What is "Phenomenology of Music"?

Although we must begin with this question, whi

ch comes from the naive, natural, descriptive psychological attitude, we will no
t be able to clarify what is phenomenology within the shortest hour of my life;
And only conditionally, in the investigation of some partial aspects, which in n
o case can it be.
The first difficulty comes from my heroic, unteachable attitude, trying to want
what the mind completely excludes. On the friendly invitation of the President D
r. von Canal and by Prof. Bockholdt,
In an hour, which my students have seven years to think about, I answered "yes"
with a smile. I encouraged myself, thinking of the Zen question as to whether a
brief hour was more than a long quarter of an hour? And to the Zen master's answ
er: You fool! Almost double!
"The choice," either to formulate abstractly and to go far with the interpretati
on of the doctrine, or to proceed vividly and empirically, but little to grasp t
he infinite task is tragic for me.
The second difficulty lies in the object of our project.
I must now put in a little parenthesis: I envy you that you already know what mu
sic is. Music is not something that can be grasped in a definition through thoug
ht symbols and linguistic conventions. It does not correspond to any perceptible
form of existence. Music is not something. Something can be music under certain
unique conditions. And this "something" is the sound. So: sound is not music; S
ound can be music.
The third difficulty is the obvious question of what musical phenomenology has t
o do with philosophical phenomenology - with which philosophical? The before 191
3? The Husserl, who came out of the natural inclination, the attitude, or the us
, which had come to her? Phenomenology is not descriptive psychology because it
excludes the natural execution of all empirical, naturalistic apperceptions and
attitudes.
Without renouncing the formulation of a formulation brought about by the discrim
inating intellect, I would like to call from the Pragmatic two ways suggested by
Nicolai Hartmann, two fields of research which try to make a science of this di
scipline:
1. the objectifying of the sound,
2. the study of the manifold ways in which the sound clearly affects human consc
iousness.
And if it is not too difficult for you, we will commit these simple ways togethe
r.
What do we know about the sound and finally the musical sound? Not much more tha
n the prehistoric man, who, inspired by an inner urge for freedom, discovered hi
m by inspiring searching and unknowingly lent him from the universe. What is sou
nd? Sound is movement. Sound is vibration. What moves? The coarse matter: a stri
ng, an air or metal mass. We know that everything is movement. When sound is mov
ement, what distinguishes the sound, the music can be, from the other movements?
The underlying specific, unmistakable structure: the same and constant vibratio
ns. For a given time unit, the same number of vibrations: This is the essence of
the musical tone.
This structure may exist in the world surrounding the human being; But it does n
ot appear in the sector of its sense-conditioned perception. The man who created
the harmonious tone brought him out of the deep depth of his
To the light of his consciousness, or perhaps: brought him down from the divine
stage. In any case, he created it. It vibrates an elastic length between two fix
ed points, blows into a bamboo tube or a hollowed-out tibial bone with holes
And thus, without having any idea, has the preconditions under which he can tran

scend his present conditions.

The first thing that fascinates him is the stability of his discovery: every tim
e he creates the same conditions, he gets the same experience. The unstable envi
ronment known to him does not give him such experiences. He has learned how tran
sient his environment and everything he gets to know about it is. The equally re
sonant sound is transient. However, during its existence it shows a perpetual, e
ver-recurring identity - somewhere it is always there. This invention creates a
new joy that is nothing more than experiencing itself. An emotional equilibrium
with the revealed sound phenomenon,
For also in man himself, this - after all dumb and talkative prophets - the imag
e of absolute being, there is something that is immutable. The actual, self-rege
nerating driving force that keeps him on his discovery is the new sense of wellbeing. And that has not been there yet.
The resonant sound does not swing alone. A whole series of secondary tones, whic
h the initiative-rich inventor did not produce at all, resonate with and form a
completely new, resonant multiplicity. These are the overtones, the directly dep
endent secondary phenomena, the immediately following epiphenomena. The elastic
string, which has been clamped between two points, the air column enclosed in a
cylindrical space can not vibrate in its entirety. It must be divided according
to the law of the inert mass. And these subdivisions give a series of sounds tha
t belong to the family of the main sound. The main note is therefore not alone.
He is always accompanied by his family, which is close to him. The sound, a furt
her undefinable sum of sound sources, also has overtones. But these are not perc
eptible to the constitutive function of my consciousness, since they are not dif
ferentiated.
The harmony of the main sound and of its family, which originates outside any in
tention of man, does not occur in the world, which man calls in his naive attitu
de "nature." Man creates conditions that arise. He lends, he steals the cosmos o
f this one phenomenon, which does not exist without him. But not for long. The i
ndividual tone is also invariably recalled to its origin and recalled immediatel
y. It also disappears. In the mass of inert matter, too, he must again take the
place from which he was torn. However, the secondary phenomena that he revealed
are nothing more than the various clearly structured stations on the way of his
final disappearance.
We are faced with the most fundamental phenomenon, which gives the sound the pos
sibility to become music. In the most direct way, we are confronted with the mos
t primitive, unique spatio-temporal structure in a confined space: each individu
al sound is a solar system, there are fixed, not arbitrary, uninterpretable rela
tions between it and its secondary phenomena.
These relationships are not only spatial (the length divides into two, three, fo
ur <parts>, the overtones appear higher, the overtones lower), but also temporal
ly. What music science completely ignores is the temporal structure of the appea
rance of the epiphenomena and its implication, which is reflected in the affecti
ve world of man. The secondary phenomena do not arise at the same time as the pr
incipal phenomenon, but appear, even in a distance which is barely perceptible t
o man, in time, ie after the principal phenomenon. This is what physical acousti
cs calls the "transient process", which, among other things, has a temporal dime
nsion.
Is music only the effect of sound? Nowhere else does the novelty of the unique a
bundance for human beings caused by the secondary phenomena arise? No. The essen
ce of music is to be sought in the relationship between sound-man and the corres
pondences between this temporal structure of the sound and the structure of the
human affective world.

What is the essence of the human affective world? Relations in the Now Between P
ast and Coming. What are the acting motivations, the emphatic motives for the em
otions and feelings that appear in the affective world, if not this double conne
ction in the present between the future and the past? Someone whom you love is m
issing, is related to the past ( "I've known it ..."); To wait for something tha
t can not come: disappointment is past and future-oriented; Hope is future-orien
ted; Action is future-oriented; Repentance is past and future-oriented, etc. The
re is nothing in our affective world that is not one of these polyvalent relatio
nships.
How is it with our omnipotent small structures? The first overtone: the octave.
They know that when a string divides in the middle, it first divides into two pa
rts: the octave appears; It divides into three: the fifth appears; It divides in
to four, five, ten, one hundred, until, for the human station, it reaches the re
sting position from which it was torn. This process arises in time, although in
a, as I said, very perceptible distance for the human being. The first note, the
octave, which is in motion, appears later than the main note, and is therefore
its future. The octave, however, is not something entirely new; It can appear ne
w under melodic conditions, but at the same time it is also the same. But in the
same way, in the repetition, the goal is, for the time being, the uniforming no
n-different ability of inertia.
'On the wing,' I'll try to show a little '(I've got so stiff fingers for two day
s, if that goes away?). So, the octav: it's something new. <Plays a nuised octav
e> This is absolutely new! ". But it is also the same. What am I playing now?
Ex 1 & 2
You see, it's the same. So, the octave is something new when it is melodically a
chieved, it really has the value of a new phenomenon, but that is a very special
, particular condition; Its function is the same.
The second overtone is completely new and unmistakably different, if the length
is divided into three, and this is the fifth. It is in itself the real future of
the fundamental tone. I do not need to play a line also in fifths, you know how
contradictory that is. In its relation to the main tone and to the other second
ary phenomena, it is predominant, and thus inheres all pre-dominant features fro
m the original tone. <On the Plate> It is characterized by the Pythagorean relat
ion 2: 3 (by dividing the string into three, the fifth being a third, and that i
s 2: 3, three are three units, and only two are I and so The fifth) is the small
est and largest opposition of the first prime numbers. It is in a right angle po
sition to the main function and is thus the most stable sound interval. By symbo
lizing all stable relationships, it is the parameter and invariable standard of
all mobile and genetic spatio-temporal structures.
So, the sound belongs to the initiative of man and at the same time he belongs t
o the universe. Why the initiative of man? I can make a melody like this - I did
it, I mean; At the same time it is - because it is recovered - the universe. So
, double affiliation. It is essential, in the tone, which is, among other things
, a spatial phenomenon, to listen to the occult time dimension, which constitute
s the essence of the relationship to man.
But a tone alone can not become music, despite its implicit late-temporal struct
ure. It is only with the appearance of the next note that the further dimensions
of the expanding activity, which are directed against the all-swallowing inerti
a, against which all devouring tendency to disappear are furnished.
I do not know whether this is clear enough, that in the division of the main phe
nomenon, in the revelation of his family, there is something that can not be int
erpreted.

<On the Wing> The essential appearance is the Quint. What does that mean? In mus
ic we have dealt with the sixteen first appearances of the overtone series, for
example, from this tone:
Ex 4
The essence is the Quint. Why not the quart? Because within this final reference
system, what is the octave ...
Ex. 5
... within this system:
Ex. 6
I can reduce everything that lies within the nine octaves of humanity:
Ex. 7-14
Thus, the octave is a final reference system - not for all expansions, <only> fo
r the harmonic and melodic. And if you take the octave as the ratio 1: 2 (which
is the Pythagorean ratio), the octave is also - as represented by the ratio 1: 2
- far from the other part played by the fifth. 1: 2 ratio:
Ex. 15
Rhytmic:
Ex. 16
Is it entirely new, or is it already in the other? Yes, of course!
Ex. 17
How about the Quint? 2: 3 ratio:
Ex. 18
Great Opposition!
Ex. 19
On the other hand
Ex. 20
It is the same again, which the opposition canceled. Are there any greater tensi
on in this opposition than the Quint? Larger non-differentiated, yes.
Ex. 21
Three against five: heavier perceptible, no greater than the <two versus> three.
The:
Ex. 22
There are no more distant dynamic positions than 2: 3.
This is also the essence of the jazzmusic, which at first drew the greatest rhyt

hmic energy out of this counter-interpretation of the two rhythms. The so-called
Hiccup, which is when I am here ...
Ex. 23
What's this? Are three eighths together against four below. [...] This "Hiccup"
can be moved, and in jazz, too, people have discovered this over time
Ex. 24
It is three against two. So, the smallest and the biggest opposition. You see, a
ll these aspects, I need to live together with you for a week, you would not be
more than a theory, but you will see in your life the same active forces that ar
e in me. Husserl calls this "intersubjective impingement."
So, we now need the material, the sound 'leave'. We have gone out of this study
of sound and we now want to tackle something else. But we have spoken very littl
e of this, should we go a little further [...]? My hour is getting scarcer, is n
ot it? We'll go on, maybe we'll come back. (Ladies and Gentlemen, I promise you
of your direct interest later - with questions in this respect - much more than
from this theoretical presentation.)
[p ]
We are now leaving the material and dealing with the nature of the human mind. T
he human mind is a self-contained, indivisible entity, which is constantly oppos
ed to a variety of phenomena. He is therefore a closed unity, a "one," and can o
nly have something to do with another "one" at a time. In his intention, directe
d towards the outside, to be appropriately identified with perceived ones - to i
dentify appropriately with the perceived! Or to exclude the irreparable, irrecon
cilable: this is the ontological essence of its function. This unique nature of
the human mind is called Sanskrit ekagrata. We do not have an equivalent concept
in German. The English are better off this time, they call it onepointedness. O
ne-on-one. We can, however, translate the facts intelligently, circling what is
meant, with "non-dualistic nature of free consciousness." If the mind were not t
o be able to absorb what is proper and leave it, that is, to transcend it, there
would be no other possibility of a next appropriation experienced in the correl
ation. Through the transcendental transcendence in the here and now (transcenden
ce of immanent appropriation), the spirit regains its freedom; The impartiality
that is conditio sine qua non for the next connotation. Merging the differences,
eliminating any form of duality, is the only possible performance of our mind.
As a result, every variety must be united in a fact that seems to be closed to i
t. The elimination of all differences, the integration of all parts into a whole
, we call "reduction."
[p24]
(For the phenomenologists: here the paths of musical phenomenology are different
iated from the philosophical ones.) Husserl calls reduction by means of "parenta
lism", "exclusion," "overthrowing," etc. We have gone absolutely differently. )
Integrating has nothing to do with the mathematical and formal logic as the rest
oration of the unity of the differentiated. It is not a restoration, but a one-t
ime and first-time re-creation, which requires only one condition: the mutually
complementary, mutually complementary relations between the parts or modes of be
ing. (The relationship: "red nose" and "the will as an idea" can not be integrat
ed.)
In a series of phonetic perceptions, each individual phenomenon disappears and t
he question arises: What remains? What remains is the relationship that can only
be experienced through transcendence. The transcendent mind is neither in the f
irst term of a relation, nor in the second, but it transcends all the two, and i
s the essence of its comprehension, being related, and related relation. Disappe
aring relationships? ... Not? Yes, but not like the sounds from the physically p

erceptible sector where they have occurred; But they integrate into a new, highe
r, transcendental unity, which is the permanent work, the eternally possible fun
ction of the human mind.
[p25]
We have thus encountered a cardinal difference between European philosophy and t
he real facts. Since Brentano, the teacher of Husserl, European philosophy has p
roceeded from the apodictic, axiomatic assumption that every consciousness is "c
onsciousness of something". This is also the riddle of our whole philosophy. For
us, nothing is more false than that. The yogis know this since reflexive thinki
ng has existed. Before the consciousness reaches something, it must exist existe
ntially. Only when it has gripped, it becomes awareness of something. And if it
has gripped - how can it still be pure? What does the yogi's recommendation to t
he student always mean when he meditates: "Emptiness! Do not let the omnipotent
light of your consciousness be diminished by something that rises above the grou
nd. Violent Violation? Or is it the unrestricted, unconditioned experience of om
nipotent light, that is, the highest activity? As I said, you can not talk about
it, you can only experience it. (Millions of young people are trying today, may
be for the first time in the history of this planet in this latitude, and they o
nly bring their indomitable urge for freedom to this cosmic enterprise.)
Now back to the sound. We have seen that a sound alone can not be music. After t
he first sound, another appears, the first articulation arises, which produces t
he communication between hearing and hearing. This is not enough, however, to ke
ep the listener under the spell of a sound event. In what follows this articulat
ion, the other living feature will show itself, which from the association of tw
o tones forms the smallest building block of the future building. This feature i
s directed.
[p26]
What are the relationships between two consecutive tones? The second note is equ
al to the first, which is the first case. In the opposition of two equal tones,
for the first time, the most elementary, time-consuming sound structures materia
lize, the appropriate prerequisite that the metamorphosis of all tondata in musi
c takes place.
The second case would be followed by a single tone. At the first note, we have f
ound that he is not only a spatial phenomenon, but also has a temporal dimension
. His family comes after him. For the first time in this narrow space, we are co
nfronted with a phenomenon which remains significant, essential, for everything
that later results from it. <Shows on the panel> If the second note is the same,
we are faced with a whole new situation. Do I feel the second tone, which is ph
ysically the same as that, equal? Of course not, because the first tone left som
ething to me. (Otherwise, I can not say that the second is a second.) There is a
n impression, whether it be in my memory, or in this incredibly prepared sensiti
vity of man. This tone no longer has this incredible advantage of falling into a
unprocessed field, but falls on a field that is worked by this tone. For God's
sake! Then there is no repetition in the music? Of course there are no. For from
the first time I have received something, the second time, what we call repetit
ion, falls on something worked. How often can you walk on fresh snow without usi
ng the same footprints? Once.
[p27]
This is an absolutely new phenomenon, you will say - it is also! <Drawing on the
board> Did she have something with him? Only when I look at all two phenomena i
n themselves ... and that in themselves ..., then they are equal. How can we abs
orb something in a career? If so, the position of the same phenomenon of the fir
st is different from the position of the first to the second. The second appears

discursive, in discursiveness, and the other recursively. The comprehending non

-different ability of the mind (onepointedness) does not sound in itself, but wh
at? He hears the relationship between the two. And in the relation neither the f
irst nor the present nor the second is present. If this is nothing new in the se
cond phenomenon, then my interest in it is diminished. Thus, a valley of this ph
enomenon arises to this ... <Tafel> Since this first worked on me, I can only pe
rceive the second in relation to the first. The advancement further into time sh
ows a new dimension in favor of the second, it goes so ... The relation "nothing
new in the other" creates a direction from this articulation, and that is oppos
ite: I take the second tone In relation to the first <true>.
These are already the first oppositions. Contrasts that are permanent, are perma
nent. Aha! We did not know! What do you say, Mr. Celibidache? How Beethoven buil
ds the climax in his first movement of his Fifth Symphony?
Ex. 25
[p28]
Oh, does not he repeat eight times? Not at all!
"Eight times" is the photography of the image, not the musical reality. It incre
ases, just because it is not the same; Because it is not a repetition. If he had
not done this, instead he would have done (I can now only serve an idiotic impo
sition):
Ex.26
What is mandatory? Nothing! What is compelling with the other? Everything! And w
ithin these two poles, everything is played out in music. These are also quite d
ifferent dimensions, which we will still experience.
[p29]
What happens when the second tone is new? Are the considerations, which were abs
olutely inevitable, are they still to be found here? Do I hear the second tone i
n relation to the first? Of course. Is this valley (by not being new) also here?
No, here is something new. Here, of course, all the musical dimensions arise: .
.. This is an articulation ... and that too. I can only hear: one - two; From th
e earliest to the next. Here also. ". What forces are still at work here? If thi
s second sound is one of these secondary phenomena of the first tone, it is said
that the kinship is close, the opposition is not so great. [That is possible. B
ut if this second note is not part of these epiphenomena of the first tone, "the
re are so many phenomena that belong to it, it is not one of them, but a very re
mote one-what is the opposition? Enormously great. Does the other tone, the new
one, also have such a system around it? Of course. The further the relationship,
phenomenologically, the more distant the kinship between these two ". (Since we
have criteria, to determine, I can not recite this so quickly) ". The more dist
ant the struggle between the epiphenomena and the epiphenomena of the first tone
. We call that "tension."
So, the greater the distance, the greater the tension. But, for example, I can l
ight up this tone on the piano easily - how are the epiphenomena? Are they alway
s there? Yes. But if it is launched with little force, how is its world? Small f
or human perception, that is, we hear little. <On the Wing> It is not said that
this tone
[p30]
Ex. 27
Not the same Epiphenomena has like this:
Ex. 28
This one has the same as the former, but how is it between this:
Ex. 29
And this?

Ex. 30
In the second, in which the attack was stronger, I heard much more of his epiphe
nomena than the first. Well, how about the physical conditions? With this sound:
]
Ex. 31
[p31]
I hear all the first decisive sixteen phenomena. <Ex. 4>. How is it with the sou
nd?
Ex. 32
Is there also there? Of course, but where do they fall? Outside the human percep
tion sector, which can be heard acoustically from 16 vibrations to 20,000 and mu
sically from 32 to perhaps 8000.
So, in the one case, the family ... that is the human perception sector ... in t
he one case: this "deep" sound that is so, it is to be heard in all its identity
. This <high> tone forms the same phenomena, all falling outside the human perce
ption sector, so they are no longer audible to me.
So: kinship between the tones, kinship between the different volumes, intensitie
s. Is very strong and the other little is obviously not a big opposition. If the
strong and the strong - is a huge opposition is present. The greater the opposi
tion, the more numerous the points of contact between the facts. And the greater
the opposition, the more the contacts, the more time I need to perceive. Aha! T
hus, the temporal dimension is already contained in the interval. Thunderstorm!
Why that?
What other musical phenomenologists claim? What frescobaldi, the musician, says
the Quinta
[p32]
What other musical phenomenologists claim? What frescobaldi says, the musician w
ho has spoiled the quintuple, says about 100 or 90 years before Bach lived: "Exp
ressive passages must be played slower than the others." Where does the term com
e from? What is expression? Variety of contact points between the phenomena. I h
ave a strong and a weak, there are hardly any contact points, hardly any opposit
ions. They can not interest us. Because of the luteness, by the intensive presen
tation of the phenomena, a lot of contact points, I need more time to learn from
it through my onepointedness (the synthetic power of my spirit), ... I need mor
e time then, a relationship from it To be able to. Aha!
What does Bach, the other great phenomenologist, say by the few words he has lef
t us? "If you can not see the tempo from the sound set, let it rather be!" They
make a score, and they must know whether that is a slow movement, or a faster on
e. When will it be a slow rate? Where these oppositions, whether in kinship, in
tone, or in phrasing, are great. Aha! And is that everyone? He said: Yes! - I me
an it, too. But not after 200 years of false music practice, everything has been
broken. Today we get as the very first date or ... Information: Allegro = 52. N
ow let them run, metronome: di-di-di, and they are now trying to compile the var
ieties there - well, what can come of it? What is this temptation? Where should
it be? After all the factors that have affected us, we can say that at this rate
it is possible.
[p33]
What does Haydn say? "The harmonies of a final sentence, a prestation sentence m
ust be simple: tonic, dominant, subdominant" Oh, why that? "Chromatic harmonies
can be at slow rates." So there is something in the sound and in the sound assoc
iations, which objectively contains the tempo. And what is that? This is the deg
ree of oppositeness.
Of course I can talk about these situations (the same tone and different tones,

etc.) for a very long time, but I think only of this tragic hour which is at my
disposal. So, of course, this situation is not only so melodic, in time, but two
tones can also appear simultaneously; The points of contact between these pheno
mena are the same. If both belong to the same series of epiphenomena, the kinshi
p is close; If they do not belong, the opposition is great.
Unfortunately God, in me it is a very healthy urge and so much human love, I wan
t to convince you all that what you now hear is not a spinning, a speculation of
thinking. But that is what you always hear; What is in you - absolutely dynamic
- is active. We must go on now.
These relations between two tones reveal a series of separate partial aspects wh
ich, when the conditions are there, completely disappear in the reduction. Not e
veryone has perhaps understood what a reduction is: <On the panel> If we have se
veral individual phenomena that materialize in the present ... That would be som
ething ... <draws> ... in the now, yes? ... <On the Wing> Imagine a chord, yes?
[p34]
Ex. 33
There are horns, flutes, bassoons, viola, cello, etc. And one of these elements,
acting in the simultaneity ... on the blackboard, for example, this flute is to
o deep. What are we doing? They do not know what to do - we do not say, "You are
too deep!" When we said that, what happens? Either he has ears and changes his
pitch and returns to the existing unity. For as long as he is too deep, he is he
re and the others are here, that is, duality. <Drawing> does he find the right t
one, what happens? Will he disappear? No, it is integrated into this unit. Imagi
ne now that such a sleepy hornist mezzoforte blows and the other piano bubbles .
... He also creates a duality, there are two things. When they tell him, "Are yo
u so good, please, do not disturb the others." "Yes, yes, I beg your pardon!" No
w he blows too - has he disappeared? No, it is integrated in the "one", in the n
ow. How many such dimensions are there? Countless: It can be too soft, too hard,
it can be too deep, too [...] (I can not explain about it), it can be too extro
vert and too introvert. There are incredible points of view that could go on.
<On the blackboard> So, that is duality. It can also be that this variety is muc
h bigger: too deep flute, now too stupid trombone, too loud horn, ... too late d
ouble bass !!! ... too early trumpet variety! And if that is not the case, if ev
eryone pure ... - where pure? In the generating unit - ... the diversity disappe
ars. Only with this "one" can we have to do, for we ourselves are "one." As long
as we are confronted with an existing diversity, we can not do anything with it
. By appropriating this, it must first become a "one." And to appropriate? To be
free for the next appropriation. It is quite clear, I hope, what diversity is a
nd what is the onepointedness, the ability of the mind to associate everything.
[p35]
The joining together of two separate phenomena corresponds to the only possible
action, the one-time, first and last-time non-different ability of the mind. He
has to cope with diversity, that is, he must get out of it. He must assert himse
lf against them. As diversity is eternally new, the ability of reduction must be
eternally unused. It is a self-assertion that the mind must reduce the diversit
y. And he does it wherever possible. The act of thought is a clear reduction tak
ing place in simultaneity. In the act of thought, the comprehensible ability of
human consciousness manifests itself directly. Every definition, every generaliz
ation, every wish to be valid in valid laws, any plurality projected as a totali
ty, each reduced by the conceptual symbolism of the individual phenomenon, every
mathematical equation, the only possible conclusion arising from the numerous p
remises is the direct fruit of this potentiality Of the human mind.

But what are the irreplaceable conditions for the reduction of sound phenomena?
A condition for this is the "tempo". Yes, what the tempo is, is
[p36]
Very difficult to define. Not difficult - impossible! The tempo can be a correla
te in the physical world, but it has nothing to do with the physical time and it
s course. In terms of tempo, all temporal identifiers, such as "slow," "fast," "
not slow," "not so fast,
"Too fast," "correct", or "wrong". The assertion that a greater variety needs mo
re pace to be reduced than a smaller one is as false as the hope of the scholars
to be able to come to the basic, not divisible, endings by eternal sharing. Sin
ce tempo is a one-time condition, it can no longer be larger, smaller, less, or
different; It is unique. If the reduction did not take place, the tempo was not
wrong, but the sound sensations occurring one after the other remained what they
were and could not be reduced to a simultaneous structure. The tempo has not ex
isted as a condition at all. It can not be that the reduction did not take place
because the tempo was wrong - the tempo can not be wrong or right; The tempo ha
s no existential existential existence, it is a condition.
When experts say that the pace was correct, they speak of a flood of dry water p
rojected into the physical world that flows up the citizenry of the swine. The d
ifferences occurring in the physical time do not affect the formation of all hig
her units by reduction. The enormous confusion, the most unhealthy, is to equate
speed with speed. Tempo is not speed; Tempo is nothing. But, thus a series of s
ound phenomena are summarized in one unit
[p37]
Is a condition. As we have said, it is a correlate in the physical world - it ha
s nothing to do with it.
If you tell someone, Goethe's Faust has been told in America in two hours now, w
hat would we say? Yes, in what way? That all the words were there - possible. Th
at the sense also. "? Well, there we would say: No! We - those who have read it
a bit - we do not think this is possible. When we hear that this tempo is correc
t (verbally, only one speed is correct), it is said that in the performer someth
ing has arisen and with the receiving one as well. Can the tempo be something th
at it is right? That you, like the others, can find any meaning in it? There is
nothing to say about this. The heat manifests itself through the objects. There
has to be something that gets hot, which makes heat manifest. The objects themse
lves are not the heat.
As we have seen, the articulation of two equal tones is an opposition process th
at takes its place and its role within the whole expansion. What is "expansion"?
This spatial and temporal continuation. The essence of each spatio-temporal exp
ansion is the impermeable, so-and-not-different organic link between all the art
iculations involved in this development. The interpenetration of all the compone
nts involved: supplementing and completing each other, forgetting any form of in
dividual existence or discursive appearance, irreversible relationship between t
he whole and its parts, are unmistakable features of this interpenetration.
[p38]
As Husserl so beautifully says that "every single act of the consciousness life
is not isolated, but necessarily implies an infinite horizon of inactively valid
ating validity." Never before has a man formulated so clearly and unequivocally
what he himself has seen. We know today that the terminology of Kant was very po
lyvalent. There is even a logician [...] who has discovered with computers that
all the conclusions of his logical sequences were contained in the premises. Yes
, Husserl has not been so busy. We'll come back again.
It is clear that the material repetition of a tone, in spite of the emergence of
initial musical structures, can not create the opposition that causes the expan
sion, the expansions in space and time. Every musical articulation is an expansi

on and compression process. The right in the experience to continue to exist in

the spatio-temporal dimension - the right to permanence - is directly dependent
on the opposites. Where can expansion go? How far can expansion expand? Until sh
e can not stretch! This crucial point of any expansive development is the "clima
x".
This turning point, where the extroverted direction of expansion into the introv
erted reverses, is the most cardinal pivot around which any form of musical arch
itecture is functionally divided. Because of its unique meaning, it falls rigoro
usly out of every form of form. Everything that occurs in the expansive phase un
dergoes an organic, reduction-promoting supplement in the compressive phase. If
this is not the case, the conclusion is not the consistent, unavoidable conseque
nce of the beginning. If, however, the conclusion is the actual sequence of the
beginning, it is simultaneously present, as in the act of thought, with the begi
nning. The act of thought and the musical act manifest, both materialize in the
spatio-temporal continuum. In essence, however, they are non-temporal, simultane
ous. [{syncchronic}]
[p39]
When you say, "I could not call you last night because my mother came late"; "I
could ..." when you started, you knew where you wanted to go; They knew that you
r mother had come. The end was contained in the beginning: So is the act of thou
ght. So, the end is simultaneously present, inherent in the beginning. This is t
he case with the musical act. The end is contained in the beginning; And not pot
entially, but effectively. There were former conductors who said: "Before you be
gin, remember four kraziale moments: beginning, maximum expansion point, low poi
nt and end.
"Remember! Think, how should ...? Yes, but this is very static. That this is ind
eed the case, that we act in this way (and not act consciously), is another fact
.
Thus, the creative act - which can be the case with the act of thought as well a
s the musical act - is free from any past or future-oriented conditioning. Only
his open, spontaneous behavior guarantees his unrestricted functioning. The actu
al extent of oppositeness can only be recognized by a spontaneous, associative s
pirit. (The music lover who finds Rimskij-Korsakov "sweetish" brings his diabete
s in every concert.) Oppositeness is the invigorating source of energy, which is
responsible for the formation, maintenance and restriction of the duration. But
not every oppositeness is power-generating and lasting constituent. Only opposi
tions which complement each other complementarily, or, in other words, those whi
ch have one or more common parameters when they are activated or diminished, are
equal in the reduction.
[p40]
But this can only be recognized by the free unconscious mind. Only the free spir
it can trace the opposing tendencies of two musical factors which have been cont
racted, and only on the basis of the indelible urge to freedom that they exist,
does he continue to experience so much unfreeness as to overcome the controversy
that has carried him along. The free spirit hears how freedom is achieved by ba
lancing the opposition. So, in other words, freedom can only be freedom. Freedom
, free-being, and self-liberation are the activities of the free spirit which el
iminate any duality when the sound succeeds to become music, one thing and the s
ame.
Is music a language? No. Music is anything but a language. The language uses a c
onventional symbolism and polyvalent semantic meanings, which appear in discursi
veness. It can come to a central, meaningful core by means of predicative margin
al movements in different ways. The tone speaks directly to human beings, irresp

ective of any specific individual determination such as race, gender, condition,

age, and evokes free, non-conditioned reflexes. When the prerequisites for this
are united, he experiences a direct, inexplicable correspondence in the emotion
ally moving world of the receiving subject
What are the prerequisites? Not every recipient can remove and discard what is a
cting as a colored veil between his pure consciousness and reality. The sky may
be blue and always remain so, and yet steam, mist and clouds can hang in between
. But each individual is given the sacred possibility of eliminating what is in
between, and freeing his view. There is no such-and-not-the-language of the musi
cal tone. If the sound is different, this is only due to the different state of
the perceptual opacity of the perception, which is suspended between the pure co
nsciousness and the naked reality. The non-different ability of pure consciousne
ss is not a limitation. This eternal identity, which remains the same, is the co
ntinual, renewed renewal of its nature; The effective, omnipresent, all-encompas
sing final reduction, the divine correlative of absolute being.
[p41]
But what for? Why Phenomenology? Will phenomenology change something in the prev
ailing conditions of today's music practice? No, certainly not. Will she be able
to prevent bathing in the soothing warmth of her own ignorance? How is this to
happen? You can swallow needles and coins - you can not digest them. But you wil
l learn this one night at the latest. Can phenomenology shorten the long, someti
mes infinite, night? How come? The night and its functional length is directly r
elated to the experienced light. And there are so many like-minded people who ha
ve discovered that this bathing is most felt at night.
[p42]
Would man become more easily with phenomenology to true music? No. If he has com
e to music, if he has remained faithful to his own divine nature, then phenomeno
logy is always present. Phenomenology is not a panacea for sick gifted musicians
and healthy unmusical tenors. She can not be all that. But we already know that
it is not easy to get caught in a linguistic cladding.
It would be more interesting for you to know what brought me personally to pheno
menology. I learned of their existence long before 1945, and I believe that, in
addition to the philosophical interest in this groundbreaking new way of thinkin
g, I was greatly stimulated by the taste of the forbidden fruit, which at that t
ime guaranteed a safe place for prisoners.
In 1945, on an orchestral part of Wagner's Siegfried Idyll, I discovered the fol
lowing comment from a not very energetic violist: "Siegfried Wagner: 30 minutes,
Wilhelm Furtwangler: 26 minutes, Siegmund Hausgger: 16 minutes." Later, I learn
ed, these best times were swept away by a Wikinger gazelle, who, when she was no
t trying to make music, called Bernard Haitink, with the record time of twelve-a
nd-a-half minutes from the musical sports palms. Is it still about the same thin
g, or can you embrace a girl stenographically in a poetic idyll? So: fight! - un
relenting struggle of arbitrariness, whatever aspects it may appear. There must
be in man the means to do it, that was my faith.
[p43]
I was warned by my musical father, Heinz Tiessen, that this study might bring or
der to yourself; The chances of a lecture, this one-movement thought-fiction, wh
ere the sounds of the sympathetic listener are not easily heard, and thus irredu
cible, remain rather small.
So now we are waiting for your questions. I know you should not worry about your
questions being too stupid. No question is stupid as long as it meets a need. A
nd if you do not understand something, we are there to explain. But if you have

understood that all this is not correct; What animates me, I also stand for a co
ntrasting discussion.
thank you!
==============
[p44]
Discussion
Question: [...] It may be concluded from this that [..] you have actually denied
the ability to interpret the musical scientist?
Celibidache: Yes, not just the musicologist. "An ability to interpret" -I do not
believe that we are able to make anything out of what is heard. It is possible
that you do not quite perceive a variety as a certain journalist in Munich alway
s finds the tempo too slow. - You know, we have a cohesive area: where the tones
fight, when certain relationships in the bow, in the volume, in the structuring
of the present moment, when these relationships are there, four octaves higher
still arise Soundtrack, which is also very complicated. If, however, you are not
made aware of it by false education or inadequacy, and if your consciousness is
not directed to it, then you will not be able to feel the extent of a slow pace
. What is happening? Are only the cohesive substances responsible for the substa
nce? Oje, oje. That man has not yet experienced that the physical world is suppo
rted by a higher (we can call it "astral", if you wish), but that it is there, i
t does not need the ear but it needs a directed consciousness .
With a small piece like Ma mere l'Oye by Ravel, we are striving for an incredibl
y differentiated arcing so that overtones are formed four octaves higher. If the
y arise, if I hear them, I need a little more time in the physical time to make
a unity. If you do not hear these higher octaves because of your inability, the
tempo will seem much too slow for you. My tempi, recorded in a variety in the ac
tual room, or realized by me - when I hear them on the recording, they appear a
third too slow. Why? Because the microphone can not hear a third of it.
I saw Furtwangler in London when he said after a recording of a Wagner piece: "F
or God's sake, these are not my tempi! I've never been so slow! "No, the microph
one can not do that, the diversity. Not only that it can not do so, it can not t
ake up (within the first five octaves) 28 <percent> of the phenomena; To do so,
it creates its own mass (because it is a metal mass) its own overtones, which ar
e not at all in space. So, why speed as a condition? On the recording - does it
still play the same role as in the actual room? Since when has humanity perished
musically? (And that is it!) Since there are recordings; And the reference temp
o <-wide>, let's say even simpler: speed - diversity is not there at all. Becaus
e it was recorded here and you will hear in the bathroom, where a completely dif
ferent variety is created.
[Bockholdt: [..] I had the impression that you had asked the question to me befo
re, and you asked me whether I would deny Mr Celibidache the ability to interpre
t. Did I understand you correctly? I would like to answer, if you so ask, then y
ou are still moving on the ground of the concept of interpretation, which I have
attempted to portray as inappropriate. So, I do not speak to Mr. Cclibidache as
a musician, as a conductor, not the ability to interpret, but I mean that what
he is doing, and I think so, he means so too, has nothing to do with interpretat
ion.
[p46]
Question: [...] Who is the interpreter, if not the musician?
Bockholdt: Excuse me, if I can answer, I do not know who the interpreter is. I d

o not know whether there are any interpreters, but I mean only that interpretati
on of music, as well as the interpretation of works of art from other fields of
art, is something that takes place on a different ground than on the ground of a
ctivity The musician.
So, if you ask me directly - but in my lecture I also said where I see the space
in which music is interpreted, then I would answer, in the space of the broades
t theoretical limitations with music, which, however, Which I find very importan
t and, I believe, also struck out, presuppose the musical execution. Only the on
e can think of interpreting music, interpreting music, performing a piece of mus
ic as it is, from the first to the last note in itself, or by performing music.
Whoever does not, is certainly not called to interpret a piece of music.
Question: [...] The lecture also had an educational approach: It could be so if
...
[p47]
Celibidache: Then pedagogy is to show each individual that what helps to make th
e sound music is to be sought only with him - and nowhere else. Yes, is there su
ch a pedagogy? Although I have seen little results so far, I am trying to make a
difference to each individual - and there is only a potential difference betwee
n him and me in the now relationship; Basically almost none at all - and I tell
that to each individual.
[...]
We have not talked about what is beautiful in music. Music is not beautiful, mus
ic is true. And the highest compliment I've ever heard was from an old lady who
said, "That's it!" Nothing else. I have never heard anything more beautiful. So
that you certainly do not have technical means to reduce this variety, to struct
ure these sounds so that the higher octaves appear, which is quite normal. But,
if you are aware of your consciousness, you will hear it just as I do, that is G
od-given. And most people do it and listen, but they do not know exactly what is
important.
I have been told (excuse, I have to speak immodestly of myself): "With you, the
orchestra sounds different." As a woman told me as a young man in Berlin: "How y
ou make the horns sound, that is unique! "What is so unique about the horn sound
? In this position:
Ex. 34
[p48]
(The decimal length is called), the horn has one of the slowest transitions (onl
y the deep flute is even slower) until the sound comes into vibration. This temp
oral substructure, that is, to bring the two c and g to a perceptible continuity
, is required a third of a second, until all the secondary phenomena are combine
d in the reduction. One third of a second, that is 180 on the metronome!
In the tremendously well-defined violin concerto by Sibelius, Adagio molto is ve
ry slow. No, more than that: Adagio di molto. What is the point?
Ex. 35
If I push the tempo a little bit, that is, not as an act of will, but I do not l
isten to these secondary phenomena, as in the first octave. If it is pushed a bi
t forward, the horns sound like what? After all, just not for horns. When do the
horns sound? When they are caused by intensive listening,
Ex. 36
[p49]
This Quint here, an octave here. Only then is the good sound. This is the term "
di molto". However, if you do not care what's going on, you do not know the spec

ific determination of Sibelius why horns are in place.

In other words, this phrase, projected onto the physical world, is slower in hor
ns than, for example, in the violins. The phrase in the piano concerto is slower
in the orchestra than in the piano. But not so in reducing. To learn it, I have
to get out of this "one" and measure the seconds: "It took five seconds longer
for Celibidache." Yes, not for the man who is in the reduction . This is really
true. What is the same? The function!
If the tempo is now too slow in this sense, that the individual phenomena separa
te once more in time, no more than a shabby, dry sequence arises in an unstructu
red time. Yes, these are aspects that we have not experienced in our training as
musicians. How did we do it? More or less instinctively - as a bit ... Yes, tha
t is the most important statement in my life, which has taken me out of this ine
rtia of stupidity. I once asked Furtwangler, "Master, how fast is it here?" What
does he say? "What's the question, depending on how it sounds!" Aha! So not J =
42. Depending on how it sounds. How do horns sound? With the same harmonic, mel
odic, rhythmic agogics - they sound the same for the reducing spirit. How do the
y sound for those who work with "Andante con moto" and have learned from the lin
guistic definition some irreducible answer? What does that mean? Why did Beethov
en describe all the tempos more slowly after England? The fire test takes place
in the room, not on the paper.
[p50]
What are the composers who have actually listened on the paper to all these seco
ndary phenomena and have encoded them in the script? Among others, for example,
not Beethoven. What does that mean in the Ninth Symphony: Presto [o] = 116 and A
llegro vivace [J] = 132, ie Allegro vivace faster than Presto? What's this? Very
superficial, because he did not care. What did Verdi write at Missa da Requiem?
Largo = 60. Later he wrote: Anteante moderato j = 58. Why then? Andante is slow
er than Largo? He has been wrong, he should not have written quarters, but halfbars = 30; This corresponds to the situation. What he had heard was different fr
om what he had noted. Can it be said that Verdi was not Italian? . "Haydn: not a
single time, Mozart never, Bach has anyway no data, you learn everything from t
he sound set!
Question of alienation as a means of composers; "Against the sound composer"
Sound is reality and not imagination. Against the realities compose?
Bockholdt: He thinks, I believe, if there are no composers who have intentionall
y composted against the natural conditions, as you describe them, that a urine s
ound needs so long, so to speak, so to speak, the effect you want to avoid , Is
wanted by the composer.
[p51]
Celibidache: The ambiguity - here we go back to the natural conditions. It is no
t natural that horns sound different than horns, and that there is a temporal co
mpulsion in the sound, what can I do about it?
Question: A new reality arises!
Why Irreality? Horn can not even be that and once that is; Since it exists, it i
s always the same. What is that horn is not the same? How then can we let the Mo
zart horns harmonize with the other instruments? If it is not the same? This lea
ds to infinity!
Question:

Of course, I can not say anything about music. But I can say a lot about what mu
sic can be - sound. What is the essence of music, how shall we go about it? Only
professors who believe music is the - oh, they've got it much easier! ". I ask
you for one, try to understand that the relationship between sound and man is un
ique - so and not otherwise. And if you have experienced it, no matter what leve
l, you will see that there is no other level where it is not. We can still imagi
ne the world of Josquin Desprez today - we can not hear today's sound with his t
onal sound at the time - and so he always has access to his music. Everything in
music is unique, in its origin.
[p52]
There is also no repetition. There is not the Fifth Beethoven, but it arises at
the moment. Not everything that takes place with the same notes or other musical
features is the Fifth Beethoven. But even more dramatic is another realization:
There is no alternative to the Fifth Beethoven! It arises or does not arise. Di
d I make a fifth pretty good? No, it does not exist: bad, worse, approaching ...
When it is created, the end is in you, in the speaker, and in everyone who is i
nvolved, at the same time with the beginning. If this is not the case, then we w
ill have to hold on to endless discussions.
There is no alternative to music and therefore no interpretation.]