like a perfectly functioning unified whole, because it isnt. But then again maybe in a few years it'll all make sense to me in a way that contradicts that, who knows.

[Pirtek]

5 hours ago, Boxus said:

For me set and setting have a lot to do with it.

For me, it's mood and patience 

[hoggy]

3 hours ago, vkxwz said:

With draft I feel like the theme of the album is things falling apart and breaking down

That's so interesting - for me it felt so constructed, like lego and circuits and text, where Confield felt like plants and animals and things that grow.. actually that thought makes me want to give it another go

OK, listening now, it's totally different to how I remember haha

Edited August 18, 2023 by hoggy

[hoggy]

7 hours ago, YEK said:

I wonder if our brains ever add click tracks to very busy hard to understand music once we’ve figured them out. Like a hallucination… I know that stuff is possible because I’ve learnt song lyrics one way for years and then when I learn the real lyrics I find it hard to unhear my way.  It’s like hallucinations in waking life is a constant thing we know now and like what, half of what we see around us is our brain just guessing, filling in gaps.  
It’s possible that two people could get an autechre track but what they get could be slightly oh so different because you know, different brains. 

Interestingly, our brains literally do that - when someone with dementia has a gap in their memory or orientation (but unlike someone without it who realises they forgot something) - their brain literally makes up a whole story to fill in the gap. And they have so much conviction that the delusion is totally concrete and clear to them. I think also, the emotion the person is feeling can shape the character of the delusion, like dreaming.

[BlockUser]

Great thread. I think openness and curiosity play a big role, and of course, you have to be obsessed with music. If you discard something immediately because it doesn't make sense to you right away, then obviously, you can't even get to the point where it clicks. And it's no surprise that this seems to happen a lot with Autechre. It was the same for me. 

When I was a teenager, I bought Trout Mask Replica. I bought it because of Zappa, because of how he'd described the sessions in his autobiography. So I had no direct clue of what was going to happen. And then I hated the album. It felt like an endless, ice-cold shower. I was even mad at it briefly, but what can you do? I had blown the biggest part of my month's pocket money on this album(We're talking pre-Napster days here). So I listened some more because this was the new music I had this month. Then one morning, about 10 days later, I awoke and just heard Frownland in my head, and then I put it on. I was amazed by how intensely I was touched by it suddenly. The album became this extremely fascinating thing, I just couldn't stop listening to it. Lifetime fav ever since.

This was the primer. I realized that sometimes, it just takes time. Other times, I got help. My best friend back in high school was already into AE when we met, we both liked a lot of extreme and experimental music, and turned each other on to a lot of good stuff. He gave me LP5 to listen to and I couldn't stand it. I found it cold, robotic, soulless. I thought "Why are these guys doing this??". A few weeks later, we'd been out one summer day and ended up on a rooftop together, shortly before sunset. We smoked weed and he just turned on the boom box. Under BOAC came up. We were silent. And now, it hit me. Everything was exactly where it was supposed to be. The incredible percussion. That melody, and how the whole thing collapses, and then it reconfigures itself. It wasn't a contradiction anymore. It was simply pure motion. It was perfect, suddenly I was incredibly touched by the beauty of it. It was like finding the strangest and most beautiful thing under a microscope. It was so totally of its own world, and at the same time, so absolutely relatable. So I asked him to rewind. It was on this rooftop 22 years ago that I became the ridiculous Autechre fanboy that I am today.

[hoggy]

10 minutes ago, BlockUser said:

We smoked weed and he just turned on the boom box. Under BOAC came up. We were silent. And now, it hit me. Everything was exactly where it was supposed to be. The incredible percussion. That melody, and how the whole thing collapses, and then it reconfigures itself.

Drugs can definitely make a difference - I didn't like electronic music at all before I tried E - something about the clarity of the sounds/the high frequency textures and the insistence of the rhythm just tickled something in my brain after that, even when I wasn't high

[BlockUser]

3 minutes ago, hoggy said:

Drugs can definitely make a difference

You remember that Quaristice interview where they're being asked something like "We saw people at your gig taking drugs, what do you have to say about that?" And Rob is having a meltdown from this question, just keeps saying "I am speechless!!" He simply can't comprehend because AE were ravers themselves.

[xox]

Western mind and knowing yourself - Thinking in the veil of postmodernism vol.378

Great question @vkxwz I still remember your lovely posts when we talked about aesthetics of music and how you sincerely tried to understand my convoluted ideas written in broken english; kudos to you, really  

I just wanted to say that I see a big problem in our modern approach to metaphysics and objective analysis of ordinary life! we have become accustomed to and satisfied with shallow operational explanations like “apple fell off the tree because of gravity” as if they mean anything meaningful outside of mechanics…

imo it’s impossible to answer the question from a materialistic standpoint; all you get is more pain and sorrow 

[vkxwz]

55 minutes ago, xox said:

Western mind and knowing yourself - Thinking in the veil of postmodernism vol.378

Great question @vkxwz I still remember your lovely posts when we talked about aesthetics of music and how you sincerely tried to understand my convoluted ideas written in broken english; kudos to you, really  

I just wanted to say that I see a big problem in our modern approach to metaphysics and objective analysis of ordinary life! we have become accustomed to and satisfied with shallow operational explanations like “apple fell off the tree because of gravity” as if they mean anything meaningful outside of mechanics…

imo it’s impossible to answer the question from a materialistic standpoint; all you get is more pain and sorrow 

I don't remember any broken english, just you refusing to explain further. I recently realised you were probably referencing Schopenhauer in that thread, maybe I'll revive that thread and start pestering you some more.

I don't think theres anything more to metaphysics that it being misunderstandings of language really. You talk about explanations about mechanics being shallow, and I agree but this is all we have, just observations and models. You seem pessemistic about this approach but the alternative is incoherent, and whether you like it or not; modern science actually has produced models that are predictive enough to give us great control over the world around us.

Edited August 18, 2023 by vkxwz

[hoggy]

8 minutes ago, vkxwz said:

I don't think theres anything more to metaphysics that it being misunderstandings of language really

Isn't metaphysics just a category of philosophical inquiry? I don't think it's a philosophy as such that makes assertions.. but then I don't know the previous conversation you two had, so maybe you're referring to a particular philosopher's conception of metaphysics

[Boxus]

5 hours ago, hoggy said:

Another thing is just adapting to unfamiliar sounds - like when I first heard Type O Negative, Pete Steele's voice sounded kinda cringe and weird, but after I heard it a few more times when friends played it I started to hear the songwriting and the layers in the soundscape, and I realised they weren't just a cheesy novelty band, and I started to notice how they use irony
 

Oh yeah, adapting to vocal styles is a big one for me too. I wasn't that into Fugazi at first because I had never liked punk that much and didn't connect with the vocal delivery, but I appreciated the instrumentation and kept listening, and pretty soon a switch flipped and I started to love the way they sing as well. And recently I've become really obsessed with their whole discography - I'm so glad I stuck with it.

[BlockUser]

On 7/1/2023 at 5:56 AM, vkxwz said:

Agreed about it being about an underlying simplicity, I think this is probably what sean was talking about when he said he's more interested in complexity arising from simplicity. it's very satisfying when something complex gets reduced to something simple.

Loved that bit. I digress but iirc, Sean was talking about how they're using Max specifically(and then started relating this principle to processes in nature or smth). I love how Sean + Rob are constantly speaking up against this meme of "Autechre is at the forefront of music because they're using the most intricate and cutting-edge sh*t1!!". Pretty sure that a lot of the processes in their Max system, at least on message level / in the sequencing domain, are really just many simple bits / modules set up in a way so that they all can communicate and mess with each other. And then, complexity arises from the interaction between the elements, while the elements themselves are simple. The rest is their strong work ethic + incorruptible instinct. 

You say "it's very satisfying when something complex gets reduced to something simple", but didn't Sean mean that it's the other way around? Personally, I find complexity from simplicity really beautiful. Or am I getting you wrong here?

[xox]

34 minutes ago, vkxwz said:

I don't remember any broken english, just you refusing to explain further. I recently realised you were probably referencing Schopenhauer in that thread, maybe I'll revive that thread and start pestering you some more.

I don't think theres anything more to metaphysics that it being misunderstandings of language really. You talk about explanations about mechanics being shallow, and I agree but this is all we have, just observations and models. You seem pessemistic about this approach but the alternative is incoherent, and whether you like it or not; modern science actually has produced models that are predictive enough to give us great control over the world around us.

1. I maybe refused to explain myself further back than bc of the semantical dispute that was dominating in the discussion and i felt like it was futile to continue when nobody can understand even the basic premise of my arguments; generally speaking imo it’s possible to overcome the misunderstandings you’re referring as being inherent to metaphysics but the gap between us was too large at that moment 

2. nothing wrong with explanations/laws/axioms in mechanics; they’re shallow only if we use them outside of mechanics. Apple fell because of gravity is a fine explanation of ‘why’ in physics for physics but it’s actually much closer explanation of ‘how’.  
 

3. thankfully we have many ways of understanding the nature including ourselves! “other approaches” being incoherent as you say, just shows you how difficult and deep the subject really is but id rather take the road less traveled vs the usual shallow one bc I believe it’s closer to the truth. science is beautiful, i love it, i consider myself a scientist (and probably the people who play me to do the work) but scientific methodology is not practically applicable to every aspect of life and existence, and in this form as is today it shouldn’t be imo; it’s confusing to see how science started to dominate in some famous art universities

[beerwolf]

4 hours ago, BlockUser said:

Great thread. I think openness and curiosity play a big role, and of course, you have to be obsessed with music. If you discard something immediately because it doesn't make sense to you right away, then obviously, you can't even get to the point where it clicks. And it's no surprise that this seems to happen a lot with Autechre. It was the same for me. 

When I was a teenager, I bought Trout Mask Replica. I bought it because of Zappa, because of how he'd described the sessions in his autobiography. So I had no direct clue of what was going to happen. And then I hated the album. It felt like an endless, ice-cold shower. I was even mad at it briefly, but what can you do? I had blown the biggest part of my month's pocket money on this album(We're talking pre-Napster days here). So I listened some more because this was the new music I had this month. Then one morning, about 10 days later, I awoke and just heard Frownland in my head, and then I put it on. I was amazed by how intensely I was touched by it suddenly. The album became this extremely fascinating thing, I just couldn't stop listening to it. Lifetime fav ever since.

This was the primer. I realized that sometimes, it just takes time. Other times, I got help. My best friend back in high school was already into AE when we met, we both liked a lot of extreme and experimental music, and turned each other on to a lot of good stuff. He gave me LP5 to listen to and I couldn't stand it. I found it cold, robotic, soulless. I thought "Why are these guys doing this??". A few weeks later, we'd been out one summer day and ended up on a rooftop together, shortly before sunset. We smoked weed and he just turned on the boom box. Under BOAC came up. We were silent. And now, it hit me. Everything was exactly where it was supposed to be. The incredible percussion. That melody, and how the whole thing collapses, and then it reconfigures itself. It wasn't a contradiction anymore. It was simply pure motion. It was perfect, suddenly I was incredibly touched by the beauty of it. It was like finding the strangest and most beautiful thing under a microscope. It was so totally of its own world, and at the same time, so absolutely relatable. So I asked him to rewind. It was on this rooftop 22 years ago that I became the ridiculous Autechre fanboy that I am today.

Yeah I never pursued Trout Mask Replica. That album is a true test, twice was enough for me 

Still sits pristine in the cd drawer 25 years later. Clear Spot was easier and better imo.

Edited August 18, 2023 by beerwolf

[BlockUser]

It's time for me to get back on topic: I really believe that nothing is for everybody. Different brains and nervous systems enjoy different kinds of music. If your brain likes challenges, then it will get bored when not challenged enough. Other people like music that is predictable. But yeah.. That moment when it goes click is immensely pleasurable.

On 8/17/2023 at 3:23 AM, Summon Dot E X E said:

I like surprise, the rate of ideas per second (can be fast or slow -- it's nice when it alternates), defying genres, etc. I've heard so much music from so many genres that I really feel that Squarepusher album title sometimes.

So I guess above I've described both good and bad "clicking"... autotuned mumble rap about killing rival drug dealers "clicks" immediately and I turn it off, for instance.

My problem with most pop music is that it always leaves me feeling both hungry and nauseous, like a big McDonald's menu. It just hits me in all the wrong places. It wants too much from me. It's too user-centric. I prefer stuff that is following its own course, the less I matter in that process, the better. But pop music is engineered towards eliciting emotions, manipulating the listener. It's constantly trying to press buttons in my brain. It's trying too hard to click. The Loudness War was nothing compared to the Engagement War.