All My Journal Packets (Files)

[The Transcended Omniverse]

File #5: My Composing Dream

My Mentally Inspired Tunes And Their Unrealized Greatness (Full Version)

Note to Reader: In this section, I present melodies I've made in the past. These were melodies that weren't good at all, since I didn't know that much about music theory. But, the recent melodies I've made, such as the Dramatic Sky High melody, are, hopefully, good melodies. Some of these recent melodies are actually presented in this section as well. Anyway, I'll begin with this section, and then get into the Composing Discussion Section:

Even though I hardly know anything about composing, I've created very good tunes in my head for now. I've created a melody that, to me, conveys something awesome. It was a melody created through channeling inspiration. I've got down the right notes and rests to this melody I hear in my mind, and I got the right tempo.

The scene I envision this melody conveying would be a dark character, such as Shadow the Hedgehog, unleashing a magnitude of energy. What you hear playing at the higher octave is to prepare the listener for what's about to happen next. It would be a leading tune that I think people call the "bridge" in music. Therefore, this part of the melody would convey Shadow preparing to unleash.

Then, you hear things playing at the lower octave, and this is where Shadow unleashes his power. This part is supposed to be the chorus, which conveys awesome, dark, heavy, powerful emotion. Now, this melody is supposed to be awesome, catchy, and dark. It's not just the instruments I've chosen for this melody that convey a dark, awesome mood.

It's the actual melody itself that conveys this to me. If anyone tells me that this melody conveys nothing of the sort, that it's nothing catchy, that it's "ok," or that it's all musical gibberish, or something lame/awful, then perhaps it's because more things are needed to make this melody coherent for the listener, and to fully bring out its intended power.

You see, there's more to making music than just having the melody down, and a beat. There are so many other factors and, as long as those factors aren't met, then music might sound like gibberish, or something unpleasant for the listener. Only I know what this melody is supposed to be, and only I know the awesome power it has, since I'm the one who created it. Other people might not know because I have yet to find a way to fully convey the melody for other listeners.

Me knowing what this melody is supposed to be is a memory. In other words, if I were to lose that memory somehow, I'd perhaps see my melody as gibberish because I'd no longer know what it's supposed to be. This has, in fact, happened to me with other tunes I've made. The memory just didn't stick there and, as a result, I lost the memory, and perceived my created tunes as gibberish. Fortunately, with this tune I've made, the memory is permanent.

I've also managed to bring back some of the memories of my previous tunes, which means I'm back to perceiving them as amazing, catchy tunes, since I now know what they're supposed to be. Anyway, I have this dark melody on a cd. But, I'll share the youtube link to this dark melody. In addition, I'll also give a link to the music sheet of this melody.

With all of that being said, I'm now going to share the links to my tunes. These are simple, catchy, memorable tunes that are great, and they all convey different scenes and atmospheres. Some of these tunes convey powerful and profound emotion. But, said emotion might not be conveyed because these melodies might not be successfully conveyed in their current stage.

Nonetheless, I'm going to share them anyway. I do have a beat to go along with these tunes, which is a beat based off of the melody itself. Hopefully, this conveys my melodies. If not, then I'd have to learn more, so I can successfully convey them later on down the road.

So, before I present to you this dark tune, I'm going to present my most recent tune I've made first. It's a different dark (evil) tune, and it's very powerful. It could actually be my best one (even though I said my other dark tune could be the best one). This dark tune I made is like one of those simple, powerful, repeating melodies you hear during the chorus of a song.

When you listen to the chorus of songs, you sometimes hear a simple, powerful, repeating melody being sung by a choir. Also, I know I said in the Composing Discussion Section of this packet that I might not be accurately reproducing what I hear in my head.

But, I've gotten much better at reproducing the tunes I hear in my head. So, I think I got the exact notes to this tune down. Here's the youtube link to this dark tune. In addition to a choir instrument, you do hear a brass instrument as well. The brass gives a different feeling. It's supposed to play the other half of this melody:

Here's that same dark tune, but with a different instrument that I like

Here's that same dark tune one more time, but sped up. When sped up, it conveys a different emotion/scene. It sounds serious and dramatic, like a video game boss fight. It doesn't sound miserable or sad to me. But, it does sound like a dangerous level, or boss fight, in a video game. Again, only I can see this, since I'm the one who created this melody. Others might still hear this melody as random, meaningless rubbish. Also, as a side note, when you slow down, or speed up melodies, they do convey different emotions/scenes than the normal-paced melodies. Anyway, here's the link to this melody:

Now, this tune I made is a very haunting one. I'm quite sure I've accurately transcribed this melody. This melody, to me, conveys something very spooky:

Here's another tune which is a dramatic one:

Now, I'll present one more tune before I present to you that other dark tune I talked about in the very beginning of this packet. I think this tune is a very cool, awesome one. It's something you'd hear during the chorus of a song. So, when you first listen to it, it might be a bit confusing to you, given that the rest of the song isn't there to give context to this tune. I have yet to create the rest of the song myself someday. For now, I'm just sharing short tunes:

#1LISTENTOFIRSTAwesomeChorusTune

Now, here's the youtube link to that dark tune I was talking about. You just hear the beat at first. Then, you hear the melody later on, along with the beat. It conveys something evil, awesome, and powerful. In regards to the chords I've chosen for this tune on the music sheet, they're basic chords, since I don't know what chords I'm supposed to use:

DarkTuneFinal

(Note: In the Composing Discussion Section of this packet, I said I might've gotten the notes wrong to this tune. Actually, I was referring to a previous version of this tune I made. This is my final attempt, and I did my absolute best to get the notes right this time. Also, you can actually forget the instrument choice because they're not the awesome, dark instruments I hear in my head. This tune, along with my other ones, do have a key to them. I just don't specify that key.

But, I'll just give you the key signature to this Dark Tune, which would be F minor. Again, in regards to the tunes I'm sharing, you might not understand them. Only I understand them, since I'm the one who created them. I'll have to learn more about making music, so I can make my melodies understandable for other listeners. Hopefully, other people will be able to understand them as they are now though).

Here's that same dark tune. But, with different instruments. These instruments might sound like they're better quality:

DarkTune2

Now, here's another recent tune, and I think I got the exact right notes to it. I think I'm naturally creating great tunes in my head, and I wish to share them. This recent tune is one of those great tunes. My other tunes might not really adhere to a rhythm because I didn't learn enough about music theory at the time. So, someday, I plan on changing the notes a bit, so they do adhere to a rhythm. In addition, I have the time signature wrong for these tunes as well. But, I'll share these tunes anyway. With this new tune I've made, it does adhere to a rhythm, and I do have the right time signature.

It's a short, simple tune that I think others would love, and find catchy. Since I'm a beginner at composing, I just wish to share simple, short tunes at this point. I think that's good enough anyway because there are already simple, short tunes out there that are great. Haven't you ever heard of one? I'm quite sure you have. The Frosted Flakes tune would be an example. It has the lyrics: "Frosted Flakes are more than good. They're great!" I think I'm creating simple, great tunes like this. Another example of a simple, great tune would be a tune you'd hear when a character acquires a 1-up (extra life).

Sure, the examples I gave are short tunes. But, they're still memorable and great. This recent tune I made would be one for a video game. It would be for Sonic the Hedgehog. But, it's not the type of tune you'd hear when a character earns an extra life. It would be a chorus tune, like the Frosted Flakes tune. I think this tune could very well be used in a Sonic commercial. It would be a commercial featuring Super Sonic (Sonic in his golden form). It has lyrics, which would be: "This is Super Sonic. He's at the speed of light!"

Here's the Youtube link to it. I also give the Soundcloud link to my tunes later on, in case the Youtube links don't work for you. Not only that, but I give links to the music sheets of my tunes because I think it's important that others see my tunes on the sheet:

YouTube

Now, here's a link to a different tune (the time signature is actually supposed to be 2/2). This tune is supposed to convey something bizarre and mysterious, such as being all alone in a far away, distant time period, or galaxy. It, to me, conveys powerful, deep meaning, and is very catchy. I'm not sure what others would think of it though. I think it could very well be my best tune (along with my Dark Tune, since they're both the best tunes). Again, you just hear the beat at first, and then you hear the melody, along with the beat. So, listen to all of it:

DistantFutureFinalVersion

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Here's that same tune, but slowed down, and added to a scene in Sonic the Hedgehog. The slow version sounds sort of creepy/ominous, which is the reason why I've added it to this scene:

Now, here's a very beautiful, catchy, memorable tune. It sounds like something you'd hear during a wedding. I add lyrics to this. Sure, they might not be great lyrics. But, I think the melody itself is great. The lyrics are on the music sheet. I add lyrics to convey what each part of the melody expresses. The fact I know what each part of the melody expresses means I have a vision of this melody, which means I'd know how I'm supposed to fully craft the melody.

As I said before, my melodies aren't fully crafted. I'm going to explain to you now what each part expresses. The first part is a statement, where it goes "Bum bum bum this is love. Bum bum bum we are one." The second part builds up in tension, since it's about to finish off. It's an incomplete sentence, which is: "Don't you see that..."

Then, it finishes off with an exclamatory question, which would be "You are in my dreams?!" Lastly, this tune starts on a C chord, ends on a C chord, and is in the key of C major. I also reverse this melody and it, to me, conveys something even more beautiful. It conveys a deeper, beautiful meaning. I love the reversed version better than the forward version.

Here's the wedding tune:

Here's a link to a gentle, caring tune. It's very memorable and catchy. Again, you hear the beat, and then the melody, along with the beat:

Here's a cool, catchy tune that conveys deep meaning to me:

Here is another dark tune. This one sounds like a catchy, awesome, Halloween tune someone would dance to. This is supposed to be the chorus, and this tune is supposed to repeat (although, I just had it play one time). The chorus repeats, which is why this tune is supposed to repeat:

Here's a link to a new tune I recently made. I think it's a very good one. It conveys a strong, dramatic emotion, and is catchy. It has chords, and there's also a pattern to this tune because it alternates between something playing in the treble clef, and something playing in the bass clef. Here's the youtube link to this tune:

DramaticForce

Here's a link to a short, simple, catchy melody:

Lesson

Here's a link to a bit of a weird tune I made:

WeirdTune

Here's a Super Mario Galaxy 2 tune I made, which would convey the scene of Mario obtaining the Grand Green Star. In Super Mario Galaxy 2, Mario collects yellow stars, and then he collects the big, yellow stars, known as the Grand Stars. Later on in the game, you start to collect green stars.

But, there's no Grand Green Star in that game. Therefore, I've come up with this theme, which expresses Mario obtaining the Grand Green Star, which would be a special, secret, hidden star. I first have the melody in basic piano form, so that the notes of this melody can be distinctly heard:

SuperMarioGalaxy1

From there, I have the Super Mario Galaxy 2 tune with more suitable instruments:

SuperMarioGalaxy2

Here's a lovely tune, which I think would be a full theme song:

LovelyTheme

Here's a beautiful, catchy tune that I think many people would really love:

BeautifulTune

Now, here are the soundcloud links to all those tunes I've just presented to you:

#1LISTENTOFIRSTBestDarkTuneVersion1(AccuratelyTranscribed)

#2LISTENTOSECONDBestDarkTuneVersion2

#3LISTENTOTHIRDBossFightTune

#9VeryHauntingMelody

#1LISTENTOFIRSTNewDramaticTune

#1LISTENTOFIRSTAwesomeTune

DarkTuneFinal

Dark Tune #2

SuperSonicTune

DistantFutureFinalVersion

Wedding Theme

GentleTuneFinalVersion

CoolDeepMelody

EvilTune

DramaticForce

BeautifulTune

Lesson

LovelyTheme

SuperMarioGalaxy1

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/supermariogalaxy2

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/weirdtune

Lastly, here are the links to the music sheets of my tunes, so you can see what types of notes and rests I've chosen:

https://ibb.co/v10Qk1m

https://ibb.co/jH9SQH6

https://ibb.co/T251smG

https://ibb.co/ZcWL68z

https://ibb.co/d4ENAL

https://ibb.co/F37vyVK

https://ibb.co/my4C7ST

https://ibb.co/qdvySjG

https://ibb.co/3yx9mt9

https://ibb.co/HxL76Xg

https://ibb.co/hoMMBV

https://ibb.co/iMRmRe

https://ibb.co/bsyAkp

https://ibb.co/iuybQp

https://ibb.co/cMKGQp

https://ibb.co/cAW7WU

I'm actually going to point out the music sheet of one of my tunes, which would be the Super Mario Galaxy tune. I've circled the pattern of notes I see in that tune, which proves I'm not just coming up with melodies with randomly placed notes or, what I like to call, just plain ruckus. What's interesting is that I didn't sit there and think of a pattern of notes. Rather, this melody came to me through pure inspiration alone and, sure enough, I discovered that this inspired melody actually has a pattern of notes to it.

This means my brain can create great, catchy tunes through pure inspiration alone with no intellectualizing before hand. Of course, I do think of certain scenes to be inspired by in order to come up with these melodies. But, I do not sit there, and think what notes I should use to convey whatever scene, character, or atmosphere I want to convey. I let the inspiration alone create the music. It's no different than how artists say they let the inspiration alone create the work of art. Whenever I feel positively inspired, I let that emotion create the music.

Koji Kondo is the composer for video games, such as Super Mario, and The Legend of Zelda. Now, this Super Mario Galaxy tune I made is something I think is just as great and catchy as any one of Koji's tunes (but might not sound good, or catchy, in its current, beginning stage of development). There are certain tunes Koji Kondo makes, which are short tunes. An example would be the tune you hear when Mario obtains the Grand Star in Super Mario Galaxy 2. I have created my own tune to express that scene, and I think it's just as good as any one of Koji's tunes.

That might sound arrogant of me. But, if I was truly arrogant, then I'd be saying it's a fact that the tunes I'm creating in my mind are just as good as Koji's tunes. I'm not saying it's a fact. I'm merely keeping an open mind to this possibility. I have every reason to keep an open mind to this because, from what it sounds like, this tune really does sound just as good and catchy as one of Koji's tunes. I have suspended all factors that would make an inflated judgment, and I've honestly judged this tune to be just as good and catchy as one of his tunes.

If someone else made this tune, and fully crafted it, then I'd see it as being just as good as Koji's tunes. Whether this is just a crap tune, and it's simply my lack of knowledge and experience, rendering me unable to tell the difference between a crap tune from a really good one, has yet to be determined. Like I said before, only time will tell, and it's only when I successfully convey/fully develop this tune would it be determined for sure if this tune really is as good as I say it is or not. I'll say one last thing before I move onto the Composing Discussion Section.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

It takes a gifted composer to convey something great, catchy, profound, memorable, and powerful in one, simple melody. I think I have that gift, but have to find a way to convey it. If there's any skilled composer out there who can convey my melodies, then I'd tell them to feel free to convey them. I'll show them the music sheets to my tunes, and they can get to work. But, if it's really the case that only I can convey these melodies, since I know what they are, then I'll have to forget about others conveying my melodies for me.

Composing Discussion Section

Other Person's Response: You've got to be joking!

My Reply: I'm not joking. I really think the tunes I'm hearing in my mind are really good, and that I have yet to find a way to convey them. I have every reason to think I'm creating really good tunes in my head.

Other Person's Response: When you say your melodies are awesome and great, you wouldn't be able to see them as awesome or great without your positive emotions, right? You'd just be having the thought/idea that they're awesome and great.

My Reply: Yes. I'd also be thinking they'd be awesome and great in the eyes of others. But, I'm not sure how others would feel about them.

Other Person’s Response: In regards to your composing dream, why do you wish to share your music to the world? Why can’t you just compose in private? There are many people who create works of art just to create them, and they have no need to share them.

My Reply: I’m the type of person who wishes to evoke a certain reaction in the audience. It would be like someone creating frightening works of art because he wishes to evoke fear in the audience. As of now, I’m not a skilled composer, and I’ve yet to acquire the necessary knowledge and skill to create the music I want to create and share. I haven’t gotten that opportunity yet, due to all my miserable struggles that have wasted much of my life.

Other Person’s Response: Not only must you evoke the reaction you want within your audience through your music, but you say you must witness such a reaction either through online comments people make regarding your music, or in person.

My Reply: Yes. Witnessing such reactions would make me feel great.

Other Person’s Response: I heard you wish to compose unique, bizarre, otherworldly music to share to the world, so that people can hear it. But, let’s pretend the world got to hear your music, and they acknowledged it as unique and amazing. However, the entire world was apathetic. Would you be satisfied with the fact that the world heard your music and praised it, even though they didn’t care about your music?

My Reply: No. People need to get the emotional response I intend to evoke through my music. That emotional response would be a feeling of astonishment or: “Wow, man! This is a very bizarre, profound, and powerful composition!” So, people need to be impacted by my music. If, let’s pretend, the entire world was apathetic, then I wouldn’t want to pursue my composing dream anymore.

That’s because nobody would be impacted by my music. Now, there will be some people who’d be apathetic in regards to any awesome composition I create because not everyone is going to be impacted by a work of art. So, I’d avoid sharing my awesome compositions to these people, and instead share them to those who’d be impacted.

It’s very interesting and enjoyable for me to witness others being astonished or moved by my music. It makes me feel great, and my goal is to experience positive feelings from others praising my music. If the entire world was apathetic, besides me, then I could still enjoy the whole process of creating music. But, my goal as a composer is to have the world hear my music and be impacted by it.

Other Person’s Response: People can be negatively impacted by your music because they could say your music is absolute garbage.

My Reply: That’s true. Hopefully, not very many people will be impacted in such a way by my music because that’s not the response I want. As of now, many people might say my music is absolute garbage because I’m not a skilled composer yet. So, I wish to compose awesome music someday that will astonish the audience.

Other Person’s Response: Let’s pretend you do acquire all the knowledge and skill you need as a composer, and you end up creating music that’s better than the rubbish you’re creating now. If virtually everyone doesn’t praise your music, and they say it’s lame or mediocre, would that anger or upset you? You wouldn’t be getting the astonishment and praise you wanted from your audience, and I’d imagine that would upset or anger you.

My Reply: It wouldn’t upset or anger me at all. I just wouldn’t care anymore about being a composer, and I’d go back to my previous hobby, which is playing video games. Since I’m not achieving my goal of impacting the audience, then I’d just give up composing.

Other Person’s Response: Actually, if you were having a miserable moment in your life, then virtually everyone not praising your music would upset and anger you because you feel all sorts of negative emotions during your miserable struggles.

My Reply: Correct. But, normally, it wouldn’t upset or anger me at all. It’s a fact that, if you’re having stress or an emotional crisis, then many things will upset and anger you. Even things that shouldn’t would. But, when you don’t feel upset or angered by anything, then nothing can upset or anger you. That’s been my personal experience, which is why I conclude that the only way things can move us, bother us, astonish us, etc. is through our emotions, and not through our mindset alone.

Other Person’s Response: When you’re not having any miserable moment in your life, and you’re doing just fine, do you still have the mindset that things still anger or upset you, even though that mindset can’t make you feel angered or upset?

My Reply: I don’t have that mindset. If I were to have that mindset, then I’d feel angered or upset by things. The only time I have that mindset would be during my miserable struggles because negative thoughts become dominant over positive thoughts during such struggles. So, when you have an emotional crisis or stress, you end up having the negative mindset that things bother you, that you want to give up on your goals and dreams, that you don’t want to live anymore, etc.

It becomes very difficult to have a positive mindset, such as that it’s perfectly alright if things don’t go your way, that you want to persevere in your goals and dreams, that you want to live life to the fullest, etc. As a result, you end up feeling much more negative emotions than positive emotions. But, once the emotional crisis or stress resolves, you end up feeling much more positive emotions than negative emotions.

Other Person’s Response: Our mindset takes on an emotional form when it makes us feel an emotion. For example, an angry mindset would cause us to feel anger, and a loving mindset would cause us to feel love, so that we can be angry and love.

My Reply: Correct. But, a loving or angry mindset alone can’t allow us to love or be angry. The same thing applies to being upset. An upset mindset alone can’t allow you to be upset.

Other Person’s Response: According to your philosophy of emotions, emotions are the only beauty, horror, magnificence, etc. there is. So, if you had no emotions, then that means there’d be no beauty, horror, magnificence, etc. within you to express to the audience through your music.

My Reply: Correct. I’d just be composing music and nothing more. I wouldn’t be expressing any love, beauty, etc. within me.

Other Person’s Response: Could you give me an example of an awesome composition you wish to create someday when you become a skilled composer?

My Reply: Yes. It would be a heavy metal composition that conveys a solar, otherworldly, bizarre, supernatural, awesome, powerful, profound, potently destructive mood. Such a composition would express a final boss battle in another dimension, where a character has otherworldly destructive powers to take down the boss. Such destructive powers would be spiritual energy blasts and beams (i.e. something you’d witness in an anime, such as Dragon Ball Z).

Other Person’s Response: Wouldn’t that final boss composition sound demonic?

My Reply: Yes, which might cause people to shy away from it. As for the type of singer for this composition, it would be the singing voice of a female, gothic, dimensional witch.

Other Person’s Response: You say you wish to create good music that expresses whatever specific scene, mood, character, atmosphere, etc. you wish to express to your audience. You’re not concerned about lyrics, which means you’re just concerned as to whether the actual music you create expresses what you want to express.

My Reply: Yes. That requires talent, and I’m not sure if I have it. I claim I have this talent because I’m claiming I’m naturally creating such music in my mind, and that I’m just not good at accurately transcribing it. I really don’t know if that’s the case though. I could just be creating musical rubbish in my mind that I think is good, memorable, catchy, and expresses what I want to express. If that’s the case, then I never had this musical talent, which means, even if the music in my mind was accurately transcribed, it would still be nonsensical rubbish.

Other Person’s Response: What if it’s the case you never had this musical talent?

My Reply: Then I’m not sure if I’ll ever be capable of developing this talent. I could certainly create some good music by studying and following the rules of music theory. But, I wouldn’t have the talent of creating memorable music that expresses what I want to express to my audience. In other words, I’d just be the average person creating good music. But, I wouldn’t be someone like a video game or anime composer who’s able to create memorable theme songs that bring out the very essence of characters, atmospheres, etc. For example, I wouldn’t be able to create the type of music you hear in Sonic the Hedgehog video games. I just wouldn’t be able to musically express the zones, atmospheres, characters, etc.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person’s Response: So, if you never had this talent, then let’s pretend someone asked you to create a Valentine’s Day theme song. The only theme you’d be able to create is something that follows the rules of music theory. But, said theme wouldn’t express love, which means it wouldn’t be a Valentine’s Day theme.

My Reply: Correct. I wouldn’t be able to express the very essence of Valentine’s Day through a composition. But, even if I did manage to create a theme that I thought expressed Valentine’s Day, it might not actually express it. So, if the audience were to listen to my theme, it might express something entirely different for them.

Other Person’s Response: If someone wanted to express love to someone through words (lyrics), then that would be quite simple. He could write the lyrics: “You will always be there in my heart.” But, when it comes to writing a melody that expresses that sentence, it’s not so simple because it’s not so obvious. It all comes down to the person’s instincts, imagination, and creativity in creating a melody that he thinks expresses that sentence (and, of course, it also comes down to some knowledge of music theory).

But, music theory can’t teach you how to create melodies that express what you want to express though. So, if that person ends up creating a melody that doesn’t express that sentence at all, then he’s unfortunate in terms of being a composer. Even though he’s able to express what he wants to express to his audience through lyrics, he’s unable to do so through the music he composes.

My Reply: What makes composition tricky is that you can be taught how to write sentences, lyrics, or messages that express what you want to express. But, that’s not the case when writing music. Sure, music theory can teach you scales, which are different moods. But, it can’t teach you how to write melodies and themes that express whatever specific idea, message, character, etc. you have in mind. For example, the Harry Potter theme song (Hedwig’s theme) is in the scale of A minor.

But, that scale is merely the setup for the theme, and doesn’t capture the world of Harry Potter on its own. That’s why any instrumental song written in A minor wouldn’t be a suitable theme for Harry Potter. It’s Hedwig’s theme that captures Harry Potter in a memorable way. So, music theory just gives you the tools you need, such as scales, chords, etc. But, it can’t teach you how to capture certain worlds, atmospheres, characters, etc. through compositions.

Other Person’s Response: Since music theory can’t teach you this, then it’s something you either have or don’t have. What if you don’t have it? Perhaps you should take up a different field of art to express what you wish to express to your audience.

My Reply: I’ve heard people tell me that I should write stories, lyrics, or poetry, since I’m already a good writer, and I could express what I want to express through writing. But, composing is the only field of art I’m interested in because music is so meaningful, powerful, and profound for me. So, if I have no composing talent, and can never develop one, then I’m giving up composing and going back to my previous hobby, which is playing video games. Even if I eventually composed good music, that’s not enough. My music needs to express what I want to express to my audience. Like I said, if I can’t achieve this goal, I’m giving up composing.

Other Person's Response: So, you're saying, even if you do learn how to create good melodies, you might not know how to express what you want to express through melody writing? You might not know how to communicate what you want to communicate to the audience through melody writing?

My Reply: That's what I'm saying. Hopefully, that won't be the case. Many good composers are able to express what they want to express to the audience through the music they write. Not just in terms of lyrics, but also through the melodies they write. That's why you see so many people saying that a particular song, melody, or theme expresses something specific. They could say a particular melody expresses adventure, or collecting a secret item. That's my goal is to express myself to the audience through songs, melodies, and themes.

Other Person’s Response: If you don’t have the ability to musically express yourself, then that means you could write a melody that you think expresses someone coming along and showing kindness. But, the melody wouldn’t express that at all for the audience.

My Reply: Correct. Also, imagine if a famous nursery rhyme still had the same lyrics, but a completely different melody that didn't express the intended scene or message. The lyrics would be great and memorable. But, the melody just wouldn’t capture those lyrics.

Other Person’s Response: You wish to express what you want to express through composition because you wish to evoke the reaction you want to evoke within your audience?

My Reply: Yes. If my music is expressing what I want to express for the audience, then that means the audience is getting the response/reaction I want from my music.

Other Person's Response: It seems you're just bragging about yourself. You think you have some awesome tunes in your head to share to the world, and you don't.

My Reply: I'm claiming everyone's brain is naturally capable of creating great works of art in their heads. If not everyone, then many people can do this. I explain why this is later on. So, I'm not just bragging about myself here. Also, I'm open-minded towards the possibility that I'm creating rubbish music in my mind that I just think is great, and expresses the scenes I described. I'm also open-minded towards the possibility that the music I'm creating in my head is great, and really does express the scenes I described. So, consider everything I've written to be a claim I'm open-minded to. Don't consider it to be the written material of a bragging narcissist.

Other Person’s Response: There are people who are able to figure out what sounds good on an instrument, and create good music that expresses what they want to express, without studying up on any music theory. But, then there are those who absolutely need the aid of music theory education because they can’t get anywhere in composing without it. I think you’re the latter type who’s creating rubbish melodies in his mind and on an instrument. So, you don’t have a natural, musical talent, which means you need to educate and train yourself.

My Reply: Just because I’m unable to create good music that expresses what I want to express on an instrument, or in a music notation software, doesn’t mean I’m unable to create such music in my mind. So, it could be the case that I’m creating awesome music in my head, and that I’m just bad at transcribing it.

Other Person’s Response: If you can naturally create awesome music in your mind that expresses what you want to express, then you should be able to do so on an instrument or in a music notation software.

My Reply: Creating music in my head isn’t the same thing as creating music on an instrument or in a music notation software. In my head, I can automatically and easily create an awesome, powerful, profound melody. But, it’s much more difficult for me when it comes to creating such music on an instrument or in a music notation software. I just can’t do it without the aid of music theory education, as well as some ear training.

Again, it would be like a situation where a person is able to naturally create an awesome drawing in his mind, but is unable to create any good drawing on paper or in a computer software. So, a person can be bad at creating works of art in the physical world. But, that doesn’t mean he’s not a mental, artistic genius who can naturally create awesome works of art in his mind.

Other Person’s Response: You claim you’re able to create awesome melodies in your mind through pure instinct alone.

My Reply: Yes. I’m able to do so through inspiration alone.

Other Person's Response: I'm just curious. Do you wish to learn how to play an instrument or sing? Or, do you wish to just learn how to create good melodies and share them?

My Reply: I don't want to play an instrument or sing. I just wish to share my music.

Other Person's Response: During your miserable moments, do you give up composing?

My Reply: Yes. This is because I have all these subconscious, negative thoughts during said moments that make me feel negative emotions, such as misery, hate, rage, the desire to give up, etc. But, once I'm fully recovered from these miserable moments, and have my positive emotions back to me, I could experience the most difficult learning curve when learning music theory, I could make many mistakes, and fail many times. But, I'd still be positive and optimistic the whole way through, since there are positive thoughts making me feel positive emotions now. All those previous negative thoughts, and emotions, would be gone. So, I'd actually enjoy the whole learning process.

Other Person's Response: In the folders that contains your musical tunes, and their music sheets, you only share a few of your melodies. Yet, in this packet, you share a lot of your melodies. Why is that?

My Reply: It's because the ones in my folder are better than the ones in this packet, and I just wish to share my most recent, best melodies. I think the melodies in my folder follow the rules of melody writing to a much better degree than all the other melodies I share in this packet. As I point out later on in this packet, I've learned there are rules to melody writing, and my melodies must follow these rules in order for them to sound good.

Other Person's Response: Do you proselytize the things you've written?

My Reply: Yes. I share some of the things I've written on online forums. People are doubtful about my claims, and I wish to clear things up for these people in the hopes they'll agree with me.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your melodies, is it the instrument choice you've made for your melodies that makes you think your melodies convey powerful scenes? There's more to music than having instruments. The melodies themselves must convey certain scenes.

My Reply: It's not the instrument choice. I really think my melodies convey powerful and profound scenes. An example would be my Haunting Tune because I think the melody conveys powerful and profound horror, regardless of what instrument I had playing the melody. Other people have yet to realize the power and greatness this melody has. Like I said, only I can see its power and greatness. Every time I listen to my melodies, they always convey the exact same, powerful scenes to me.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person's Response: I think you're talking nonsense. Even if you did perfectly transcribe the melodies you've naturally created in your mind, there'd be no power and greatness whatsoever to these melodies that has yet to be conveyed to the audience. There's no way to make these melodies work because they'll always be senseless rubbish, regardless of what you try to do with them!

My Reply: I'm hoping there is a way to somehow make them work, I just don't agree that they would be senseless rubbish, and I think there's power and greatness to these melodies that has yet to be conveyed to the audience. Perhaps a music teacher, or a professional composer, can make them work. In other words, maybe they can find a way to convey the power and greatness of my accurately transcribed melodies for other listeners. If not, then I'd have to find a way to convey their power and greatness myself.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I don't think you're coming up with any good melodies in your mind. What good ideas are you able to come up with though?

My Reply: They'd be simple ideas, such as video game or movie titles. For example, I came up with the title "Star Trek Dimensions." There are Star Trek movies out there titled "Star Trek Beyond," and "Star Trek Discovery." I came up with the next title called "Star Trek Dimensions." After all, there was a Sonic the Hedgehog game to be released called "Sonic Dimensions." But, that game didn't get released.

So, I thought that "Dimensions" would go well with a new Star Trek title. Especially since Star Trek involves the cosmos, other dimensions, etc. I also came up with 2 Super Mario titles, which would be "Super Mario Palace," and "Super Mario Casino." I also come up with simple, comedy scenes (such as Family Guy scenes).

Since my knowledge and experience is so limited, I'm limited to coming up with simple ideas, rather than complicated ideas that require a rich level of knowledge and experience, such as good stories for movies, or new, awesome inventions that work.

Even my own vocabulary is limited, which means it would be difficult for me to come up with a very amazing movie or video game title. But, even though my ideas are simple, I still think they're good ideas worth appreciating.

Other Person's Response: Could you share another one of these good ideas you have?

My Reply: Sure. There's an anime titled "Inuyasha." The word "inu" is the Japanese word for "dog," and the word "yasha" is the Japanese word for "demon." The main character in the anime is Inuyasha himself, who's a dog demon. My idea would be a new series of Inuyasha titled "Inutenshi." The word "tenshi" is the Japanese word for "angel." So, the character Inuyasha would be a dog angel in this new series, rather than a dog demon.

Thus, Inuyasha's new name would be Inutenshi. Many Inuyasha fan girls have found the character Inuyasha very attractive. But, they might find the character Inutenshi much more attractive. Whether this idea of mine is a good idea that would actually work is something I don't know. It's just a random idea I'm throwing out there. Hopefully, it's a good idea that would work.

Other Person's Response: Could you share another movie title you came up with?

My Reply: Sure. It would be a new Sonic the Hedgehog movie titled "Sonic: In the Blink of an Eye." Since Sonic is so fast, then that title makes sense, and I think it's a good title.

Other Person’s Response: Could you share another video game title you came up with?

My Reply: Sure. There are already Super Smash Bros. games out there titled “Super Smash Bros. Melee, “Super Smash Bros. Brawl,” and “Super Smash Bros. Ultimate.” The title I came up with would be “Super Smash Bros. Elites.”

Other Person's Response: You say you're naturally coming up with awesome, amazing tunes in your head. So, why couldn't you naturally come up with amazing titles, or new, amazing inventions?

My Reply: It's because my brain hasn't naturally learned the things necessary to come up with these amazing titles and inventions. For example, I never immersed my mind in stories, or literature filled with rich vocabulary. Had I done this throughout my life, my brain would've naturally learned the rich vocabulary I'd need to come up with amazing movie or video game titles.

Actually, I'd need to figure out what these big words mean if I were to read them in stories or literature throughout my life. Then I'd have the vocabulary I need to naturally come up with great titles. Like I said, this hasn't happened. But, since I've listened to music my whole life, whether it be through playing video games, watching movies, or listening to music on the radio while driving, my brain has naturally learned the rules of music theory. Thus, I'm able to naturally come up with awesome music in my mind.

Other Person's Response: I heard you're no good at tasks that require thought, planning, and a rich level of knowledge and experience. That's why you fail when it comes to things, such as skeptical and rational thinking. You have a difficult time trying to discover the truth as to whether conspiracy theories are true or not, whether vaccines are harmful or not, or whether the afterlife exists or not.

You can't decide what's true, and you give up, since you're not skilled at this. You have no interest in this anyway, which is another reason why you give up on it. Creating great music is also something that requires knowledge, experience, thought, and planning. So, it's no wonder you're not creating any good, sensible melodies!

My Reply: But, I'm skilled at certain tasks that don't require much thought at all, such as playing video games. When I play Super Mario, I just enjoy collecting items, and completing the levels. I don't think about anything, and I just have fun. I'm not the best player in the world. But, I did have people compliment me on my level of skill.

Now, even though I'm currently not a skilled composer who's making music other people love to listen to, music means so much to me, which is why I'm not giving up on composing just yet. I've put my video gaming hobby on hold in the hopes that I can become a skilled composer someday. If I can't, then I'm giving up composing, and going back to playing video games. So, composing is the new hobby I've recently taken up, and I'm no longer playing video games.

Other Person's Response: You say you can't decide what's true. Does that mean you're also undecided as to whether you're making awesome melodies in your head?

My Reply: Correct. It's possible I'm just creating senseless, rubbish melodies in my mind. Then again, I could be making awesome and powerful melodies in my mind.

Other Person's Response: Are you deaf? There are deaf composers out there.

My Reply: I'm not deaf. My hearing is just fine. I'm also not blind either, and my sight is just fine.

Other Person's Response: Are you tone deaf?

My Reply: No. I can hear the difference between tones and semitones.

Other Person's Response: Let's pretend you were deaf. Would you give up composing? Beethoven was deaf, and he didn't give up.

My Reply: I'd still pursue my composing dream to see how it works out for me. If I don't want to do it anymore, then I'd give up on it.

Other Person's Response: What makes you think you're creating really good tunes in your head? For all we know, they could be crap tunes.

My Reply: As I said before, I have autism, and it's said that autistic people are gifted. People who are gifted tend to be incapable in other areas, and highly advanced in one area, and I think I could be that person. I think I might be creating really good music in my mind that I have yet to share to the world. Once people recognize its greatness, they should see me in a whole new light. There's also another reason why, and I explain later on.

Other Person's Response: I heard some autistic people are savants, and you say you have autism. But, that doesn't mean you're a savant.

My Reply: That could be so. But, still, maybe having autism does give me an upper hand when it comes to creating music in my head because I think the melodies I'm creating in my head are awesome.

Other Person's Response: When people go on psychedelic trips, are they literally entering different realms? Or, are they just hallucinating?

My Reply: I'm not sure.

Other Person's Response: If our brains aren't naturally capable of creating great works of art in our minds, and the works of art that are witnessed during drug trips and dreams are great works of art, then that must mean these great works of art reside in actual realms, visited by our minds or souls. Our minds would peer into other realms during dreams, and they'd detach from our physical body, and visit realms during drug trips.

My Reply: That could be. I don't know.

Other Person's Response: If our brains are receivers, then they could be receiving great works of art, when we channel inspiration. Maybe that's how great works of art become naturally created in our minds.

My Reply: I'm not sure about that. It seems I naturally know how to create great works of art in my mind. So, I think it's just my brain naturally knowing how to do this. But, I'll admit, there were times I was drifting asleep, and whole new images instantly popped up in my mind that I've never seen before, as well as whole new melodies with beautiful, bizarre instruments I've never heard. So, it seems like my brain was receiving music, just like a radio, receiving signals. That even applies to the images that were automatically created in my mind. But, like I said, it could just be my brain, naturally knowing how to create new, great works of art in my mind.

Other Person's Response: Only savants can naturally create great works of art in their minds, and there are few savants.

My Reply: You don't need to be a savant to naturally create great works of art in your mind. I talk about this when I say our brains naturally create whole new, great works of art during dreams, drug trips, and near death experiences.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person's Response: I think you're talking nonsense! Our brains don't naturally create great works of art, whether it be through dreams, drug trips, or any other method!

My Reply: Haven't you ever had a dream of any given environment, or scene, that you never witnessed before? I bet you have. For example, you could dream of a scene in Harry Potter that never happened, such as Harry opening up a portal, and flying in a futuristic, technological city. This shows our brains do have this natural capability to create great artwork. I, myself, had a dream of a labyrinth version of my old home.

My old home became a beautiful, complex, work of art in this dream. I think our brains can create much more complex, amazing works of art through dreams and drug trips than our normal, waking life because perhaps certain mental processes are being more dedicated towards these astonishing tasks.

Other Person's Response: Could you explain to me another dream you had?

My Reply: Sure. I had a dream of a scene in the show Futurama, which was a scene that never happened. I'm not sure if you've ever watched that show. But, I'll explain the dream anyway. The character Fry is a cunning psychopath in this dream (although, that's not his normal personality in the actual show). He takes on many tough opponents, and defeats them one by one. Each opponent is given his/her scene, and Fry is shown defeating each opponent.

There's one scene where there are 2 robots fighting each other in the alley. The 1st robot keeps on beating down the 2nd one. But, the 2nd one keeps on getting back up, since he's a very tough opponent. Fry then comes along to the very entrance of the alley with a female robot he's created himself. I'd call this female robot the 3rd robot. This robot resembles the wife of the 2nd robot. Fry and the 3rd robot make out, and the 2nd robot becomes devastated and heart-broken upon seeing this.

That devastation causes the 2nd robot to literally fall apart into pieces. Thus, the 2nd robot becomes defeated. Fry had a cunning trick to defeat the 2nd robot. Once he's defeated, Fry gives a sinister smile. So, there's my dream. As you can see, this dream I had was a good work of art that conveyed deep meaning. The deep meaning it conveyed was that even the most tough people can be beaten down by moments, such as his wife cheating on him. You could call it deep meaning, or simply a life lesson.

Other Person's Response: You say Fry is the cunning one in this dream. But, you're the cunning one, since it's your brain that created this scene. So, that makes you the cunning artist.

My Reply: I agree.

Other Person's Response: In this packet, you talk about a comical scene you made during your waking life, which involves a tough guy who's unbeatable. There are other tough guys who slam their fists into him, and it doesn't phase him at all. Then, a little kitten comes along, scratches the tough guy's leg, and that defeats him. It seems the Futurama scene you dreamed of is sort of like an improvised version of that comical scene you made in your waking life.

My Reply: I agree. I think that Futurama scene I dreamed of is better than the tough guy scene I made in my waking life.

Other Person's Response: Could you share another comedy scene?

My Reply: Sure. This is a Family Guy comedy scene I made. There's a fitness coach who's putting women through hardcore training. The coach is giving them more than they can handle. Peter meets one of the women. She literally looks like a walking stick, since she's so thin, and her eyes are literally the size of bowling balls. She shows Peter a photo of herself when she was fat.

In the photo, she's an obese, Asian woman, with small, beady eyes. She tells Peter this is who she used to be. Now, through the coach's training, she has transformed her entire look. Instead of having a fat body and small eyes, she has a thin body and fat eyes. Peter becomes outraged at the sight of her new, unhealthy appearance, and exclaims: "That's it! That coach needs a stern talking to, since he's pushing these girls way too far!"

Other Person's Response: That Family Guy comedy scene was very short!

My Reply: I think it's good enough. I think it's a good work of comedy as it stands. People just need to lower their standards, so they can appreciate this comical scene, and any others I make.

Other Person's Response: I really love your comedy scenes. Forget those other people who dislike them because I can appreciate them. So, could you share another one?

My Reply: Sure. Now, this one is a Dragon Ball Z one. If you've ever watched the anime Dragon Ball Z, there's an evil, psychotic character in that show named "Buu." I've created my own comedy scene based off of this character. So, here it is:

The evil Buu arrives at a victim's door, and he gently knocks on the door, while saying in a sinister tone of voice:

Buu: "Knock knock."

Victim: "Who's there?"

Buu: "Buu."

Victim: "Buu who?"

Buu: "Stop your crying. We all have to die someday."

After which, Buu breaks in and kills the unsuspecting victim.

*Note: If you didn't get the joke, the term "boo hoo" refers to someone who cries.*

Other Person's Response: I love SpongeBob! So, could you share a SpongeBob comedy scene you made?

My Reply: Sure. The Flying Dutchman arrives to steal SpongeBob's soul. Before he takes SpongeBob's soul, he asks:

"What do you get when you take the 'Bob' out of 'SpongeBob?'"

Patrick says:

"I don't know."

The Flying Dutchman answers in an exclamatory tone:

"JUST A SPONGE!!!"

The Flying Dutchman then steals SpongeBob's soul, and SpongeBob is left lying on the ground. He appears as nothing more than a sponge with no face. That's because he's nothing more than a soulless vessel now.

Patrick is saddened by this event. But, a guy, whose name is "Bob," stands next to the soulless sponge. Patrick looks at the sponge, then Bob, and he puts those two things together, and concludes:

"Yipee! SpongeBob, you're back to life! We just need to put you back inside your body."

Patrick takes SpongeBob's body, makes an opening in it, and wears it over Bob. Patrick and this SpongeBob imposter then have a jolly time together, going about their daily lives. Take note that Patrick is the very dumb character in the show, which is why my comedy scene portrays him as dumb.

Other Person's Response: You say we have dreams where we witness things we've never witnessed before.

My Reply: Yes. We have these dreams and nightmares all the time. For example, you could witness one of your family members doing something they never did in reality.

Other Person's Response: I do agree we have dreams where we witness and hear things we've never heard and seen before. But, I don't agree they're great works of art. I just don't agree that our brains are naturally capable of creating great works of art in our heads.

My Reply: Think of an awesome, vivid dream you had. Are you sure that dream wasn't a great work of art?

Other Person's Response: How do our brains naturally create great works of art?

My Reply: Maybe our brains can take already-existing information, whether it be from a show or anything else, and create whole new scenes and works of art that are wonderful, glorious, beautiful, and amazing. As you can see here, we don't have to know anything about how to create works of art; our brains will create amazing works of art for us through inspiration, dreams, etc.

That's how I'm creating these amazing themes and tunes in my head through inspiration alone without knowing anything about composing. Technically, our brains do have a form of knowledge that allows us to naturally create great works of art in our heads because, without any knowledge of how to do that, then our brains wouldn't have the ability to create great artwork. I think it would be an instinctive form of knowledge, and not the type of knowledge one would gain from studying up on things.

Other Person's Response: Do you have any article that supports your claim that our brains have an instinctive form of knowledge that allows us to naturally create great works of art in our minds?

My Reply: Yes, actually. In this article, it talks about how we instinctively know things about music. They're things we know, but we don't know how we know them. It's called "statistical learning." I think we as human beings naturally learn what series of notes and rests convey the power, meaning, and emotion we want to convey. It's no different than how we naturally learn the English language, and choose a series of words to convey the power, meaning, and emotion we want to convey. I think that's how we're able to naturally create great and powerful melodies, or themes, in our minds. Here's the article:

The Music in You - Aeon - Pocket

Other Person's Response: Even if you are naturally creating great music in your head, that doesn't make you a great artist. A truly great artist is someone who takes the time to learn and train himself to convey his artistic vision.

My Reply: I disagree. I think I'm a great, professional artist on the inside, since I'm creating great music in my head. I'm just not a professional artist on the outside, since I can't make any good music in the real, physical world.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person's Response: You shared this article, and you're giving all your supporting arguments to support this idea that you're some sort of gifted, amazing composer in your head. I think it's all lies just to make yourself look great. I think you know deep down that you have no musical talent, and amount to nothing as a composer.

My Reply: That's not true. I'm undecided as to whether I really am this awesome, musical artist who's creating great music in his mind, or if I'm creating rubbish music in my mind that I just think is great.

Other Person's Response: In that article, it says we naturally have as much musical knowledge as an expert musician. Therefore, I think our brains really are naturally capable of creating great music. Our brains can make use of that knowledge to create some awesome music in our heads.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If you really must create music by training and educating yourself, rather than relying on your inspiration alone, then it's still possible you can naturally create awesome music in your mind that expresses what you wish to express. But, only providing that you have much musical training and education. Only trained professionals can naturally create such music in their minds.

My Reply: In that article I gave a link to, it says we already have a professional level of musical knowledge, naturally ingrained within us. That means I already am a professional composer in my own head who can naturally create such music in his mind.

So, I don't think I even need to create music the hard way (or the tedious, intellectual way of creating a melody on the keyboard from scratch, and making sure the notes I choose on the keyboard not only adhere to the rules of melody writing, but make a melody that conveys something memorable, great, and expresses the scene, moment, or character I wish to express).

Instead, I'd simply have to accurately transcribe the awesome music I've naturally created in my mind, which already meets all those criteria I mentioned above in parenthesis. From there, I'd have to somehow convey the power and greatness of this accurately transcribed music to the audience. Lastly, I will quote something from the article:

"But the more psychologists investigate musicality, the more it seems that nearly all of us are musical experts, in quite a startling sense. The difference between a virtuoso performer and an ordinary music fan is much smaller than the gulf between that fan and someone with no musical knowledge at all."

Other Person's Response: Since brains can naturally create great works of art with no effort at all (an example being drug trips), then that means brains effortlessly follow artistic rules to create the beautiful landscapes, beings, and music during drug trips. Given this, why couldn't your brain naturally create awesome, powerful music through inspiration alone with hardly any effort?

My Reply: Exactly. The only effort I'd need to put in would be imagining whatever scene or character I wish to create a theme or melody for, when naturally creating awesome music in my mind. Imagining these things would get my inspiration all pumped up. I'd also have to channel the emotion I wish to express when creating music in my mind.

If I create music in my mind without channeling powerful and profound emotion, then, chances are, the music wouldn't turn out to be that powerful and profound. So, I think creating awesome music in my mind is simply a matter of imagining and channeling emotion.

I don't think it has to be an intellectual process of thinking about the rules, and making sure I've chosen the right notes and rests in my mind that follow these rules. I'd be a bit disappointed if this intellectual process really was necessary because it would make matters tedious and difficult.

Other Person's Response: I admit, our brains are amazing, complex organs. But, that doesn't mean we're gods who can naturally create awesome works of art in our heads.

My Reply: I mentioned earlier I had a dream of a labyrinth version of my old home, and how it was this beautiful, complex work of art. If I attempted to draw that scene, the drawing would be awful. But, if I could somehow record my dreams, and share the actual image I dreamed of, I bet people would say it's a beautiful work of art. As a matter of fact, if we could all record our dreams, I bet they'd be great works of art to share to others. That means even complete novices could share great works of art they've naturally created in their own minds.

Other Person's Response: Your attitude or mindset of believing you're this naturally gifted musician won't get you very far. Nobody can naturally create great music in their heads!

My Reply: I think such an attitude/mindset is something to be proud of because it's being your own boss or master in your own head. You get to be the awesome musician in your own head, and you don't have to study anything. Of course, you do have to learn things and undergo musical training if you wish to successfully convey the awesome music you hear in your head to others. But, in terms of creating awesome works of art in your head, you're the master and boss of that. You can be the natural professional!

Other Person's Response: Even if we could somehow record the works of art we naturally create in our minds, I don't think they'd be good works of art. You have to literally be an experienced professional to create good works of art in your head. That's not a natural ability an average person can have.

My Reply: Personally, I think they would be good works of art. Also, our mentally created works don't have to be the complex craft of an artistic mastermind to be something great. Even simple works of art can be great. When we naturally create works of art in our heads, sometimes, they can be complex crafts while, other times, they can be simple and great. That labyrinth I dreamed of would be an example of a complex, great work of art. But, the simple tunes I'm creating in my head would be an example of a simple work of art.

Other Person's Response: A work of art has to meet certain qualifications to be classified as "good", "awesome," or "great." I'm not sure if our dreams would classify as great works of art.

My Reply: If we were to record our dreams and have professional artists look at them, I bet they would meet these qualifications.

Other Person's Response: I don't have internet access. Even if I did, I’m not allowed to access certain websites. So, could you share the article right there?

My Reply:

The Music in You

(Written by Elizabeth Hellmuth Margulis)

You might not be a virtuoso, but you have remarkable musical abilities. You just don't know about them yet.

Twenty years ago, a pair of psychologists hooked up a shoe to a computer. They were trying to teach it to tap in time with a national anthem. However, the job was proving much tougher than anticipated. Just moving to beat-dominated music, they found, required a grasp of tonal organisation and musical structure that seemed beyond the reach of an ordinary person without special training. But how could that be? Any partygoer can fake a smile, reach for a cheese cube and tap her heel to an unfamiliar song without so much as a thought. Yet when the guy she’s been chatting with tells her that he’s a musician, she might reply: ‘Music? I don’t know anything about that.’

Maybe you’ve heard a variation on this theme: ‘I can’t carry a tune to save my life.’ Or: ‘I don’t have a musical bone in my body.’ Most of us end up making music publicly just a few times a year, when it’s someone’s birthday and the cake comes out. Privately, it’s a different story – we belt out tunes in the shower and create elaborate rhythm tracks on our steering wheel. But when we think about musical expertise, we tend to imagine professionals who specialise in performance, people we’d pay to hear. As for the rest of us, our bumbling, private efforts — rather than illustrating that we share an irresistible impulse to make music — seem only to demonstrate that we lack some essential musical capacity.

But the more psychologists investigate musicality, the more it seems that nearly all of us are musical experts, in quite a startling sense. The difference between a virtuoso performer and an ordinary music fan is much smaller than the gulf between that fan and someone with no musical knowledge at all. What’s more, a lot of the most interesting and substantial elements of musicality are things that we (nearly) all share. We aren’t talking about instinctive, inborn universals here. Our musical knowledge is learned, the product of long experience; maybe not years spent over an instrument, but a lifetime spent absorbing music from the open window of every passing car.

So why don’t we realise how much we know? And what does that hidden mass of knowledge tell us about the nature of music itself? The answers to these questions are just starting to fall into place.

The first is relatively simple. Much of our knowledge about music is implicit: it only emerges in behaviours that seem effortless, like clapping along to a beat or experiencing chills at the entry of a certain chord. And while we might not give a thought to the hidden cognitions that made these feats possible, psychologists and neuroscientists have begun to peek under the hood to discover just how much expertise these basic skills rely on. What they are discovering is that musicality emerges in ways that parallel the development of language. In particular, the capacity to respond to music and the ability to learn language rest upon an amazing piece of statistical machinery, one that keeps whirring away in the background of our minds, hidden from view.

Consider the situation of infants learning to segment the speech stream – that is, learning to break up the continuous babble around them into individual words. You can’t ask babies if they know where one word stops and a new one begins, but you can see this knowledge emerge in their responses to the world around them. They might, for example, start to shake their heads when you ask if they’d like squash.

To investigate how this kind of verbal knowledge takes shape, in 1996 the psychologists Jenny Saffran, Richard Aslin and Elissa Newport, then all at the University of Rochester in New York, came up with an ingenious experiment. They played infants strings of nonsense syllables – sound-sequences such as bidakupado. This stream of syllables was organised according to strict rules: da followed bi 100 per cent of the time, for example, but pa followed ku only a third of the time. These low-probability transitions were the only boundaries between ‘words’. There were no pauses or other distinguishing features to demarcate the units of sound.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

It has long been observed that eight-month-old infants attend reliably longer to stimuli that are new to them. The researchers ran a test that took advantage of this peculiar fact. After the babies had been exposed to this pseudolanguage for an extended period of time, the psychologists measured how long babies spent turning their heads toward three-syllable units drawn from the stream. The babies tended to listen only briefly to ‘words’ (units within which the probability of each syllabic transition had been 100 per cent) but to stare curiously in the direction of the ‘non-words’ (that is, units which included low-probability transitions). And since absolutely the only thing distinguishing words from non-words within this onslaught of gibberish was the transition probabilities from syllable to syllable, the infants’ reactions revealed that they had absorbed the statistical properties of the language.

This ability to track statistics about our environment without knowing we’re doing so turns out to be a general feature of human cognition. It is called statistical learning, and it is thought to underlie our earliest ability to understand what combinations of syllables count as words in the complex linguistic environment that surrounds us during infancy. What’s more, something similar seems to happen with music.

In 1999, the same authors, working with their colleague Elizabeth Johnson, demonstrated that infants and adults alike track the statistical properties of tone sequences. In other words, you don’t have to play the guitar or study music theory to build up a nuanced sense of which notes tend to follow which other notes in a particular repertoire: simply being exposed to music is enough. And just as a baby cannot describe her verbal learning process, only revealing her achievement by frowning at the word squash, the adult who has used statistical learning to make sense of music will reveal her knowledge expressively, clenching her teeth when a particularly fraught chord arises and relaxing when it resolves. She has acquired a deep, unconscious understanding of how chords relate to one another.

It’s easy to test out the basics of this acquired knowledge on your friends. Play someone a simple major scale, Do-Re-Mi-Fa-Sol-La-Ti, but withhold the final Do and watch even the most avowed musical ignoramus start to squirm or even finish the scale for you. Living in a culture where most music is built on this scale is enough to develop what seems less like the knowledge and more like the feeling that this Ti must resolve to a Do.

Psychologists such as Emmanuel Bigand of the University of Burgundy in France and Carol Lynne Krumhansl of Cornell University in New York have used more formal methods to demonstrate implicit knowledge of tonal structure. In experiments that asked people to rate how well individual tones fitted with an established context, people without any training demonstrated a robust feel for pitch that seemed to indicate a complex understanding of tonal theory. That might surprise most music majors at US universities, who often don’t learn to analyse and describe the tonal system until they get there, and struggle with it then. Yet what’s difficult is not understanding the tonal system itself – it’s making this knowledge explicit. We all know the basics of how pitches relate to each other in Western tonal systems; we simply don’t know that we know.

Studies in my lab at the University of Arkansas have shown that people without any special training can even hear a pause in music as either tense or relaxed, short or long, depending on the position of the preceding sounds within the governing tonality. In other words, our implicit understanding of tonal properties can infuse even moments of silence with musical power. And it’s worth emphasising that these seemingly natural responses arise after years of exposure to tonal music.

When people grow up in places where music is constructed out of different scales, they acquire similarly natural responses to quite different musical elements. Research I’ve done with Patrick Wong of Northwestern University in Illinois has demonstrated that people raised in households where they listen to music using different tonal systems (both Indian classical and Western classical music, for example) acquire a convincing kind of bi-musicality, without having played a note on a sitar or a violin. So strong is our proclivity for making sense of sound that mere listening is enough to build a deeply internalised mastery of the basic materials of whatever music surrounds us.

Other, subtler musical accomplishments also seem to be widespread in the population. By definition, hearing tonally means hearing pitches in reference to a central governing pitch, the tonic. Your fellow partygoers might start a round of Happy Birthday on one pitch this weekend and another pitch the next, and the reason both renditions sound like the same song is that each pitch is heard most saliently not in terms of its particular frequency, but in terms of how it relates to the pitches around it. As long as the pattern is the same, it doesn’t matter if the individual notes are different. This capacity to hear these patterns is called relative pitch.

Relative pitch is a commonplace skill, one that develops naturally on exposure to the ordinary musical environment. People tend to invest more prestige in absolute pitch, because it’s rare. Shared by approximately 1 in 10,000 people, absolute pitch is the ability to recognise not a note’s relations to its neighbours, but its approximate acoustic frequency. People with absolute or ‘perfect’ pitch can tell you that your vacuum cleaner buzzes on an F# or your doorbell starts ringing on a B. This can seem prodigious. And yet it turns out not to be so far from what the rest of us can do normally.

A number of studies have shown that many of the other 9,999 people retain some vestige of absolute pitch. The psychologists Andrea Halpern of Bucknell University in Pennsylvania and Daniel Levitin of McGill University in Quebec both independently demonstrated that people without special training tend to start familiar songs on or very near the correct note. When people start humming Hotel California, for example, they do it at pretty much the same pitch as the Eagles. Similarly, E Glenn Schellenberg and Sandra Trehub, psychologists at the University of Toronto, have shown that people without special training can distinguish the original versions of familiar TV theme songs from versions that have been transposed to start on a different pitch. ‘The Siiiiiimp-sons’ just doesn’t sound right any other way.

It looks, then, like pitch processing among ordinary people shares many qualities with those gifted 1-in-10,000. Furthermore, from a certain angle, relational hearing might be more crucial to our experience of music. Much of the expressive power of tonal music (a category that encompasses most of the music we hear) comes out of the phenomenological qualities – tension, relaxation, and so on – that pitches seem to possess when we hear them relationally.

Musical sensitivity depends on the ability to abstract away the surface characteristics of a pitch and hear it relationally, so that a B seems relaxed in one context but tense in another. So, perhaps the ‘only-prodigies-need-apply’ reputation of absolute pitch is undeserved at the same time that its more common relative is undervalued. Aspects of the former turn out to be shared by most everyday listeners, and relative pitch seems more critical to how we make sense of the expressive aspects of music.

Another vastly undervalued skill is just tapping along to a tune. When in 1994 Peter Desain of Radboud University in the Netherlands and Henkjan Honing of the University of Amsterdam hooked up a shoe to a computer, they found what many studies since have demonstrated: that to get a computer to find the beat in even something as plodding and steady as most national anthems you have to teach it some pretty sophisticated music theory.

For example, it has to recognise when phrases start and stop, and which count as repetitions of others, and it has to understand which pitches are more and less stable in the prevailing tonal context. Beats, which seem so real and evident when we’re tapping them out on the steering wheel or stomping them out on the dance floor, are just not physically present in any straightforward way in the acoustic signal.

So what is a beat, really? We experience each one as a specially accented moment separated from its neighbours by equal time intervals. Yet the musical surface is full of short notes and long notes, low notes and high notes, performed with the subtle variations in microtiming that are a hallmark of expressive performance. Out of this acoustic whirlwind, we generate a consistent and regular temporal structure that is powerful enough to make us want to move. Once we’ve grasped the pattern, we’re reluctant to let it go, even when accents in the music shift. It’s this tenacity that makes the special force of syncopation – off-beat accents – possible. If we simply shifted our perception of the beat to conform with the syncopation, it would just sound like a new set of downbeats rather than a tense and punchy contrary musical moment, but our minds stubbornly continue to impose a structure with which the new accents misalign.

In other words, perception of rhythm depends on a more general ability to synchronise with our surroundings. But this raises the question of why we might have such an ability in the first place. It seems telling that it emerges very early in parent-infant interactions. People tend to speak in specific ways to their babies: slowly, with exaggerated pitch contours, extra repetition, and regular timing (‘so big… so big… sooooooo big’). All of these are more typical of music than in ordinary speech. And it seems that these modifications help infants to engage predictively with the speech stream, anticipating what’s going to happen next, and ultimately to insert their coo or eyebrow lift at precisely the right moment to generate a sense of shared temporal orientation between parent and child, an experience that contributes to the powerful bond between them.

Music piggybacks on this ability, using it to choreograph experiences of shared temporal attention, sometimes among large groups of people. Experiences at concerts, dance clubs and religious services where lots of people move together to a beat often create a powerful sense of bonding. When music allows us to perceive time in a shared way, we sense our commonality with others more strongly.

And so the capacity to track a beat, which might seem trivial on first glance, in fact serves a larger and more significant social capacity: our ability to attend jointly in time with other people. When we feel in sync with partners, as reflected in dancing, grooving, smooth conversational turn-taking and movements aligned to the same temporal grid, we report these interactions as more satisfying and the relationships as more significant. The origins of the ability to experience communion and connection through music might lie in our very earliest social experiences, and not involve a guitar or fiddle at all.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

It has often been observed that there is a special connection between music and memory. This is what allows a song such as Tom Lehrer’s The Elements (1959) to teach children the periodic table better than many chemistry courses. You don’t need to have any special training to benefit from the memory boost conferred by setting a text to music – it just works, because it’s taking advantage of your own hidden musical abilities and inclinations. Music can also absorb elements of autobiographical memory – that’s why you burst into tears in the grocery store when you hear the song that was playing when you broke up with your boyfriend. Music soaks up all kinds of memories, without us being aware of what’s happening.

What’s less well-known is that the relationship goes both ways: memory also indexes music with astonishing effectiveness. We can flip through a radio dial or playlist at high speed, almost immediately recognising whether we like what’s playing or not. In 2010, the musicologist Robert Gjerdingen of Northwestern University in Illinois showed that snippets under 400 milliseconds – literally the blink of an eye – can be sufficient for people to identify a song’s genre (whether it’s rap, country or jazz), and last year Krumhansl showed that snippets of similar length can be sufficient for people to identify an exact song (whether it’s Public Enemy’s Fight the Power or Billy Ray Cyrus’s Achy Breaky Heart). That isn’t long enough for distinctive aspects of a melody or theme to emerge; people seem to be relying on a robust and detailed representation of particular textures and timbral configurations – elements we might be very surprised to learn we’d filed away. And yet we can retrieve them almost instantly.

That fact becomes both more and less amazing when you consider just how steeped in music we all are. If all the exposure in elevators and cafés and cars and televisions and kitchen radios was put together, the average person listens to several hours of music every day. Even when it isn’t playing, music continues in our minds – more than 90 per cent of us report being gripped by a stubborn earworm at least once a week. People list their musical tastes on dating websites, using them as a proxy for their values and social affiliations. They travel amazing distances to hear their favourite band. The majority of listeners have experienced chills in response to music: actual physical symptoms. And if you add some soaring strings to an otherwise ordinary scene in a film, it might bring even the hardiest of us to tears.

So, the next time you’re tempted to claim you don’t know anything about music, pause to consider the substantial expertise you’ve acquired simply through a lifetime of exposure. Think about the many ways this knowledge manifests itself: in your ability to pick out a playlist, or get pumped up by a favourite gym song, or clap along at a performance. Just as you can hold your own in a conversation even if you don’t know how to diagram a sentence, you have an implicit understanding of music even if you don’t know a submediant from a subdominant.

In fact, for all its remarkable power, music is in good company here. Many of our most fundamental behaviours and modes of understanding are governed by similarly implicit processes. We don’t know how we come to like certain people more than others; we don’t know how we develop a sense of the goals that define our lives; we don’t know why we fall in love; yet in the very act of making these choices we reveal the effects of a host of subterranean mental processes. The fact that these responses seem so natural and normal actually speaks to their strength and universality.

When we acknowledge how, just by living and listening, we have all acquired deep musical knowledge, we must also recognise that music is not the special purview of professionals. Rather, music professionals owe their existence to the fact that we, too, are musical. Without that profound shared understanding, music would have no power to move us.

Other Person's Response: Do you have the natural ability to pick up on the beat of a song?

My Reply: I don't think I do.

Other Person's Response: Then what makes you think you have the ability to naturally create great music in your head?

My Reply: Because other natural abilities can still remain intact, even though other ones are absent. So, even though I might not have certain natural musical abilities, such as picking up on the beat of a song, I still might have the natural ability to create great music in my head.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you really do have the natural ability to pick up on the beat of a song, and that ability is just turned off, since you have no interest in grooving to a song.

My Reply: That could be so. When I listen to music, I do feel powerful and profound emotions. But, I don't groove to music. Also, I'm able to naturally create a beat for my melodies. So, maybe you're right.

Other Person's Response: According to you, we should all have a musical talent, since we can all naturally create great music in our heads.

My Reply: Correct. However, some people require dreams and drug trips to naturally create great works of art in their heads, since they can't do it in their daily life. Maybe they just need to awaken the ability to do it in their normal, daily life. I think I have because I'm naturally creating great music in my head without the need for drug trips or dreams to pull it off.

Other Person's Response: Try to come up with an idea pertaining to any given subject while having no knowledge and experience in that subject. You might think your ideas are great and meaningful. But, I dare you to share them to people experienced in these fields, and they'll tell you your ideas are nonsense. Whatever musical tunes you're inspired to create in your head will also be nonsense because you have no understanding of music theory. Your melodies will be nothing great, they'll be rubbish, and they'll make no musical sense.

My Reply: Well, I'm able to naturally speak the English language, and the things I say make sense to others, and convey powerful meaning. So, why couldn't I naturally create music in my head that also makes sense, and conveys powerful meaning? Statistical learning allows us to naturally create great ideas and works of art in our heads. But, things our brains haven't naturally learned would only render us without that natural gift. When you talk about coming up with nonsensical ideas, you'd be talking about a situation where our brains haven't learned something.

Other Person's Response: To be good at anything, that requires study and practice. Creating great works of art in our minds is no exception.

My Reply: It's obvious to me, at least, that our brains are naturally capable of creating great works of art and melodies in our heads. If you casually said the phrase: "I went to the store today," that would be an average melody because you could translate that spoken phrase into a melody. If you said or sung that same phrase differently, but with power and greatness, it would very likely be a great melody, and not just some average melody.

So, you could either say/sing that phrase in your mind in the most basic, bland way, or you could naturally say/sing it in a whole new way that makes it a great melody. When you come up with average, lame melodies, that's just your "average joe" within you speaking. But, when you bring out that awesome artist that naturally dwells within you, that's like your inner god speaking or singing an awesome melody. Of course, other people might not understand the awesome melodies you're trying to convey, and they might think they're awful.

That's why you must learn how to convey their power and greatness. Conveying a basic, lame melody would yield a meaningful melody to other listeners. But, it wouldn't be that good of a melody. As for my melodies, I don't think they're lame or awful. Once I convey them, you should realize they were awesome melodies all along. I'm just no good at conveying my melodies at this point, and that's why I must improve as an artist, so I can convey them.

Other Person's Response: All those tunes you've posted up there are utter ****! Can't you make a better tune?

My Reply: There's this one tune I've recently made that you'll hopefully like. It's one of those naturally inspired tunes, where I just create whatever melodies come to mind. In this packet, I claim people can naturally create good music in their heads, having no knowledge and experience whatsoever in composing. I think I'm naturally creating good music from within and, when you look at this recent melody I've made on the music sheet, you'll definitely see a pattern. This is the melody my mind has naturally created for me and, as it turns out, there's an actual pattern with the notes.

So, clearly, my mind is naturally creating a pattern of notes without even thinking. If my mind can do that, then why couldn't it naturally create good music? Anyway, in regards to this recent melody of mine, it's supposed to be a strange melody. It conveys a weird scene. Not something big and epic, such as a strange scene in a horror movie. But, something like a mouse doing something strange (i.e. a more trivial scene). I think it's a good, catchy melody. But, it's not an amazing, powerful melody. When you listen to it, you first hear the beat, and then, the melody along with the beat. So, here are the links to it:

Youtube Link:

Soundcloud Link:

StrangeMelody

Music Sheet (I circle the pattern of notes I see):

Strange-Melody

Other Person's Response: Why are you just sharing short tunes? Why not share to us full songs?

My Reply: Well, if the tunes I make are awful, and people aren't liking them, then it's a waste of time and effort to make a full song because the full song might be just as awful. If my tunes are rubbish, then my songs might be rubbish. So, I'm just sharing my tunes for now, and seeing how people respond to them.

Other Person's Response: I'd like to hear another new tune. This time, make it an awesome one, because I don't like hearing **** music!

My Reply: This new tune I've made, to me, conveys a scene that's heavy, dark, and ominous. I think it's like one of those awesome, ominous tunes you hear in video games. Again, this is just a short tune (a short example) I'm sharing for now. I'm not sharing full themes or songs yet. Every time I listen to this tune, it conveys that ominous vibe to me. That's an emotional memory my mind has in regards to this tune. If I lose that memory, then I'd perhaps hear this tune as meaningless rubbish.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

It would be like listening to a child pluck out a random tune on an instrument. That's why I must have that memory intact, so I know the ominous power that I'm supposed to eventually convey to the audience. Without that memory, then the tune just becomes a rubbish tune from my perspective. It becomes stripped of that awesome, ominous power. So, by having this emotional memory intact, I retain knowledge of the great, ominous power this tune really has.

Only I have this memory. Since others don't have this memory, then they'll hear the tune as meaningless rubbish when they listen to it. But, I'm the musical artist here creating great tunes, and people just don't realize they're great yet. They hear them as meaningless rubbish for now. But, I have to find a way to bring out the greatness of my tunes, so that the audience realizes the power and greatness they really have. Anyway, here's this new tune. Hopefully, there will be people who'll hear this tune as awesome and ominous:

Youtube Link:

Soundcloud Link:

NewDarkTune

Music Sheet:

New-Dark-Tune-1

Other Person's Response: How would you lose that emotional memory?

My Reply: If it's a short term memory, then my brain would lose it. But, if it becomes a long term memory, my brain retains the memory. These emotional memories I have in regards to all my tunes were once short term memories. That means I lost them, and heard my tunes as meaningless rubbish when I listened to them. Fortunately, they're now long term memories, since I've managed to bring those short term memories back. By focusing very hard when listening to my tunes, I've managed to bring back those memories I've lost. So, the only thing that can take away these long term memories would be something, such as brain damage, or Alzheimer's disease.

Other Person's Response: These memories are probably nothing more than you thinking your tunes are great and convey certain awesome scenes, when they're really rubbish tunes. I think you were hearing your tunes for what they really were when you lost those memories. You heard them as meaningless rubbish, and that's what they'll always be. There's no power and greatness whatsoever to these tunes that has yet to be conveyed to the audience.

My Reply: I don't agree. It seems absolutely compelling to me that these tunes are great, and convey the scenes I describe. I just have to find a way to bring out that power and greatness to other listeners.

Other Person's Response: The brain works by a process known as conditioning. When you have a certain inspiration (such as the inspiration to create a dark, awesome tune in your head), that inspiration gets combined (conditioned) with whatever tune you create. In other words, your brain confuses the inspiration with the tune itself, and thinks they're the same thing. Therefore, your brain thinks the tune you made actually has that dark, awesome power you've been inspired by, when it's really just a rubbish tune that expresses no given scene. Basically, your mind is just playing tricks on you. It's making you see power and greatness that's not even there.

My Reply: I'm not sure if this is true.

Other Person's Response: You say there's power and greatness lurking in the shadows that you have to convey to the audience. Perhaps you're just thinking there's a ghost in the shadows, and it's your imagination playing tricks on you. Maybe there was no power and greatness ever there.

My Reply: I really don't know. To me, it really seems like it's there.

Other Person's Response: When you lose those emotional memories, and hear your tunes as meaningless rubbish, is that the same thing as saying you hear them as noise, and nothing more?

My Reply: Yes. The tunes just become sound. They convey no scene, moment, or character.

Other Person's Response: If you do lose those memories, couldn't you just read the described scenes of your tunes, and that be enough to bring those memories back when you listen to those tunes? Shouldn't that remind you, and allow you to hear your tunes as great, awesome, and powerful again?

My Reply: No. That's because it's not the type of memory where someone forgets something he's written, and just has to go back and read it again to remind himself. What I'm talking about here is an emotional memory. So, even if I did read the described scenes of my tunes while listening to them, I'd still hear them as meaningless rubbish. It's only me having those emotional memories intact that allows me to hear my tunes as awesome, powerful, great, and conveying of certain scenes. So, reading the awesome or powerful scenes I described for my tunes isn't enough for me to actually hear my tunes as expressing those scenes.

Other Person's Response: Maybe the real melodies you have in your mind are awesome and catchy. You have memories of those melodies in your mind. But, you might be inaccurately transcribing those melodies. So, when you lose those memories, and listen to your inaccurately transcribed melodies, they sound like meaningless rubbish, since that's what they are. From there, you try to bring back those memories by listening to these melodies.

You're trying to remember what the real, awesome, catchy melodies were by listening to the inaccurately transcribed melodies, and you manage to do so. So, when you listen to those inaccurately transcribed melodies again, having brought back those memories, you hear them as the awesome, catchy ones in your mind, even though the melodies in your mind, and the transcribed ones, don't match up.

My Reply: Yes, that might be what's going on here. But, maybe, if I were to accurately transcribe the melodies in my mind, I'd automatically hear them as awesome and catchy, even when I don't have those memories. Other people might hear them as awesome and catchy as well. I thought I was accurately transcribing the melodies in my mind. But, I might not be. After all, I'm not very skilled at transcribing what I have in my mind, whether it be drawings, or melodies.

Other Person's Response: I heard you say earlier that, during your miserable moments, you even perceive great and beautiful works of art as meaningless, and conveying of no scene or character. So, when you perceive your melodies as meaningless, and conveying of no scene or character, is it because you're miserable?

My Reply: If I were to lose those emotional memories, then I'd still perceive my melodies as meaningless, even when I'm happy, and no longer miserable. Actually, I'm not sure I'd even describe them as emotional memories, since I think they're simply memories of awesome melodies I've created in my mind. When I lose those memories, and listen to the inaccurately transcribed version of these melodies, I hear them as meaningless, rubbish melodies, since that's what they really are. They're nothing awesome like the melodies I've had in my mind.

Other Person's Response: You see, Matt the Fraud, people who compose music that other people may want to listen to don't write whopping great treatises about what they're going to do. They simply get on with it. However, having heard bits and bobs of your previous attempts, I'd strongly advise you to take up gardening.

My Reply: First of all, I'm not trying to fraud anybody. I give all the reasons why I think these tunes I hear in my mind really are great, and catchy. Second, I haven't been feeling up to composing yet, due to my miserable, unhappy struggles. Therefore, I've instead chosen to write about my composing dream in the meantime until I feel up to learning how to compose. Lastly, my tunes might very well sound awful, and that is to be expected at this point.

Other Person's Response: It seems to me you really are trying to fraud people. Why else would you write this whole packet?

My Reply: It's because I have problems with the personal views of other people, and I feel the need to speak up for myself, and to thoroughly address said issues. I have an issue with other people who claim that my emotions aren't the source of value in my life. So, that's why I've written so many of my other packets, which talk about how emotions are value judgments.

I also have an issue with people who have unreasonably high standards when it comes to works of art, whether said works be comedy, music, or anything else. So, that's why I've written this whole packet. I also just wish to share everything that's on my mind regarding my composing dream. It would be like how someone wishes to write every single thing that's on his mind in his journal, and share it.

Other Person's Response: You said you were going to learn how to compose many years ago. Yet, here you are, still coming up with these horrendous tunes. From this, I can conclude you're too lazy to learn, and have no talent. So, you're better off just giving up.

My Reply: That's not it. I've struggled much of my life with many miserable moments, and that's why I've not even bothered learning. I can't stand doing my hobbies without my positive emotions, which is why I don't even bother.

Now, it's just a matter of time waiting for me to fully recover from this recent emotional trauma I've had. I'm doing just fine now, and have to wait a little bit longer for my positive emotions to return back to me on their own.

Once they do, then I'll start learning how to compose, since I'd be able to have fun, and enjoy the whole process. I personally don't think any conclusions as to whether my musical claims are true or not should be drawn, when I haven't even gotten the chance to make any awesome music yet.

Other Person's Response: You're 30 years old. That's a bit late to begin learning how to compose. Why the delay?

My Reply: There are two reasons why. The 1st would be that composing wasn't something I took up until later on in my life. The 2nd would be that I've struggled much of my life with many miserable moments. It was a cycle I was in, and I've finally broken free of that cycle. Now that I'm no longer miserable, and almost have my positive emotions back to me, I'll soon be ready to learn how to compose. I don't think I'll have anymore of those miserable moments again.

Other Person's Response: I bet, even if you fully regained your positive emotions, you still wouldn't dedicate much time to learning how to compose, and you still wouldn't go through with your composing dream.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

My Reply: That's false. Once I have my positive emotions, then I'd be fully dedicated to achieving my goal. I'd dedicate many hours each day. I used to do this with my previous hobby (which was playing video games). As long as I could have fun and enjoy them, then I'd play them for many hours each day. But, when I struggle with misery, then I don't even bother with them.

Other Person's Response: What's your update or status now?

My Reply: I've had an emotional crisis, and I'm all better now. My mind was stuck on some traumatizing worry for quite some time, and that rendered me without my feelings of happiness and joy. I was in a very horrible, unhealthy state of mind, and my life and hobbies were nothing beautiful, or worth living for. Now that I'm all better, I wish to go back to composing. I've abandoned it for quite some time, due to my miserable struggles and, now, I'm ready to go back to it.

My goal in making music is to create melodies, themes, and songs other people would love to listen to. I don't want to be making music I just think is great. I wish to express myself as an artist, which means I want to make music that's both great, and expresses whatever it is I wish to express. So far, I know I'm not making any good music for others because so many people online have told me my music is rubbish, and doesn't express anything I described.

I'm undecided as to whether I'm creating great music in my head, and I'm just bad at transcribing it. Or, if my mentally created music really is bad. It seems absolutely compelling to me that the music I hear in my head is great, and expresses what I describe. Anyway, I hope I'm able to create the awesome music I want to create in the real, physical world. This is a goal I wish to achieve, and I don't think I'm going to have anymore miserable moments stopping me from achieving this goal.

Other Person's Response: Is it possible your melodies have been accurately transcribed, but something more is necessary to convey their power and greatness?

My Reply: That could be.

Other Person's Response: When you talk about fully crafting any accurately transcribed melodies you make in order to convey their power and greatness, do you mean adding in all the proper chords, harmony, etc.?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: When you talk about conveying the power and greatness of your melodies, you're talking about the ones in your mind, accurately transcribed, right? Because you said earlier that you might not be accurately transcribing what you hear in your head right now. So, you're not talking about the melodies you've presented in this packet, since they're poorly transcribed?

My Reply: That's correct. But, who knows, maybe I did accurately transcribe some of the tunes I hear in my head.

Other Person's Response: Have you shared your tunes to other people, and have they told you your tunes are gibberish?

My Reply: Yes. What makes it frustrating is that I already perceive these tunes as amazing and catchy, since I know what they are. This perception makes it seem quite obvious that others should perceive them the way I do. That's why it becomes frustrating when I go and share them to other people, and they say it's awful, incoherent, gibberish.

I think this is the same issue I have when writing essays, and things on forums. I already know the message I'm trying to convey, and the message is quite obvious to me, since I already know what it is. But, other people don't get that message, and they say to me that my writing is awful, incoherent, gibberish.

I think I just need to improve both as a writer, and as a composer, in order to successfully convey my message. But, like I said before, composing is what I wish to learn and improve on. I don't wish to be a skilled writer, since that's not my goal in life. As long as I don't improve, then other people might not get my message/music at all, or they'll perceive a completely different message/tune that I never intended.

Other Person's Response: If your music is good enough in your eyes, then why care what anyone else thinks?

My Reply: My whole goal in composing is to share music that other people would really love. But, I suspect people are having too high of a standard, which would prevent them from appreciating the greatness and catchiness of any fully crafted tunes I'd share in the future. Therefore, I'm asking others to lower their standards, so they can appreciate my tunes. I think such a lowered standard is a reasonable standard.

Other Person's Response: Is there any amazing work of art you can instinctively craft in your mind besides good music?

My Reply: Yes. I can come with awesome fighting moves in my mind. I can imagine 2 characters fighting, and performing awesome, complex moves. These are moves better than what the average person would come up with. Since I've played video games and watched anime my whole life, where characters fight, then I instinctively know how to create skilled moves in my mind, just like I instinctively know how to speak the English language.

Of course, if I tried to convey these moves to you by any means, such as performing them myself, or creating them on some type of animation software of 2 stick figures fighting, I bet people would tell me these moves are awful, and/or that they just don't understand these moves. This is because I don't have the necessary animation skill, or physical fighting skill, to successfully convey them. But, I'm a skilled fighter mentally. The thing is, I wish to convey the music I hear in my mind, and not any fighting moves, or any visual art I create in my mind.

In other words, music is my passion, and that's what I'm going for. Now, even if I did successfully convey these moves I have in my mind, it doesn't have to be the greatest martial arts display in order for it to be considered talent, or something great. As long as these moves are significantly better than what an average person would come up with, then I consider that to be talent, and greatness.

For example, the average person might have one character simply beating another character's face back and forth, or having one character simply keep on throwing energy blasts. In other words, think of the average moves a child, or a young teenager, would come up with, who knows nothing about martial arts. As for me, I'd create moves that make a much better work of art. They'd be sophisticated moves.

Other Person's Response: So, according to you, any work of art that's significantly better than what an average person would come up with (such as your martial arts example) is talent and greatness?

My Reply: Yes. That's why I consider the comedy scenes I make to be talent and greatness, despite the fact they're not the best comedy scenes in the world. I personally think my last comedy scene is the best of them all in this packet. You see certain comedy scenes in cartoons and anime, and, even though they're not the best in the world, they're still great, since they're better than what the average person could come up with. The same idea applies to my comedy scenes.

Other Person's Response: Another example would be very short, nursery rhymes. They're melodies better than what the average, educated composer would come up with. Yet, they're still great and memorable.

My Reply: Yes. Any given work of art, even if it's very simple, can be great and memorable, as long as it's something significantly better than what the average person would come up with.

Other Person's Response: Do you think any fully crafted tunes will turn out to be much better than your comedy scenes?

My Reply: Yes. Even my best comedy scenes.

Other Person's Response: Maybe that Dark Tune will become amazing, powerful, and will convey what you describe once you fully craft it. In its current stage, there's no way the tune is going to achieve its intended goal. However, even if you do fully craft it, and it's said to be not that great, and conveying something else, then maybe your assessment of your tunes is off. In other words, what you think your tunes convey, and your judgment that they're awesome, powerful, and amazing, would be an assessment that doesn't match up with reality.

My Reply: Again, that would be quite frustrating if it's the latter. If it's the latter, then I'd somehow have to fix my way of assessing my tunes. I wish to see my tunes for what they really are, rather than deluding myself into thinking they're amazing, and conveying the scenes or characters I describe.

If I could know what my tunes actually convey, and if they're that great or not, then that would give me a major advantage, since I'd know if other people would think they're awesome, great, and convey what I describe. Otherwise, I'd be all alone, and I'd be the only one who sees his music as great, and conveying of certain scenes.

Other Person's Response: I agree that your assessments are off.

My Reply: Here's the thing though. I can give an accurate assessment of any given song. For example, if someone were to present to me a song or tune by Michael Jackson, I'd be able to describe the power, personality, and emotion it conveys. So, why can't I give an accurate assessment of music I create in my head? I conclude that, since I can give an accurate assessment in regards to other tunes and songs, that my assessment of these melodies in my mind is also an accurate assessment.

Other Person's Response: What about reversed songs? Do they convey certain scenes?

My Reply: Yes. When I reverse some songs, they convey certain meanings to me, and are catchy. Some songs I reverse don't convey anything to me. They just sound like stuff being played backwards. Take note that I'm not talking about reversed lyrics here. I'm talking about the reversed series of notes and rests in a song, and what emotion it conveys.

Most people reverse songs to make out what words they think they hear when they listen to reversed lyrics. But, I reverse songs to see what emotion music conveys. I'm just concerned with the power and meaning music itself conveys. Yes, lyrics are important. But, I'm just not concerned with lyrics. Anyway, I'll give you an example of how a reversed song does convey a certain emotion.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

This song doesn't have lyrics to it. It's called "The Ballad of the Goddess." Even though it's the song Zelda's Lullaby played backwards, it still conveys meaning. It conveys powerful heroism, such as a hero embarking on a journey. It's not just Zelda's Lullaby played backwards. It's done in such a way that the notes sound like they're playing forward, rather than having notes that sound like they've been reversed. This is called "retrograding." Here's the youtube link to this song:

Now that you know reversed songs can convey certain emotions, I'm going to share to you a song I reversed, and made my own personal story out of. It's the song "Let It Rock" reversed. Again, forget about the reversed lyrics because that's not my focus here. Instead, focus on the emotion of this reversed song, and the scenes I've chosen for it. Yes, do focus on the singing because the singing involves the series of notes being sung. But, just forget about the reversed lyrics.

As for the scenes I've chosen, they've been taken from a Sonic the Hedgehog video, and I personally think they match the song. I slow some scenes down so the story matches with the music. When you first hear the reversed song, the vibe I get from it is something you'd hear before the chorus arrives. When you first hear songs play, it's the beginning of the song to prepare the listener for the chorus.

The chorus conveys intense emotion, and the song has to lead up to that. Sonic the Hedgehog is preparing to transform into his super form in this video, which is why I have that part of the song match this scene. I think this portion of the song also really does express a character preparing to transform. Not in a cinematic way. But, in a very cool way, since that's the vibe it conveys to me.

Then the intense part of the song (the chorus) arrives. This part, to me, conveys something awesome, powerful, and dangerous. It expresses a character going through an intense mode of unleashing power, and that's why I have the scene of Sonic transforming match this part of the song. The reversed chorus is unlike the forward version because the forward version doesn't convey that emotion. The forward version makes people want to dance, and have a fun time.

After Sonic transforms into his super form, I then have the next part of the song match the next scene. The next part of the song is a bit more settled down, which is why I have the scene of Sonic standing in his super form match this part of the song. After that, I have the next scene match the next part of the song. The next part of the song conveys something awesome, lethal, serious, and dangerous.

It's not like the chorus because the chorus conveyed powerful emotion. The scene that's used to match this part of the song would be Super Sonic unleashing his lethal moves upon a character. So, there you have it. There's my assessment of the reversed song Let It Rock. It's not the full song reversed though. I just gave you a small example. One might say my assessment is way off, and it could very well be.

If that's the case, then it would be an irrational assessment, and I'd have to find a way to rationally assess somehow. Or, maybe, my assessment was right all along, and the notes of the reversed song have to be retrograded in order for that emotion I described to be conveyed. It could also be the case I'm envisioning the reversed song being played in a different key to convey the serious, awesome, dangerous emotion I described.

Here's the link to the Sonic video with the reversed Let It Rock song:

Other Person's Response: You must be a crazy person if you think that reversed Let It Rock song conveys what you described.

My Reply: Not crazy. Just irrational if my assessment is wrong. There's a big difference between someone who's crazy, and someone who's using irrational assessments.

Other Person's Response: Could you give me a link that shows me the Ballad of the Goddess is Zelda's Lullaby played backwards?

My Reply: Sure. Also, I was wrong when I said the song had no lyrics:

Ballad of the Goddess

Other Person's Response: I found your assessment of the reversed Let It Rock to be quite interesting! Do you have another song as an example?

My Reply: Yes. It would be the song "Love Is A Battlefield" by Pat Benatar. I don't have actual video scenes to go along with it. So, I'll just describe the scenes that this reversed song conveys to me. Here's the link to it:

Starting from 0:02-0:14 in this video, this would just be the intro. Then, from 0:15-0:31, this conveys something settled. It would be like something slowly creeping up. Think of a person standing there, and something's about to happen. It doesn't sound cinematic, like something you'd hear in a movie though. It's different than that.

Then, starting from 0:32, this is a moment of shock where the person looks, and notices some demonic creature about to grab him. The tension rises as the song leads into the chorus starting from 0:40-1:17. The chorus conveys something dramatic and horrific, as the person is being dragged to hell, screaming.

Again, in regards to the scenes I'm describing, don't think of anything cinematic because the emotion this reversed song conveys is entirely different than the type of emotion conveyed by cinematic music. Think of it as the song Love Is A Battlefield taking on the essence of pure horror. The same idea applies to the song Let It Rock reversed.

Think of it as that song taking on the form of something awesome and dangerous. As you can see, when you reverse songs, they take on a whole new essence, since they become whole new songs. Anyway, the reversed chorus of this song conveys even more dramatic horror than famous horror music. It's in a league of its own. Pat Benatar yells while she's singing the chorus, and that really adds to the dramatic horror.

Then, from 1:17-2:02, it sounds settled and ominous. Then, from 2:03-2:36, it sounds like something evil is brewing. That's all the scenes I'll describe of this song because you get the idea. If anyone disagrees with my assessment of this reversed song, then, again, maybe I'm envisioning the reversed song in a different key, which would convey the scenes/emotion I described.

Other Person's Response: Here's a novel idea. Why not just listen to the songs the way they were meant to be heard? Incidentally, the key of a piece of music doesn't change, simply because you're playing it backwards. If, however, you change the speed it is played at, then it does. Does a movie make any sense if you watch it backwards? No. Neither does music. Stop wasting time with this reverse rubbish. Rather, invest the time listening to music naturally. It's a lot more fun, and a lot more rewarding.

My Reply: I know the piece does not change key simply because you play it backwards. I said I was perhaps envisioning the song being played backwards in a different key to convey the scenes/emotion I described. I also said earlier that songs played backwards do make sense, and do convey emotions and scenes. An example I gave was the Ballad of the Goddess, which is actually Zelda's Lullaby reversed. As you can see, a reversed song can become a whole new song that does tell a story that makes sense.

Other Person's Response: Simply changing the key of a song doesn't mean it's going to convey the scenes you describe. Even if you did change the key of those reversed songs, it still wouldn't convey what you described.

My Reply: I realize that. I think it's a combination of what key the reversed song is in AND what the reversed series of notes and rests are. That's what will convey the scenes I described, and I think the reversed series of notes/rests, as they are, do convey those scenes. Actually, there's another thing that's needed to convey the scenes I described, and I explain it soon enough because just having a reversed song in the right key isn't enough to convey something meaningful to the audience.

Other Person's Response: Those reversed songs you've posted are meaningless, and don't convey anything. They were meant to be listened to in their forward version. Since you're projecting meaning upon meaningless music, then maybe you're also projecting meaning upon meaningless, rubbish tunes you're making in your head.

Many people make certain connections with music. They connect certain emotion, power, and scenes with music they hear. Some connections make sense, while others are irrational. The connection you've made with those reversed songs is irrational. The same thing applies to the connection you're making with those tunes you've created in your mind.

My Reply: I don't think that's the case.

Other Person's Response: Many human beings just aren't wired rationally. Hence the reason why you have many religious believers who believe in religious nonsense. I think the same thing applies to you because you believe this nonsense that these tunes in your head convey certain meanings, and that those reversed songs you've put up convey certain scenes as well.

My Reply: I'm open-minded towards that possibility. But, I don't think that's the case.

Other Person's Response: A 'song' is something that's sung with (hopefully) intelligent and meaningful lyrics. Lyrics played backwards don't become words and, therefore, can't be a song. In fact, the whole thing just becomes a complete mess. All music has three elements - melody, harmony, and rhythm. If you distort one of these, you're just creating sonic soup that's a complete waste of time. Just because you can do things with technology doesn't mean it's worthwhile. To me, it just sounds stupid. But, hey, do whatever you want.

My Reply: I wasn't talking about the lyrics though. I was talking about the scenes music itself conveys when reversed. I mean, since the reversed Zelda's Lullaby is an actual theme in Zelda, and it conveys meaning, then why can't other songs convey meaning and scenes once they're reversed?

Other Person's Response: Yes, the reversed Zelda's Lullaby does convey meaning. But, I don't think those reversed songs you've pointed out do.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

My Reply: If anyone has never heard the Ballad of the Goddess, and simply reversed Zelda's Lullaby, they might say the reversed Zelda's Lullaby is a meaningless tune that doesn't convey anything. But, once they listen to the Ballad of the Goddess, they'd say it conveys something powerful, such as a hero embarking on a journey.

My point is, I think Zelda's Lullaby has not only been reversed, but recreated in such a way that it conveys something powerful and meaningful. Koji Kondo (the composer for Zelda) might've reversed the melody himself, and saw the power and greatness of this reversed melody that other people couldn't see.

Thus, that's why he made it into the Ballad of the Goddess. If I never listened to the Ballad of the Goddess, and I reversed Zelda's Lullaby, I might also see the power that this reversed melody conveys that other people just can't see. This is because I have an artistic mind that's able to see that.

The same thing applies to those reversed songs I've posted up there. I'm able to see the power and scenes these reversed songs convey that other people just can't see. So, I don't think reversing a song, or melody, is enough to convey something meaningful to the audience; you must recreate the song or melody, too.

Other Person's Response: You're basically applying the same argument you've made for your tunes in your head to those reversed songs. You're saying that you're seeing something great and awesome that other people just can't see, and that you'd have to convey that to the audience.

My Reply: Correct. Not only must I find a way to convey the power and greatness of these melodies in my mind, but I'd also have to convey the power and greatness of those reversed songs, too. Otherwise, the audience would continue to remain blind and in denial to said power and greatness.

Other Person's Response: You said earlier you were blind to many truths. I think you're also blind to the fact that those reversed songs don't convey what you described at all, and neither do the tunes in your head.

My Reply: I may be blind to many truths. But, there are certain truths I'm not blind to. One of these truths would be that my positive emotions really are the perception/experience of beauty in my life. I know this from my own personal experience. Another truth I'm not blind to would be my claim that those reversed songs, and the tunes in my head, convey what I described. These are truths I know that the world is currently blind to.

Other Person's Response: If a person thinks there's a ghost, he must ask himself if there really is a ghost, or if it's his imagination playing tricks on him. Likewise, when you think there's certain power and meaning to those tunes in your head, and to those reversed songs, you must ask yourself if that power and meaning is actually there, and has yet to be conveyed to the audience, or if it's just your imagination playing tricks on you.

My Reply: That's a good question, and I find myself wondering what the real answer is.

Other Person's Response: If a person knows how reality works, and learns there's no such thing as ghosts, leprechauns, or fairies, then he'll no longer think those things exist. Likewise, when you learn how music works, you'll no longer think those melodies in your mind have power and meaning to them. Neither will you think those reversed songs have power and meaning to them.

My Reply: You could be right.

Other Person's Response: You say you might have to change the key of those reversed songs, so they convey what you say they convey. I think the best thing you can do is to instead change the chords because changing the key doesn't really work out too well. For example, changing the major key of a song to a minor key makes things sound a little "off."

My Reply: Maybe I'd have to do that instead.

Other Person’s Response: There’s a technique known as “retrograde,” which would be reversing the series of notes in a melody or song. Composers use this technique many times. An example of a composer who used this technique would be Koji Kondo (the composer for famous video games, such as the Legend of Zelda, Super Mario, etc.). A portion of his Ballad of the Goddess theme would be a retrograded portion of his Zelda’s Lullaby theme, as you mentioned earlier.

If utilizing this technique just resulted in meaningless, random, nonsensical, rubbish melodies, then Koji wouldn’t have used it. This says that reversed melodies aren’t meaningless rubbish. So, you might be correct when you say those songs you’ve reversed do convey meaningful scenes, and that the reason why people hear them as meaningless rubbish is because reversing a melody or song isn’t enough to convey something meaningful to the audience. Something more is needed to convey their meaning.

My Reply: Right. So, I might be the one who’s able to hear those reversed songs as meaningful because that’s my meaningful vision in regards to these reversed songs. I must find a way to somehow convey that vision to the audience. I’m quite sure if Koji simply reversed a portion of his Zelda’s Lullaby theme, that the audience would hear it as meaningless rubbish. So, Koji had a meaningful vision in regards to a portion of Zelda’s Lullaby he reversed, and he somehow conveyed that vision to the audience. That’s the reason why so many people love that retrograded portion, and don’t think it’s meaningless rubbish.

Other Person’s Response: So, you think horrific, dramatic scenes are conveyed by the reversed series of notes in the reversed “Love Is A Battlefield” song by Pat Benatar? You think you must somehow convey this horror and drama to the audience? Otherwise, when people listen to this reversed song, they’ll just hear it as “stuff being played backwards” (i.e. meaningless rubbish)?

My Reply: Correct. Also, I’m not talking about the reversed lyrics. I’m talking about the reversed series of notes. When people listen to reversed songs, they often try to find meaningful words or sentences in the reversed lyrics when they listen to them. But, I don’t do that. I listen to the reversed series of notes, whether they be played by an instrument or sung, and try to find meaning in it.

Other Person’s Response: When you say that reversed song will convey something horrific and dramatic to the audience, once you’ve successfully conveyed your vision in regards to that reversed song, what you’re really saying is that it will evoke a horrific, dramatic, emotional response for many people?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person’s Response: I personally think you have a musical talent of naturally creating awesome, powerful, profound melodies in your mind, and I think you have a musical talent of developing a meaningful vision in regards to reversed songs. When people listen to the reversed series of notes in reversed songs, they often times hear it as meaningless rubbish. But, you’re able to see beyond that. You’re able to realize the meaning these reversed songs convey that many people aren’t able to realize.

My Reply: Yes. Since I realize this meaning, I must somehow convey said meaning to the audience.

Other Person's Response: If your melodies become fully crafted, and a few people do say your melodies are great, and express the scenes you described, is that enough to convince you that your melodies are great, and express the scenes you described?

My Reply: No. I must share my fully crafted melodies to many people. Especially professional musicians and composers. I can't trust the personal views of a few people. If many people end up saying to me the same thing as those few people did in regards to my fully crafted melodies, then I'd be convinced my melodies are great, and express the scenes I described.

Other Person's Response: Even if your melodies do become successfully conveyed (i.e. fully crafted), they're too simplistic, predictable, and repetitive to be anything good.

My Reply: I think they'd still be great. Their power and greatness should still be there. A craft doesn't have to be complex in order for it to be powerful, profound, awesome, or great.

Other Person's Response: I agree that short, simple tunes can be great and memorable. The McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune is very short. I think the melody only has 5 notes. Yet, so many people like it.

My Reply: Yes. It's a huge misconception to assume that short, simple melodies, that only have a few notes, won't be good tunes. If you choose the right notes and rests for a short melody, it can be a great, catchy, memorable melody. I think the melodies in my head do have that choice of notes and rests that make them great, catchy, and memorable. Some of my melodies convey powerful, profound meaning and emotion.

Other Person's Response: Here's the youtube link to the McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune:

My Reply: Thank you.

Other Person's Response: What if some people don't like those short, memorable tunes (such as the McDonald's tune)?

My Reply: I think they would be great tunes, and these people would be having an unreasonably high standard, which prevents them from appreciating the greatness of these tunes.

Other Person's Response: Any given work of art simply might not be the style of art he/she would prefer. So, having too high of a standard isn't the only thing that prevents people from loving and admiring certain works of art.

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person’s Response: What makes an awesome, profound, powerful melody isn’t the fact that it impacted and moved the audience, but the technical aspects of the melody, such as how complex the melody is, how well-crafted it is, etc. For example, there are people who are moved by Michael Jackson’s melodies. But, then there are other people who aren’t moved at all, and say that his melodies aren’t great, since they’re too simplistic. So, the audience that was moved by MJ’s melodies are leaving out the technical aspects necessary to make a great melody.

My Reply: I judge the greatness, profoundness, and power of a melody solely based on its emotion. As long as a melody conveys profound, powerful, or memorable emotion for the audience, then that makes the melody great. It also makes it a profound, powerful, or memorable melody. So, I’m like a person in the MJ audience who appreciates and admires MJ’s melodies, and isn’t really concerned about the technical aspects of music. Like I said, a melody doesn’t need to be complex and well planned out in order to be a great melody. Even simple, short melodies can be great, such as the McDonald’s I’m Lovin’ It tune, since many people find that melody memorable and catchy.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person’s Response: Since you’re not really concerned when it comes to the technical aspects of music, then that means the McDonald’s tune could have technical issues with it, such as low sound quality, pops, crackles, an unsuitable instrument playing the melody that sounds horrible, etc., and it would still be a great melody.

My Reply: Yes. As long as the actual melody is still intact, then it’s still a great melody. A person would just need to see past all those technical flaws in order to see the greatness of the melody. For me, that’s a very simple task, while, for others, it’s a more difficult task.

Other Person’s Response: If a person wishes to sell his music, then he needs to put the technical aspects in high regard. He needs to be in a studio, he must purchase instruments of excellent sound quality to use in musical software, etc.

My Reply: I don’t think that’s necessary. So, if I created music in a free music notation software, such as MuseScore, and I exported my music on MuseScore as mp3s to share to the world, then my music should sell. There’s no need for me to take the extra, unnecessary step of being an actual music producer in a studio. As long as a person is creating memorable, powerful, or profound music in a free music notation software, then that’s good enough, and such music should sell and be given many good ratings and comments. I think many people just don’t appreciate things. They expect perfection, and music doesn’t have to be perfect, or nearly perfect, in order to be great. So, my music can be lacking in certain technical aspects, and still be great music.

Other Person’s Response: Well, music does need to follow the rules of music theory to even be considered music. Otherwise, it would just be senseless rubbish. It would sound like noise that has been plucked out on an instrument by a baby.

My Reply: Yes. But, there’s no need to be in a studio and buy fancy equipment, software, instruments, etc.

Other Person’s Response: Sure, music can be great on its own, even if there are certain technical aspects that are lacking. But, addressing these technical issues will make one’s music even more great than it already is, since doing so will further bring out that emotional greatness, power, profoundness, and memorable quality in one’s music.

My Reply: Yes. But, it’s not really necessary.

Other Person’s Response: It doesn’t matter what your musical standards are. The fact is, if you wish to sell music that will be given many good ratings and comments, then you need to meet the musical standard of being a music producer in a studio.

My Reply: Let’s pretend I shared my music on youtube or sound cloud (music that follows the rules of music theory, and doesn’t sound like senseless rubbish). If many people give it good ratings and comments, then that says it’s unnecessary for me to be in a studio. So, my music should sell as it is, which means I can just make music in MuseScore, and share it to the world.

Other Person’s Response: There are people in villages who don’t have the money or access to studio equipment and software. They produce music on their instruments, and people around love to listen to it. That says music can be appreciated as it is, and doesn’t need to be taken to a professional, studio level. So, I think you’re right when you say that making music in MuseScore, and sharing said music to the world, should be good enough.

My Reply: Yes. Also, imagine a family member playing a song for you on a harmonica. You’d still enjoy that song and appreciate it.

Other Person’s Response: Many music professionals are used to listening to melodies and songs produced in a free music notation software, such as MuseScore. So, making music in MuseScore should be good enough.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person’s Response: If you were to sell your music on a cd, then you’d have to lower the price because your music was only produced in MuseScore, and wasn’t produced in a professional studio. So, your cd should sell for less money than those cds that have professionally produced music.

My Reply: Yes. Also, I could just make melodies and put them on a cd. I don’t need to make full songs. Of course, doing that would sell for even less money because it takes more effort to produce entire songs. Thus, a cd would cost more if it has entire songs on it, as opposed to a cd that just has melodies on it. If I just make melodies and put them on a cd, that should be good enough, as long as my melodies are memorable, profound, powerful, etc. for people.

Other Person's Response: If we see flaws with any successfully conveyed music you share in the future, we have every right to point out those flaws, and to say if your music really isn't as great and catchy as you say it is.

My Reply: Pointing out the flaws, and helping me improve my craft, is a great idea. But, just because there are flaws shouldn't all of a sudden deem my music as nothing great and catchy. For example, I could take a powerful portion of a song by Michael Jackson, repeat it to drag it on for too long, and I could add some flaws to it, such as crackles, pops, and make it low quality sound.

Even though it's just a short tune of MJ's music, isn't a full song, and has many flaws, it would still be great, catchy, and would still convey powerful, memorable, profound emotion. Even if MJ himself created just a short tune with some flaws, and shared that, it would still be great.

This is what I mean here when I say that people need to appreciate the greatness and catchiness of music because I should be able to share short tunes that have flaws, and still have them deemed as great, catchy tunes. Making a fully crafted, flawless song would, therefore, be something completely optional.

Sure, making a full song, without flaws, would make my music much better. But, it's optional, and isn't necessary to make my music great. As long as my music meets the minimal requirements to convey its greatness and catchiness, then that should be good enough for my music to be great and catchy.

Other Person's Response: In regards to a person’s preferences, when people prefer a certain style of art, that prevents them from appreciating all forms of art. For example, if someone prefers rap music, then that prevents him from appreciating other music that isn't his style, such as heavy metal.

My Reply: Yes. But, I'm not sure who appreciates all styles of music.

Other Person's Response: Could you give me another example of one of those short, great, memorable tunes?

My Reply: Yes. If you've ever heard the short tune that goes something like: "Tyler, Tyler, he's our man! If he can't do it, nobody can!," then that would be another example. Again, I think I'm naturally creating great, memorable tunes like this in my head.

Other Person's Response: Are there any other factors that you think would prevent people from appreciating any fully developed music of yours you might share in the future?

My Reply: Yes. People just might not like me as a person, they might not like the things I say in my packets, and also the fact that I'm not famous or popular. There are people in this world who share amazing works of art, but have them ridiculed and shot down, simply because these people weren't famous, weren't popular, and weren't liked as individuals.

There are also people who share awful music, and have their music praised, simply because they're popular, famous artists. As you can see here, people just have too many factors preventing them from appreciating the greatness and beauty of works of art, and they also have factors preventing them from seeing the crap that some works of art truly are.

Other Person's Response: A theme song or melody can be great, but not memorable. For example, the generic, cinematic music you hear during movie trailers is great music, created by a talented composer. But, it's not memorable music because many people might find it to be the same old, generic music you hear during movie trailers. The Harry Potter theme song, on the other hand, is not generic music. That's why the Harry Potter theme is so memorable. The same idea applies to the song "A Whole New World" that's heard during the Aladdin trailer. That's a very memorable song, and I think it's much better than generic, movie trailer music.

My Reply: I agree. If you want to create music that really captures the soul of certain movies or trailers, then not only does the music need to be great, but it needs to be memorable. I heard there's a Sonic the Hedgehog movie coming out, and that Jim Carrey plays as the villain Dr. Robotnick. Imagine if this Sonic movie just had generic, cinematic music in it. It would be a bit boring compared to having the actual, memorable, Sonic theme songs in it. Those Sonic theme songs really capture the very soul, or essence, of the Sonic universe, and that's why it would be a much better choice to have them in the movie.

The same idea applies to the characters themselves. If the characters had generic, cinematic personalities, then that would be dull and boring compared to having the actual, memorable, personalities the classical characters have. If, for example, you take away Sonic's original personality, then you make him a dull, boring, cinematic character if you just gave him a generic personality that's seen all the time in movies (i.e. if you gave him a serious, determined personality that dulls the classical, youthful, energetic personality of Sonic that appeals to so many Sonic the Hedgehog fans). So, by having generic, cinematic music, characters, stories, etc., that makes movies less appealing.

Other Person's Response: Do you think you're naturally creating music in your mind that's not only great, but memorable?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: In regards to those short, memorable tunes (such as the McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune), maybe the melody itself of these tunes wasn't enough to convey anything great, meaningful, or memorable. So, perhaps something more was needed to go along with these melodies to convey something great, meaningful, and memorable when people listened to them.

My Reply: I think you're right. The same idea would apply to my melodies. But, some melodies not only require more things to go with them, but require the context of an entire song to convey their greatness to the audience. However, some melodies (like the McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune) don't require the context of an entire song. They just need more things to go along with the melody to convey their greatness.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person's Response: I know there was this one guy who sang a song he created during an American Idol audition. It's famous, and it's called "Pants on the Ground." Maybe he wasn't just singing the melody line. Maybe he was singing more things to go along with that melody line in order to convey something great, meaningful, and catchy to the audience. Here's the youtube link to it:

My Reply: Well, for one, he did sing an entire song, and not just a short melody. So, maybe, if I make my melodies into entire songs, they'll become great, memorable, and catchy. Of course, they're not going to become famous. Few people and their works become famous. But, as long as I get some praise and recognition of my music, that'll be good and acceptable. I could share my awesome music to other people online, get praise and recognition of it, and that would be good enough.

Other Person's Response: What if you do make entire songs in your head that you think are awesome, you accurately reproduce (transcribe) those songs, and people still tell you they sound like rubbish, plucked out by a baby?

My Reply: Then there must be something missing to convey the power, greatness, and memorable quality of my songs to the audience that I have to figure out. Or, maybe, I really would be creating rubbish.

Other Person's Response: If a melody expresses powerful or profound emotion, then is that enough, in your eyes, to make a melody great?

My Reply: Yes. Even if the melody is simple and not complicated, as long as it's a catchy, memorable, powerful, or profound melody, then that makes the melody great. So, the McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune would be great, since it's catchy, and so many people love it.

Other Person's Response: You claim that a great melody might not sound great or meaningful when it's just the melody itself being played for others with no additional things to go along with that melody, such as chords, a beat, harmonic elements, etc. So, people who do listen to the melody, and claim they're hearing something great or meaningful, might simply be attributing greatness or meaning to a melody that, in reality, doesn't sound great or meaningful. Human beings are irrational, and they do attribute greatness and meaning to things that are nothing great or meaningful.

My Reply: Yes. As for the melodies I'm creating in my head, I could be the irrational one, claiming there's power and greatness to my melodies that I have to convey to the audience. I could just be making rubbish tunes in my head without realizing it.

Other Person's Response: If there's a great, memorable melody being played by itself, with no chords, harmony, or anything else to go along with it, and people claim it's a great, memorable melody when they listen to it, then maybe that's because they've heard the complete song, theme, or nursery rhyme this melody was based off of. If they never heard those completed songs, themes, or nursery rhymes, then perhaps these people would instead be hearing the melody alone as nothing great, memorable, or meaningful.

My Reply: That might be. When you listen to a famous nursery rhyme, it's not just the melody by itself being heard. It's a complete work of art being listened to, and I think that's what makes it great, memorable, and meaningful for those listening to it. If someone listened to a famous nursery rhyme that's a complete work of art, but then listened to just the melody alone of the nursery rhyme, then that person would be saying the melody itself sounds great and memorable. But, that would only be because he heard the complete nursery rhyme to begin with.

If he just listened to the melody alone first, without having heard the complete nursery rhyme, then he might hear the melody as being nothing great or memorable. As a matter of fact, I think it's possible to hear melodies themselves of famous music as meaningless, nothing great, or memorable, even when the completed masterpiece has been heard to begin with. So, that means melodies alone might not be enough to convey something great, memorable, or meaningful to the audience. You must have all the additional things to go along with those melodies.

Other Person's Response: Has someone ever presented to you just the melody alone of a famous theme? If so, did you hear it as meaningless, nothing great, and nothing memorable when you listened to it?

My Reply: Yes. It was the melody alone of the Harry Potter theme. When I listened to it at first, I found myself wondering what the heck this was. But, when someone told me it was the melody of the Harry Potter theme, I immediately recognized that melody as being great and memorable. That's because I heard the Harry Potter theme before.

Other Person's Response: I think this says that any melodies you make won't be good enough. You'd need to have all the additional things to go along with them. After all, that's what's needed to convey something good, meaningful, and memorable to the audience when they listen to them.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: There are simple, repetitive themes in anime and video games. An example would be the Super Mario theme song. But, the Super Mario theme isn't that good.

My Reply: People would be having too high of a standard, which prevents them from appreciating the greatness of the Super Mario theme. The theme conveys something catchy, fun, joyful, and beautiful, and I don't understand how anyone could not appreciate the greatness and beauty of that. It would be like saying that a flower is nothing great and beautiful, and only an artistic field of flowers is great and beautiful. Having such a high standard would prevent one from appreciating the greatness and beauty of that one simple flower.

Therefore, if I fully convey these melodies I hear in my mind, and other people tell me they're not that good, then they'd be having too high of a standard, which is preventing them from appreciating the greatness and awesomeness of my melodies. If my melodies really aren't gibberish, and they're great and catchy like I say, then other people would be having too high of a standard to not praise them. As you can see here, I have a much lower standard, which allows me to appreciate things. Of course, I don't praise lame music that we hear on the radio all the time. I praise music that is unique and catchy.

Other Person's Response: Is there any way to prove that the music you're hearing in your head is great, and you're just bad at reproducing it?

My Reply: Actually, I tried to reproduce a famous nursery rhyme, not knowing the actual notes to it. I shared my attempt at replicating it, and people told me it was awful. We all know those nursery rhymes are great and memorable. So, it must really be the case that I'm just bad at replicating what I hear in my head. It's quite possible that my own mentally inspired tunes are great, awesome, or powerful, and I'm just bad at reproducing these tunes I hear in my head.

It would be like if someone created an awesome drawing in his head, and was bad at drawing it. That person just needs training and education to become a skilled drawer. Likewise, I need training and education to reproduce the awesome music I'm creating in my head. So, when I say in this packet that my melodies will become great, once they're fully crafted, I'm referring to the ones in my mind, accurately reproduced/transcribed.

I'm not sure if having an accurately transcribed melody is enough to convey its greatness and memorable quality. You might need more things to go along with it, such as the proper chords, harmony, etc. Only then would people hear something meaningful, catchy, and great. That even applies to famous nursery rhymes. Sure, the lyrics of these famous nursery rhymes are good and memorable. But, I'm just talking about the nursery rhymes themselves. You might need more things to convey their greatness because the melody itself might not be enough.

Other Person's Response: When you compared your attempt at reproducing a nursery rhyme to the actual nursery rhyme itself, did you get the notes wrong?

My Reply: Yes, I did. When I looked at the music sheet of this nursery rhyme, and compared the actual notes to the notes I attempted to replicate, I got the notes wrong.

Other Person's Response: Why is it so difficult for you to reproduce the tunes you hear in your head?

My Reply: It's because, not only does it require practice to become skilled at that, but also because these tunes in my head are sometimes just general ideas. That means, for example, I might not be specifically hearing a G or an Ab. Rather, I'm just getting the general idea that the note could be a G or an Ab. But, many of the notes I hear in my head are specific, and I might not accurately reproduce some of them.

Other Person's Response: In order to accurately transcribe the melodies you hear in your head, I think that requires ear training.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If you created a tune in your head, and didn't accurately reproduce it, then how would you bring back the memory you lost in regards to the real tune in your head? You don't have the notes exactly like the real tune you've created in your head. If the real tune was something truly great, then you wouldn't be having the real tune on your computer, since it wasn't the accurately reproduced tune. I'm just curious as to how you could see the reproduced tune as great, when it was the real tune in your head that was great.

My Reply: The reproduced tune would be similar to the real one in my head. That's enough for me to bring back the memory of the real tune in my head. It's also possible that I did accurately reproduce some of the tunes I've created in my head. That would allow me to bring back the memory much quicker, since it would take my brain less time to remember than having a tune that's not accurately transcribed.

Other Person's Response: You talk about how our brains are naturally capable of creating great music in our heads. I agree with this. So, I agree that you're naturally creating great music in your head, and that you're just bad at reproducing it. Since we can naturally create good rhythms in our heads, then we should be able to naturally create good melodies and themes in our heads.

My Reply: Yes. I talk more about this later on. There's an article I share, which talks about this.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person's Response: You can have great lyrics and beautiful instruments. But, what good is that without a great, memorable melody that expresses the intended scene, moment, or message to the audience?

My Reply: Exactly.

Other Person's Response: I heard you have autism, and that you lack empathy. So, maybe that makes it difficult for you to emotionally relate to your audience. This means you might create fully crafted melodies and themes later on that you think express the given scene, or atmosphere, you want to express, when they really don't.

My Reply: I hope that's not the case because I wouldn't be expressing what I want to express to the audience.

Other Person's Response: I'm quite sure autistic people and, even people lacking empathy, produced great music that expressed what they wanted to express.

My Reply: That could be.

Other Person's Response: Since you're able to write things that express what you want to express to the audience, then I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to write melodies, themes, and songs that express what you want to express to the audience. You just need to become a skilled composer is all. Right now, you're a skilled writer. That's why you can articulate things quite well to readers. But, I'd love to see you become a skilled composer, and make some awesome music for others to listen to!

My Reply: Thank you.

Other Person's Response: It requires empathy to understand what music you create is going to be awesome, great, powerful, moving, and conveying of certain scenes to people. Otherwise, you'd only be creating music you think is great, and conveying of certain scenes, but really isn't. So, even if you do share fully crafted music you create, it might not be anything great as you say it is.

My Reply: I do have some empathy because I'd feel bad if I hurt someone's feelings, and I'd feel the need to save my mother's life, or help her if she were in a dire situation. Besides, since I can understand the power and emotion of songs being presented to me, then why can't I understand what music I'm creating would be powerful, great, etc. to other people?

Other Person's Response: Are there sociopaths and psychopaths who've composed amazing, moving music?

My Reply: I'm not sure. There could be.

Other Person's Response: If you're composing fully crafted music later on, it conveys nothing you describe, and is still awful music, then perhaps it's your autism making it difficult for you to relate to how other people respond to music. You wouldn't understand how to create music that truly moves, inspires, and motivates people.

My Reply: I hope that's not the case. I hope I create music that achieves my goal.

Other Person's Response: I heard you say you'd be frustrated if you can't achieve your composing goal of wanting to create awesome, memorable melodies that express what you want to express to the audience. Do you feel that frustration, even when you're happy and enjoying your life? Or, do you only feel it when you're having stress and worry in your life?

My Reply: I only feel it when I'm having stress and worry. Still, I wish to say I'd be frustrated, even when I'm not, because it allows people to take my composing goal more seriously. People would, thus, be much more inclined to help me achieve my goal, rather than treating my goal in a casual manner.

Other Person's Response: I realize you're relying on your instincts/inspiration alone to create, what you think is, great music in your head that expresses what you want to express. Since you have no knowledge of how music works, you basically rely on your instincts. I'm sorry, but you won't create any good music in your head this way. As a matter of fact, it won't express anything you want to express to the audience. That's why you must educate and train yourself in the art of composing to know how to create good music.

My Reply: I soon explain why I think our instincts alone can allow us to create great music in our minds that expresses the things we wish to express. It's basically a matter of creating music from within without educating yourself, and I think this method works to naturally create powerful and awesome music in our minds. However, if I'm wrong, and you were right, then I'm just not sure at this point how to create music that expresses whatever scene or character I wish to express. I’m not sure how I’d express my inner feelings through compositions.

Other Person's Response: You expect to naturally come up with awesome music in your head through pure emotional inspiration alone. Creating awesome music is a combination of inspiration and intellect. You need to also think about the rules of music theory. You can't just jump right in there and start creating awesome music to share to the world. I realize you're not the intellectual type of person, you really don't want to research things, and you just want to unleash your emotions through music right here and now. But, you can't create any awesome music if you're just blindly relying on your emotions without taking the time to learn things.

My Reply: I am willing to learn the things I need to learn. However, I think our brains are naturally capable of creating great works of art in our minds. I think creating awesome music in our minds naturally comes from within. It can come through sheer emotional inspiration alone. You don't need to think about anything, and you can let the inspiration alone create the awesome music in your head.

It's no different than how artists say they let the inspiration alone create the work of art. Emotions are power, force, and energy. They, alone, can be the driving force for creating some powerful and awesome music in our minds. Like I said though, only in our minds. This means some education and training is necessary to convey the awesome music you've created in your head.

Other Person's Response: If you blabber something without even thinking, then it won't make any sense. Likewise, if you create music in your head without thinking, then it will be musical gibberish. The melodies you create just won't make any musical sense. That's why your tunes are so awful. There are also other reasons why they're awful. People who rely on emotions alone won't get very far in life.

Some thought, planning, and analysis is necessary if you want to create a good work of art that makes sense to others. That even applies to creating good works of art in your head. I realize you're intellectually slow, lazy, and you're no good at thinking, planning, and analysis. That's another reason why you rely on your instincts alone to create music in your head. But, that thought, planning, and analysis really is necessary.

My Reply: If that's the case, then I'd have to use another method to create good music that expresses what I want to express. Sadly, I'm not sure if I can achieve the goal of expressing what I want to express through music, since I just might be incapable of this. Maybe I can express what I want to express if a music teacher, or some online source, helps me out. In that case, I won't give up composing.

Other Person's Response: You'd actually be thinking about something when creating those tunes in your head. You'd be thinking about the scenes, ideas, or lyrics to be inspired by. But, more thought than that is needed if you want to create good music in your head.

My Reply: I think that's all the thought that's needed. From there, you just let the inspiration do the work in creating awesome music in your head.

Other Person's Response: Perhaps you really do have some awesome music in your head that expresses what you want to express. You said you might not have accurately reproduced these tunes. So, maybe, you just need to slightly change the notes of those reproduced tunes, so they adhere to the rules of melody and rhythm writing. Perhaps then they'd become those awesome tunes you hear in your head.

My Reply: That could be.

Other Person's Response: If you created a melody in your head, accurately reproduced it, but the notes of the reproduced melody had to be changed to make a completely different melody than the rubbish, nonsensical one you heard in your head, in order to adhere to the rules of melody writing, would you be alright with this new melody?

My Reply: No. If it's a completely different melody than the one I heard in my head, then it would be a melody that doesn't express what I want to express. But, the one I heard in my head wouldn't express anything anyway since it would just be a rubbish melody that makes no sense, musically speaking.

Other Person's Response: Remember, when composing melodies, you can't just compose whatever melody you're inspired to compose. That's how babies compose. It's the reason why the melodies created by babies sound awful. So, forget about using your inspiration/instincts alone to create melodies in your head. You must use another method that actually works.

My Reply: I won't know how to express what I want to express to the audience using any other method. This is the only method I have.

Other Person's Response: If you later come to realize that your method fails, and the melodies in your head really are like those created by babies, what are you going to do?

My Reply: It might be a dead end for me as a composing artist. If I can't find a way to create music that expresses what I want to express to the audience, then I'd give up composing.

Other Person's Response: You're thinking that your method actually works though. But, what makes you think you're any different than a baby, coming up with rubbish melodies in his head? Why do you think you're special?

My Reply: I talk later on about how our brains naturally learn how to create great music in our heads. It's called statistical learning. Babies haven't naturally learned how to create great music in their heads yet. Since I'm an adult, then I should be able to naturally create great music in my head that expresses what I wish to express to the audience. But, I'm open-minded towards the possibility that my method doesn't work. In which case, I really won't know how to create the music I want to create.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person's Response: You say that, even if you do become a skilled composer who writes good melodies, you might not know how to create melodies that express what you want to express to the audience. That's like saying a skilled author might not know what words to choose that expresses what he wants to express to the audience. It's also like saying a skilled painter might not know what to paint that expresses what he wants to express to the audience. My point is, if you're a skilled artist, you'll instinctively know how to artistically express what you wish to express to the audience. It doesn't matter if you're a writer, a painter, a composer, or any other type of artist.

My Reply: I don't think it's like that. When it comes to melody writing, that's a different story. I'd have that writer's instinct, and the painter's instinct. That means, if I was a skilled writer and painter, I'd know what to write and paint that expresses what I want to express to the audience. But, I might not have the composer's instinct. I'm really getting the idea that melody writing is something special and different from all other fields of art.

So, if I was working in any other field of art, I'd know how to express what I want to express to the audience. But, to express what you want to express to the audience through melody writing, that's something special, and requires some greater ability. I might not have that ability. That means, even if I was a skilled composer who wrote good music, I might not have that ability.

Other Person's Response: Yes, you do need to follow certain rules when writing a melody. But, you're the artist, and you choose whatever notes and rests express what you wish to express to the audience. All you need is creativity as an artist. Once you have that and, once you follow the rules of melody writing, you're all set to create melodies.

My Reply: If my method of naturally creating melodies in my mind really doesn't work, then I'd really be clueless on how to create melodies that expresses what I want to express to the audience. I don't think it's a lack of creativity because I'm already a creative individual. I come up with many new ideas. So, perhaps something else would be hindering me from achieving my goal of creating melodies that express what I want to express to the audience.

Other Person's Response: If you’re not naturally creating music in your mind that expresses what you want to express, then why do you think it would be so difficult to create such music by studying and following the rules of music theory?

My Reply: I think it would be difficult for me to create such melodies simply because I'd have to actually take into consideration the rules of music theory when creating melodies, rather than creating melodies through inspiration alone. I'd have to limit myself to the rules when creating melodies. I’d, thus, be limited in terms of my ability to express what I wish to express through melody writing. Being restricted by these rules would make this goal very difficult for me to achieve. I'm not sure if I can even accomplish this.

Other Person's Response: You say that you're naturally capable of creating awesome music in your mind that expresses the things you wish to express. You say this is simple and easy for you because your brain naturally follows the rules of music theory in creating such music. You just let the inspiration alone do the work, and you don't have to think about anything. But, if you're wrong, and you're only creating senseless, rubbish tunes in your head, then you're saying it would be difficult for you because, now, you can no longer rely on your natural instincts alone to create music. You'd instead have to think about the rules when creating your melodies, and plan things out.

My Reply: Yes. It would be very simple and easy if I could just create awesome music that expresses what I want to express through inspiration alone, without doing any thinking or planning. When creating music becomes an intellectual exercise, that's when it becomes difficult for me. If I have to create music using method #2, rather than method #1 (my natural instincts alone), then I'd no longer have the freedom of expression that my natural instincts alone gave me. Instead, I'd have to restrict myself to certain keys on the keyboard when creating melodies, so that said melodies would follow the rules of music theory. That's what would make it difficult for me to create music that expresses what I want to express.

Other Person's Response: I think our brains are naturally capable of following some rules of music theory, such as rhythm. But, I don't think our brains are naturally capable of following other rules when making music, such as proper melody writing. In other words, a complete novice can naturally create a melody in his mind that has a rhythm. But, it wouldn't be a good, sensible melody, since it doesn't follow the rules of melody writing.

I'm sorry to say it, but I think you're only creating melodies in your mind that are senseless rubbish. It doesn't matter how much power, inspiration, and emotion you put into it because you'll always come up with rubbish melodies in your mind. Inspiration alone does not create a good work of art. You must, therefore, study and follow the rules if you wish to create some truly awesome music. The same idea applies to that complete novice because he won't be able to create any good melodies in his mind without the necessary education and training.

My Reply: That would make it difficult for me to create melodies that express what I want to express, which would make composing less appealing to me. But, I'm not even sure if there are rules when it comes to creating a melody. Can't a person create any melody he's inspired to create, as long as it has a rhythm and scale? I thought melody writing all comes down to a person's inspiration and creativity, and that there are no more rules when it comes to this.

In this Composing Discussion Section, I go by the assumption that there are no more rules to follow when creating melodies, other than having a rhythm and scale. But, at the same time, I do consider the possibility that I'm wrong, and that there are more rules. I really don't know, since I'm a complete beginner when it comes to composing. So, I don't know much at all.

Other Person's Response: So, you think your mind is naturally capable of following even the rules of proper melody writing. Do you consider the possibility that your mind isn't naturally following these rules though?

My Reply: Yes, I do. But, it really seems like the melodies in my mind sound like actual music. They sound like melodies that are actually awesome, powerful, profound, and conveying of scenes. This is why I conclude that my brain is naturally capable of following even the rules of melody writing (if there are such rules).

Other Person's Response: I do hear people say that the rules of music theory hinder creativity. If you ever watched the episode of Sponge Bob titled "Artist Unknown," you'll get the idea. So, you might be right when you say there are no rules when it comes to melody writing, and that a person can just create an awesome or powerful melody through inspiration alone.

My Reply: Well, I might be wrong.

Other Person's Response: I bet you're naturally hearing beautiful, powerful, singing voices singing these melodies you're creating in your mind. Don't let that fool you. Just because the singing voices are beautiful and powerful doesn't mean the melodies are beautiful and powerful. If a beautiful singer sang a rubbish melody, then the melody would still be rubbish, regardless of how beautiful the singer's voice was.

My Reply: Yes, I do hear awesome, beautiful, and powerful singing voices in my mind. But, from what it sounds like, the melodies also sound beautiful, awesome, and powerful.

Other Person's Response: There's an interesting youtube video I'd like to share to you:

The guy in the video says you can write any melody you want. You just have to make sure it has a rhythm, and that it adheres to a scale.

My Reply: Then why do my melodies sound like meaningless rubbish for other listeners? Maybe that guy is wrong, and there are more rules to follow when it comes to melody writing. Perhaps I'm creating melodies that don't follow these rules, and maybe that's why they sound like random, nonsensical, rubbish melodies for other listeners. Then again, I could be creating awesome melodies that I just have to convey somehow to the audience. The guy in that video makes it seem like creating melodies is a natural expression of basically being human. So, I could be right when I say that human beings are naturally capable of creating awesome or powerful melodies in their minds.

If it's true that you can naturally create any melody you want, then that would make composing much more interesting and appealing to me because I'd be free to naturally create whatever melody I want from the awesome, powerful inspiration that dwells within me, and said melody being powerful or awesome (providing, of course, that I've accurately transcribed the awesome or powerful melody I've naturally created in my mind). From there, I'd have to find a way to convey the power and greatness of this accurately transcribed melody to other listeners, so that it doesn't sound like random rubbish.

Other Person's Response: Even if you do have to study and follow rules if you want to create good melodies, rather than relying on your inspiration alone to create music in your mind, and accurately transcribing said music, you can still create good melodies that express whatever you want to express.

My Reply: Having to limit myself to these rules would make it more difficult. Especially if they're rules that severely limit me. If I really have to go through this tedious, intellectual process of limiting myself to multiple rules, rather than relying on my inspiration alone to create music, then I think creating melodies that express what I want to express would be much more difficult than creating a good melody.

That's because any average person could create any random, good, sensible melody by following the rules. But, expressing yourself as an individual through melody writing would be more difficult, given that you're so restricted by these rules. I think that's because more abilities are required than simply creating any random, good melody that follows the rules. I have some powerful, profound emotions I wish to express through composing, and I think it would be difficult for me to express them to the audience if I have to be so limited by these rules.

Other Person's Response: Composing may be very appealing to you now. But, are you saying composing would be less appealing to you if you have to create music the hard way

My Reply: Yes. It would be very difficult for me to express what I want to express, and that's why composing would be less appealing to me.

Other Person's Response: If composing would be so difficult for you, then why not take up writing stories or poetry? You seem like a skilled writer.

My Reply: I'm not interested in any other field of art.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person's Response: So, no other field of art appeals to you?

My Reply: That's right. Composing is the only field of art that appeals to me.

Other Person's Response: If writing isn't a field of art that appeals to you, then why did you even bother typing all this information to share to others? The very fact you've written all this shows you have some level of interest in writing.

My Reply: It's because I just want to share my personal views, and my personal experiences. But, I don't want to take up writing stories or poetry. Neither do I wish to write for any other purpose, such as writing articles or essays on scientific topics.

Other Person's Response: I'm a skilled martial artist, and I'm curious as to why you don't want to take up martial arts.

My Reply: It's because, let's pretend I was a skilled martial artist, my skill wouldn't convey the emotion/scenes I want to convey to the audience. If anything, it would just convey I'm some ****** dude who's skilled at fighting. Besides, I just have no interest in martial arts. My interest lies in expressing certain things to the audience, and I've taken up composing to do that.

Other Person's Response: When the guy in that youtube video plucked out whatever melody he was naturally inspired to create, did you already hear a melody that was sensible, and not random rubbish?

My Reply: I did hear sensible melodies from this guy. Even though they're just the melodies themselves, they still sounded like meaningful melodies, and not the type of melodies plucked out by a baby. That begs the question as to why my melodies sound like random rubbish for other listeners. I mean, if this guy's melodies alone are sensible to others, then why aren't my melodies sensible to others? Maybe I just didn't accurately transcribe the melodies I hear in my mind. But, I'm quite sure I've accurately transcribed my best dark tune, along with a few others.

Other Person's Response: The guy in that video must be following certain rules when creating his melodies that he neglected to mention. Maybe that's why his melodies are sensible to other listeners, while yours are nonsensical melodies to other listeners.

My Reply: But, the guy even said that things like conversations and speeches, in of themselves, are sensible melodies. So, that already implies that you're free to create whatever melody you want, and that said melody should still be sensible for other listeners. He acts as though creating a good, awesome, or sensible melody is a natural expression, no different than having a conversation, speech, or just expressing yourself as a human being. So, he acts as though there are no more rules to follow when creating melodies, other than having a rhythm and scale.

Other Person's Response: If creating awesome or powerful melodies is a natural expression of being human, then that would be wonderful! It shows our brains naturally learn how to express certain emotions/scenes. We'd then use that naturally acquired knowledge to naturally create awesome or powerful music in our minds, or on an instrument.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Conversations, speeches, or even expressing yourself (such as yelling a certain sentence) can only amount to senseless, rubbish melodies. That's because they don't adhere to the rules of melody writing. If you listened to a president's famous speech, then the words he's speaking do convey a powerful, meaningful message to the audience. But, if you just took the pitch of each word he's speaking, then that would turn out to be a rubbish melody that makes no sense, musically speaking. If you want a melody to be good, and convey something meaningful to the audience, then that's why music theory exists. That's why you must follow the rules of melody writing.

My Reply: Well, when I listen to a powerful speech from a president in a short video clip, the melody itself of the speech sounds powerful and beautiful to me. The melody brings out the power and beauty of the speech itself. If I were to listen to the melody alone, it would be like I'm listening to the speech itself. So, I think this shows human beings are naturally capable of expressing power and beauty not only through words (such as giving a speech), but through melodies. But, for whatever reason, my melodies aren't conveying their power and greatness to the audience.

Other Person's Response: Do you think the rules of music theory are basically the rules of natural, human expression? In other words, if a person gives a powerful speech, do you think the melody of his speech naturally follows the rules of music theory?

My Reply: If there are rules when it comes to writing a melody, then I think the melody of his speech would naturally follow these rules. So, that's a "yes" to your question. If a person gives a moving, powerful speech, haven't you ever heard people in the audience say that this was music to their ears? Well, this is to be taken literally because the melody of that speech would be actual music, since it follows the rules of melody writing. But, I might be wrong. If the melodies of speeches were to be analyzed, they might not adhere to the rules of melody writing.

Other Person's Response: So, when the melodies of speeches have a rhythm and scale, you think they'd be sensible melodies?

My Reply: Yes. Some of them can be great and memorable melodies.

Other Person's Response: If any melody we naturally create would be a sensible melody, then what would constitute a senseless melody?

My Reply: It would have to be a melody that wasn't naturally created through personal expression, such as a completely random melody. Such a melody would be one plucked out by a baby. Personal expression would be things like speeches, conversations, yelling certain sentences, etc. So, any created melody that goes outside of that would have to be a senseless melody. But, some melodies created through personal expression do sound like senseless rubbish. An example would be my melodies. I'm not exactly sure why that is. Maybe I just didn't accurately transcribe them.

Other Person's Response: There are forms of natural expression that are already great works of art. For example, helping someone, and changing someone's life, would be a beautiful work of art to witness. Given this, why can't melodies themselves be forms of natural expression that are great works of art?

My Reply: Exactly. I thought human beings are naturally capable of creating awesome, beautiful, and powerful melodies.

Other Person's Response: Your melodies really make no sense, and they just don't work out. There's no pattern to your melodies in terms of melodic intervals. It seems you just have notes randomly placed all over. Melodies need to have this type of pattern in order for them to be good melodies that make sense to others.

My Reply: I'm not sure about this. I thought a person could create awesome, memorable melodies through naturally expressing himself as an individual. I know I had a music teacher once who told me to just write whatever melody I was inspired to create. He never talked about my melodies needing to have a melodic pattern. The teacher's name was Don Estes at Griggs (a place for buying music accessories).

He was an old man. So, I'd expect him to be a wise music teacher, since he's old. If he's so wise, he would've pointed out to me that my melodies need this pattern if they really needed them. Also, I only saw Don for a short while. I struggled with many miserable moments in my life, and that's why I gave up seeing him. I gave up on my composing dream entirely. But, I might see him again someday, since I'm fully recovered now, and am no longer having those miserable struggles.

Other Person's Response: If you do create some awesome, memorable music someday, do you plan on seeing your music teacher again, so you can share your music to him?

My Reply: Yes. I think he'd be quite surprised because, when I first saw him, I was only creating rubbish melodies.

Other Person's Response: Maybe the real melodies in your head do have a melodic pattern, and you're just bad at reproducing what you hear in your head.

My Reply: It's quite possible.

Other Person's Response: If you can't naturally create good, sensible music in your mind, then you say it might be difficult for you to create melodies that express what you want to express by going through the intellectual process of following the rules of music theory. Maybe you should just take it one note at a time, and see what type of melodies you can come up with. Who knows, you might be successful, and create melodies that express what you want to express to your audience.

My Reply: I'm doubtful. I already tried this while studying some rules, and it just didn't work out. When I listened to my melodies, they didn't express what I wanted to express. So, I decided to scrap these melodies.

Other Person's Response: I take it you've discovered there are rules when it comes to melody writing. You tried to create melodies that follow these rules. But, you just couldn't create melodies that express the powerful, profound scenes you wish to express.

My Reply: Correct. I put some thought and planning into it. But, it just didn't work out.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you just need to study all the techniques you can in order to create the music you want to create.

My Reply: I'm not sure if that's the case.

Other Person's Response: Do you wish to create catchy melodies and themes? For example, the Super Mario theme song is catchy.

My Reply: Yes. I'm failing at this, too. When I follow the rules that I studied, I just can't create melodies that are catchy and memorable.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you just need more practice to create the music you want to create.

My Reply: That could be. But, I don't know. Maybe I'm just incapable of this.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person's Response: Maybe it's not a matter of it being difficult for you to create melodies that express what you want to express by going through the intellectual process of following the rules. Perhaps you just don't have this ability at all. So, even if you did acquire much knowledge and experience in composing, you just might not have this ability.

My Reply: I hope that's not the case.

Other Person's Response: You said earlier you've discovered there are rules when it comes to writing a melody. I don't think your melodies follow these rules, and that's why they sound like rubbish.

My Reply: Yes. I've studied some rules of melody writing, and I've revised my Super Sonic tune so that it follows these rules. I think I'm just no good at transcribing the awesome, memorable melodies in my mind, and that's why I need to study these rules to help me do so. Anyway, I think this Super Sonic tune now follows the rules, and this revised tune is my most recent tune I'm sharing here. So, consider this very reply to be my most recent update. As for this tune, the chords go from I-V and V-I. This would be an imperfect and perfect cadence. There's also a IV chord in there as well, which goes back to the I chord.

This would be a plagal cadence. The notes of the melody are the chord tones. I think this melody is great, memorable, and catchy. If, for whatever reason, it's still a rubbish melody that doesn't follow the rules of proper melody writing, then maybe I just need to revise this melody even more so that it follows these rules. Only then will this awesome, memorable melody I'm trying to convey be successfully conveyed to the audience. If I revise all my other melodies so they follow the rules, then maybe they will also become the great, memorable melodies I've naturally created in my mind. Anyway, here are the links to this revised Super Sonic tune, along with a few other recent melodies I've made:

Youtube Link to revised Super Sonic tune:

Soundcloud Link to revised Super Sonic tune:

#1LISTENTOFIRSTSuperSonicTune

Music Sheet of revised Super Sonic tune:

1-LISTENTOFIRSTSuper-Sonic-Tune

Now, here is a lovely melody, ominous melody, and another melody I've made titled "On A Higher Level":

Youtube link to lovely melody:

Soundcloud link to lovely melody:

#5LovelyMelody

Music sheet of lovely melody:

3-Lovely-Melody

Youtube link to ominous melody:

Soundcloud link to ominous melody:

#6OminousMelody

Music sheet of ominous melody:

4-Ominous-Melody

Youtube link to On A Higher Level:

Soundcloud link to On A Higher Level:

OnAHigherLevel

Music sheet of On A Higher Level:

5-On-AHigher-Level

Other Person's Response: I heard you had another melody, which you say is your new, best one. Could you share that?

My Reply: Sure. I think it's an awesome, memorable, heavy, dramatic melody. Anyway, here it is:

Youtube Link:

Soundcloud Link:

#1BestTuneDramaticSkyHighMelody

Music Sheet:

2-READSECONDDramatic-Sky-High-Melody

Other Person's Response: I can tell that gothic, sky high melody you just shared, starts on the dominant note in F minor (the C note), and ends on the tonic note (the F note).

My Reply: Yes

Other Person's Response: What if you make your melodies follow all the rules, but they still sound like senseless rubbish for other listeners?

My Reply: Then, like I said, something more would be needed to convey their power and greatness. Or, maybe, I was creating senseless, rubbish melodies all along.

Other Person's Response: What if you make your melodies follow all the rules, people tell you they sound like sensible melodies, but that they're lame or mediocre melodies?

My Reply: Then maybe something more is needed to convey their power, greatness, and memorable quality. Or, maybe, I was just creating lame, mediocre melodies in my mind to share to the world, and I just thought they were awesome, memorable melodies, when they really weren't.

Other Person's Response: When you transcribe the melodies in your mind, is it much easier for you to accurately transcribe the note lengths, as opposed to the note pitches?

My Reply: Yes. I have a difficult time accurately transcribing the note pitches.

Other Person's Response: Even if your brain does naturally know all the rules of music theory, it's still possible for your brain to make errors when it naturally creates an awesome, powerful, memorable melody in your mind.

My Reply: Which means I'd just need to correct those errors when I accurately transcribe that melody.

Other Person's Response: When attempting to accurately transcribe the melodies in your mind, do you sing them first, and then create a melody based off of what you sung?

My Reply: Yes. Listening to the sung version, even though it's poorly sung, since I don't know how to sing, helps me remember the melody I've created in my mind. From there, I create a melody on the keyboard, and it will be a bit different than what I've sung.

Other Person's Response: I have some advice for you. When creating a melody, make a beat first, and then make a melody that fits the beat, as opposed to creating a melody first, and then making a beat to go along with it.

My Reply: Yes. I think this is how I create melodies that actually work out.

Other Person's Response: I have another word of advice for you. If you hear a complicated series of notes and rests in your mind, don't just try to transcribe them, since that would be difficult. Also utilize the techniques of music theory to help you out, since that would make matters easier.

My Reply: Sure.

Other Person's Response: Is it easier to transcribe melodies that are just notes being heard in your mind? Or, is it easier when the melodies you hear in your head have lyrics to them?

My Reply: It's easier when they have lyrics. If, for example, I heard a complicated series of notes in my mind, that would be difficult for me to transcribe. But, if all those notes had lyrics, then the melody becomes more clear to me, and easier to transcribe. When the melody is just a bunch of complicated notes without lyrics, it's like a muddled, complicated mess that my mind has a difficult time with. If I'm not making sense to anyone, just know that having lyrics makes it easier for me to transcribe the melodies in my mind.

Other Person's Response: If your brain naturally knows the rules of music theory, then you'd already have all the knowledge you need to create awesome, memorable music in the real, physical world, and not just in your mind. So, it makes me curious as to why you think you're naturally creating awesome, memorable music in your mind, but not in the real world.

My Reply: Even though I can naturally create awesome, memorable melodies in my mind, I wouldn't know the technical details of what I've created in my mind. For example, I wouldn't know that the melodies in my mind start on the tonic note, and end on the tonic or dominant note. I could also naturally create a chord progression in my mind. But, I wouldn't know that the chord progressions would be a I-V, V-I, IV-V, IV-I, etc.

The only reason I know these technical details now is because I've read about them online. So, even though the melodies I naturally create in my mind follow the rules of music theory, I wouldn't know the technical details. I need to know these technical details because I don't think I'm skilled at transcribing my mentally inspired melodies, and knowing these details would allow me to create melodies that are awesome, memorable, and accurately transcribed, as opposed to inaccurately transcribed rubbish.

Other Person's Response: Even if your brain does naturally know all the rules of music theory, that wouldn't be enough for you to create great, memorable, catchy melodies in your mind, such as the McDonald's tune, or any other memorable tune for that matter. It requires much talent and training to create such melodies, in addition to having knowledge of the rules of music theory.

My Reply: I'm not sure that's the case. Sure, it requires talent. But, would it really require training to create such melodies in my head, when I already know all the rules of music theory?

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Other Person's Response: Even if you did know all the technical details, it's still possible to inaccurately transcribe the melodies you've created in your mind.

My Reply: Which means I'd also need the ability to skillfully transcribe the melodies in my mind. If I had a professional level of this skill, then I could just accurately transcribe the melodies in my mind without even knowing any of these technical details. But, if I had a moderate level of this skill, combined with knowledge of these technical details, then I could still accurately transcribe my melodies.

Other Person's Response: When you transcribe the melodies in your mind and, from there, revise these melodies, so they follow the rules of melody writing, do they become completely different melodies than the ones you've naturally created in your mind? Or, do they actually sound like the awesome, memorable melodies in your mind?

My Reply: At first, they were completely different melodies. This frustrated me because I thought I was naturally creating awesome, memorable melodies in my mind, just to find out I had to stick with completely different melodies that actually follow the rules. They were average, mediocre melodies. From this, I concluded I must not be naturally creating any awesome, sensible melodies in my mind. If I really was creating such melodies in my mind that follow the rules, then the revised, transcribed melodies would sound like the ones in my mind.

They didn't, and I grew frustrated. But, then, I tried again, and actually discovered they do sound like the ones in my mind. A great example would be my Super Sonic melody. Therefore, I must've made the wrong revisions, which made the transcribed melodies sound different than the ones in my mind. For example, if I started the transcribed, and revised, Super Sonic melody on the notes Eb and C, rather than the notes I've chosen for the recently revised melody, which would be F and C, then that would be the chord tones of a V chord in the key of F minor, rather than a I chord in F minor.

That V chord would need to go back to a I chord. To do that, I'd need to choose notes that fit that I chord. So, my next couple of notes to complete that bar would be something like F and Ab. This ends up creating a completely different melody than the one I hear in my mind because the first few notes of the melody would be Eb and C (the notes of a V chord), and F and Ab (the notes of a I chord), rather than F and C (the notes of a I chord), and the next couple of notes I've chosen for the V chord, which would be Eb and G. I think you should look at the music sheet of my Super Sonic melody to help you understand what I'm talking about here.

Other Person's Response: So, not only is it important that your melodies follow the rules, but that you make them follow the rules in such a way that they sound like the melodies in your mind. Otherwise, you'd end up with a completely different melody than the one you've created in your mind, due to the rules putting you in a position where you'd need to choose completely different notes for these melodies that fit whole new chord progressions.

My Reply: Yes. I'd be ending up with completely different melodies that are mediocre, and don't sound like the awesome, memorable ones in my mind.

Other Person's Response: I realize you think you've made some of your melodies not only follow the rules of music theory, but made them sound like the ones in your mind. When you lose the memory of the melody you had in your mind, and you listen to the transcribed melody, does it sound awesome and memorable, like the one you remembered having in your mind?

My Reply: No. It becomes a mediocre melody that conveys a completely different scene. I'm not sure why that is. Perhaps there are more rules to follow, and I need to further revise my melodies so they not only follow these rules, but sound like the awesome melodies in my mind.

Other Person's Response: But, when you manage to bring back how the real, awesome melody sounded in your mind, do you see the transcribed melody as awesome?

My Reply: Yes. It's like the melody in my mind, and the transcribed melody, are the same. That puts me at a disadvantage because I wouldn't be seeing the transcribed melody for what it really is. When I lose the memory of the melody I had in my mind, then I can see the transcribed melody for what it really is. If I had the choice, I'd choose to delete that memory in my mind, so I wouldn't be blinded, thinking that the transcribed melody is awesome and memorable like the one I had in my mind, when it's not.

Other Person's Response: In regards to the melodies of famous speeches, they don't classify as actual music. They're just rubbish. But, you can make them into good, sensible melodies that not only follow the rules of melody writing, but sound close to the actual speeches themselves. Just because you have to make these melodies follow the rules doesn't mean they have to be melodies that sound completely different than the speeches.

My Reply: Sure. That would be wonderful because I could express anything I want through melody writing, and the melodies not having to be completely different than what I wanted to express.

Other Person's Response: You later thought you weren't naturally creating awesome, memorable melodies in your mind. But, then you discovered you might be, after all. Therefore, does composing appeal greatly to you now, knowing that you can just naturally create such melodies in your mind, and that you don't have to go through some tedious, intellectual process to do so?

My Reply: Yes. But, I still need to go through an intellectual process when making sure my transcribed melodies not only follow the rules, but sound like the awesome, memorable melodies in my mind. I'm perfectly alright with this, and I actually enjoy this. But, if it was the case I wasn't naturally creating any awesome melodies in my mind to begin with, then composing would be less appealing to me because it would no longer be a matter of trying to convey some awesome melody I've naturally created in my mind.

Instead, it would be a tedious, intellectual process of trying to come up with an awesome, profound, memorable melody to begin with. That would be difficult, and I might find myself giving up composing. The fact is, composing becomes much more interesting and appealing to me when I can naturally create awesome and powerful melodies from within, and just have to find a way to convey them to the audience.

Other Person's Response: Maybe the melodies you're naturally creating in your mind are just expressions at this point, and not actual music. But, if you transform these expressions into actual melodies that work, they might turn out to be awesome and memorable melodies.

My Reply: That could be the case.

Other Person's Response: I think I understand what you were trying to say earlier. The intellectual process of creating melodies that not only follow the rules, but sound similar to the ones in your mind, or similar to ones, such as any conversations or speeches you wish to express, would be much easier than not being able to do this, and instead having to create whole new melodies from scratch.

My Reply: Yes. It would be more difficult trying to create whole new melodies from scratch, that follow the rules, and express what I wish to express, as opposed to having some sort of expression in my mind, and trying to create a melody that's very close (or even exact) to said expression in my mind, while making sure the melody follows the rules of music theory.

The former method makes it more difficult for me to create melodies that express what I wish to express, while the latter method makes it much easier, since all I have to do is match whatever form of musical expression I have in my mind, whether it be a speech, someone yelling, or someone singing. If I couldn't match whatever melody I had in my mind, then coming up with these mentally inspired melodies would be pointless to begin with, since they wouldn't work out.

Other Person's Response: By the way, if someone creates a rubbish, senseless melody for someone else to listen to, then the listener can create his own vision of that melody. He could turn that rubbish into something beautiful for others to listen to. Since everyone is different, then different people will have their own, unique vision of that rubbish melody.

My Reply: Yes. Anyone could revise the rubbish melody, so that it not only follows the rules of proper melody writing, but conveys his unique vision to the audience.

Other Person's Response: Are you saying it's easier to have a musical idea in your mind, and create a melody that not only follows the rules of music theory, but sounds like what you have in your mind, as opposed to creating a melody from scratch on the keyboard?

My Reply: Yes. Creating musical ideas in my mind gives me freedom of expression, and I'd just have to match these ideas. But, coming up with melodies that express what I want to express by just playing around on the keyboard, is a much more difficult, tedious process. When I create musical ideas in my mind, what I wish to express to my audience is already there in my mind, and all I have to do is match what's in my mind. That's what makes matters much easier.

Other Person's Response: I have some advice to give you in regards to your Super Sonic melody. I think the issue here is the number of bars. Having 9 bars, followed by a bar's rest, creates an unnatural break in the flow when the tune is played again. Normally, melodies are arranged in 8 bars, 12 bars, 16 bars etc. Try changing the timing of the second part of your tune. Apart from that, the sounds & arrangement sound fine to me.

My Reply: Thanks for your response. Now, as I said before, my goal in composing is to not only create melodies that are awesome and memorable, but express the given scenes, moments, characters, etc. I wish to express to the audience. You said this melody sounds "alright" to you, which means you're acting like it's a basic, or mediocre melody. That must mean I'm not achieving my goal because, if I was, then you'd be saying something like: "WOW, THIS MELODY IS AWESOME, AND SHOULD BE FAMOUS!!! I'LL ALWAYS REMEMBER THIS BEAUTIFUL MELODY!!!"

It would be like if I've created a new, famous, nursery rhyme of my own for you to listen to. If you were to listen to it, you'd be giving such an exclamatory response. Since you're not giving such a response to this melody, I can only gather I'm not achieving my goal. It becomes frustrating when I can't achieve this goal because I'm not expressing myself to the audience. I'm not expressing the awesome, memorable emotions/scenes I think I'm expressing to the audience. So, something's not right here.