Cerebral versus Visceral?


Generally // Generically 'framed' as Musical vs. Accurate.

I have issue with the above two words being separated as I find that to be musical there must be accuracy or preferably (to me) 'realism.' Further, I believe that both 'words' have been appropriated and attributed with connotations by respective 'camps' and that 'musical / accurate' is generally discussed as being on a continuum or sliding scale with each on polar ends.

Below is a link to a Steve Guttenberg video on the this topic. I like his choice of 'cerebral' vs. 'visceral.' 

He discusses this from a "speaker" perspective...I see it as a SYSTEM result. 

Thoughts and Reaction?

"With some speakers you feel the music, and with others you just think about it."  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWqcu1wR1sw
david_ten

Showing 2 responses by erik_squires

One thing that made me think of skin hearing was a reviewer talking about listening to an ESL with a specially made tube amplifier built without transformers. ESL's like high voltage, so the tubes were hooked up directly. 

The reviewer mentioned sobbing like a babe, and this is actually something that happens at times during massage therapy. People release trauma and it hits just like that. 

Best,

E
I want to expand on @nonoise point.

One really interesting idea I've been thinking about for a while is where exactly in our body do we perceive music? 

The idea that the ear/brain mechanism is the only part of the equation may not be fully accurate. By this, I don't mean where do we feel emotion. I literally mean, does our skin, and the nerves in that and our viscera play a part in our perception and interpretation of music? 

Like Freud, who over emphasized the mind, and cognition, without taking into account the part our brain/skin/body played in our sense of self and well being, do we do the same with music? I think this may be among the most fascinating future topics. 

Best,

Erik