# Do you believe musical ability is more a Sensor or an Intuitive Quality?



## Queen of Mars (Jan 10, 2015)

Now before you say: "Oh! Of course it's an Se quality." Bear with me.
I'm a strong Ni user, and I have a very unique talent in music. I was born with absolute pitch (or perfect pitch depending on who you ask.) In essence, I can identify a note by its particular sound and put the correct name to it, similar to how the everyday person can identify that the color red, is in fact red. I've been playing the violin since I was a kid, and although its a hobby, throughout school I was one of the best, partially due to my absolute pitch and just general intuition in the field. Additionally, I can write music very easily. Music comes naturally partially because despite being an art, its very mathematically based, and math is one of my strong suits. Think about it... rhythm? That is all numbers. Additionally, writing music requires the sort of mindset that a mathematician needs, you need to fit things together to make logical sense, or it ends up weird. It's not like visual art where everything is all over the place.
A lot of people say that music is a sensory skill because it deals with the senses (obviously.) However, especially when writing music or in my case, knowing a note, it's definitely an intuitive thing. I just somehow _know_ how the note is or how I think it should be played.
I'm curious, what is everyone's opinion on this matter?


----------



## Negativity Bias (Jan 27, 2013)

I doubt an ability to make good music has anything to do with any specific function. All of them would have upsides and downsides.


----------



## Mimic octopus (May 3, 2014)

We agree that intuitives are better at theory and abstractions. So I think we should give sensors sensing stuff.


----------



## Verity3 (Nov 15, 2014)

My guess is both S and N have potential to create great music, but from different perspectives.


----------



## castigat (Aug 26, 2012)

Well, I've spent a bit of time in my life playing music and wish to learn other instruments. I highly doubt it's a quality exclusive to either (I think it's analogous to assuming S types are more likely to be good artists in the first place—these things take practice; the only thing in-born is probably how quickly it happens). I learned flute proficiently enough to be in a symphonic band in two weeks, for example. Granted that it was in junior high, but their 'honor band' was really full of people that could pull off performances, since that's basically what we did. 

Being in band was a pretty great experience. I looked up to my teacher and learned quite a bit from him, but I stopped playing in high school because I didn't have room for electives until my senior year. I still remember how to play flute, but haven't touched it in ages. 

Other than that, I dabbled in saxophone and played clarinet well enough to be a stand-in for one of the other seats if they got sick (that is, of course, if I wasn't needed for first), and I'm slowly learning guitar. Motivation is a bitch. Whenever I can get a good keyboard, I'll learn piano, and the same goes for violin, since I had one years ago that I learned a bit on before it got pawned off without my permission. I also want to learn drums someday. 

Really, it's just about learning. If you don't have much (or any) musical intelligence, I'm sure it would be harder, but practice makes perfect. In learning the basic parts of music (keeping time, which notes are which, the difference between treble and bass, the difference between 3/4 and 5/24 time signatures, etc.), you can listen to music with more sensitivity as well. You'll be able to pick out individual instruments and name them, for example.

I'm getting a bit out of hand with this. Band geek alert.
TL;DR I'm an N and play music.

edit: I think it'd be pretty sweet to have perfect/absolute pitch.


----------



## Acadia (Mar 20, 2014)

I don't think it's fair to attribute skill with music to Se or Ne, or Ni or Si. 
though I'll say I always had a knack for playing by ear. 
sitting down with the discipline to learn? not so much. but I do actually like to know what I'm playing, so I learn. It just takes me a longer time than others when it comes to theory because I always want to be running around and doing things.


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

heartofpompeii said:


> It just takes me a longer time than others when it comes to theory because I always want to be running around and doing things.


I know more theory than I can apply. I've wondered if that's an sensor/intuitive difference too. My challenge with music is connecting what I know theoretically with what I'm actually doing. I've played different instruments since elementary school but still can't sightread, for example. But I understand how pitch works, a few different scales, and things like that, lol


----------



## INTJellectual (Oct 22, 2011)

In my opinion, I believe it's more of an S-quality in terms of the preciseness and acuity of heard sounds and notes.

I have a very weak-Se, and I cannot distinguish notes. My hearing is also not that sharp so it affects the way I process sounds and communications.


----------



## Negativity Bias (Jan 27, 2013)

Regina said:


> In my opinion, I believe it's more of an S-quality in terms of the preciseness and acuity of heard sounds and notes.
> 
> I have a very weak-Se, and I cannot distinguish notes. My hearing is also not that sharp so it affects the way I process sounds and communications.


I feel like once you learned it you could do it. I have highish Se and I can't tell notes apart because I'm not that interested in music and haven't given it much thought.


----------



## Glenda Gnome Starr (May 12, 2011)

I've been in choral groups for years and I play the piano as well. When I sing with a choral group, I always want to be next to someone who is not singing my part. That helps me tell if I am singing the right notes.
Unfortunately, when I am next to someone who is off the pitch, it is very annoying and unpleasant.
My friend, who is a music teacher, suggested that I have perfect pitch.
But I don't think so.
I think that I have really good relative pitch.
Hence, I need to hear the entire chord and know where I am in it.
But I'd rather not hear off key singing.
In my opinion, there is no connection with function.
My dominant function as an esfp is Se.
Not sure if there is a connection.
But I don't think so.


----------



## goamare (Feb 27, 2014)

Queen of Mars said:


> Now before you say: "Oh! Of course it's an Se quality." Bear with me.
> I'm a strong Ni user, and I have a very unique talent in music. I was born with absolute pitch (or perfect pitch depending on who you ask.) In essence, I can identify a note by its particular sound and put the correct name to it, similar to how the everyday person can identify that the color red, is in fact red. I've been playing the violin since I was a kid, and although its a hobby, throughout school I was one of the best, partially due to my absolute pitch and just general intuition in the field. Additionally, I can write music very easily. Music comes naturally partially because despite being an art, its very mathematically based, and math is one of my strong suits. Think about it... rhythm? That is all numbers. Additionally, writing music requires the sort of mindset that a mathematician needs, you need to fit things together to make logical sense, or it ends up weird. It's not like visual art where everything is all over the place.
> A lot of people say that music is a sensory skill because it deals with the senses (obviously.) However, especially when writing music or in my case, knowing a note, it's definitely an intuitive thing. I just somehow _know_ how the note is or how I think it should be played.
> I'm curious, what is everyone's opinion on this matter?




I have absolute pitch as well, nice to meet ya. For me I perceive any "tone" with solfege names (do, re, mi etc), as if the tones have lyrics.

(Btw I don't think anyone's "born" with absolute pitch, it's more about early-age training - or some say everyone's born with it, they just lose it when they don't train it)


S/N are relative, so it would be hard to say where it fits exactly.

I would say it depends on WHICH musical ability you're talking about.

Playing classical music (simply following what's on the page), is definitely a lot more S (or SJ).

Playing Jazz (Improvising) is a lot more N than above - maybe NP, and composing seems more NJ.

Producing an album with a theme fused in is even more N.

Seeing a life vision with your philosophy in relation to your music is much more N.


In the end, if I really have to pick one, I would say it is more of a S quality.


----------



## GreyJedi (Dec 8, 2014)

Both can create good music. They just go down with different ways to get the end result.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

As further described in this post, lots of data, from multiple studies (MBTI and Big Five both), has pretty consistently shown relatively strong correlations between an N preference (and/or the Big Five equivalent) and artistic interests — not to mention various kinds of non-artistic creativity.

The official MBTI folks have a large data bank that shows which types are the most likely to pursue various kinds of occupations, and contrary to popular belief — and I think Keirsey (who got a lot of things right, but not this) is the main culprit — ISFPs are actually _less_ likely to be artists than average.

As noted in that linked post, I think INFP is probably the most likely "creative artist" type — if you're talking about who ends up actually managing to make a career out of it — but I suspect INFJs and INTPs (not necessarily in that order) are the first and second runners-up.


----------



## Queen of Mars (Jan 10, 2015)

heartofpompeii said:


> I don't think it's fair to attribute skill with music to Se or Ne, or Ni or Si.
> though I'll say I always had a knack for playing by ear.
> sitting down with the discipline to learn? not so much. but I do actually like to know what I'm playing, so I learn. It just takes me a longer time than others when it comes to theory because I always want to be running around and doing things.


Theory is my speciality. I absolutely love the technical side of music <3


----------



## Queen of Mars (Jan 10, 2015)

reckful said:


> As further described in this post, lots of data, from multiple studies (MBTI and Big Five both), has pretty consistently shown relatively strong correlations between an N preference (and/or the Big Five equivalent) and artistic interests — not to mention various kinds of non-artistic creativity.
> 
> The official MBTI folks have a large data bank that shows which types are the most likely to pursue various kinds of occupations, and contrary to popular belief — and I think Keirsey (who got a lot of things right, but not this) is the main culprit — ISFPs are actually _less_ likely to be artists than average.
> 
> As noted in that linked post, I think INFP is probably the most likely "creative artist" type — if you're talking about who ends up actually managing to make a career out of it — but I suspect INFJs and INTPs (not necessarily in that order) are the first and second runners-up.


Makes sense. I feel as if people who have creative outlets (i.e. an "xNxx" type) are going to be better at creating things such as music or art. INFPs are definitely the most jumbled idea creative. INFJs are more creative when it comes to achieving a goal, and INTPs are creative with their theories and logic.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

The functions experience and create music in different ways. But I don't really think this is type related. Like, heavy Fi-types might be very emotionally drawn in by music. Where as Ne-types like to experiment and play around with sounds. Se-types more drawn to what is purely sounds fresh and good. Si types playing music that creates sensations from their past.

All just generalizations, but you get the point.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

I actually think (momentary thought) that music is about sound harmony, so seems more like a work for the judging functions, if any functions at all.

I have a musical hearing without ever having studies music. Not perfect pitch though. But I can identify a harmonious combination of notes and a chaotic one.


----------



## Queen of Mars (Jan 10, 2015)

goamare said:


> I have absolute pitch as well, nice to meet ya. For me I perceive any "tone" with solfege names (do, re, mi etc), as if the tones have lyrics.
> 
> (Btw I don't think anyone's "born" with absolute pitch, it's more about early-age training - or some say everyone's born with it, they just lose it when they don't train it)
> 
> ...


Ah, its nice to meet you as well. I focus more on Classical music, but I improvise with it, which is more N. I also like themed albums and things that follow with a philosophy, so yes I believe I create music using an N quality.

I'd say traditional music performance is an S trait, as its just performing what you know and/or hear. However, I'd say new "innovators" of music probably have some N in them.


----------



## Queen of Mars (Jan 10, 2015)

SplitTheAtom said:


> I actually think (momentary thought) that music is about sound harmony, so seems more like a work for the judging functions, if any functions at all.
> 
> I have a musical hearing without ever having studies music. Not perfect pitch though. But I can identify a harmonious combination of notes and a chaotic one.


Music harmony can be a judging quality, considering how judgers are perfectionists, etc. I'd say a prospector can write music as well, although its going to be a different style of music than a judger.


----------



## Ardielley (Aug 4, 2013)

Not type related, in my opinion. I'm Ne-aux and have perfect pitch as well. As far as actually _using _musical abilities, though, I do relate to what other people have said in that I love just sitting down at the piano and making up compositions as I go along. I don't actually write down any of what I play (to keep a record of it) as doing so would probably take the fun out of it.


----------



## JTHearts (Aug 6, 2013)

reckful said:


> As further described in this post, lots of data, from multiple studies (MBTI and Big Five both), has pretty consistently shown relatively strong correlations between an N preference (and/or the Big Five equivalent) and artistic interests — not to mention various kinds of non-artistic creativity.
> 
> The official MBTI folks have a large data bank that shows which types are the most likely to pursue various kinds of occupations, and contrary to popular belief — and I think Keirsey (who got a lot of things right, but not this) is the main culprit — ISFPs are actually _less_ likely to be artists than average.
> 
> As noted in that linked post, I think INFP is probably the most likely "creative artist" type — if you're talking about who ends up actually managing to make a career out of it — but I suspect INFJs and INTPs (not necessarily in that order) are the first and second runners-up.


just curious, if YOU were a sensor, how would YOU feel about someone saying S types aren't as creative as N types? Because it sure makes me think that if I'm a sensor I should hate myself.


----------



## Queen of Mars (Jan 10, 2015)

JTHearts said:


> just curious, if YOU were a sensor, how would YOU feel about someone saying S types aren't as creative as N types? Because it sure makes me think that if I'm a sensor I should hate myself.


Intuitives are better at creative processes, sensors are better at doing things that they already know. Sensors are really good at learning skills, an intuitive is not as good at learning pre-made skills. Also, sensors are typically better at sports or things like that. Of course, this isn't always the case, people are not black and white and they're all different. Being a sensor does not make you talentless, it means your talent is focused on different things. I hate when people think different types are better than others. Ugh.


----------



## JTHearts (Aug 6, 2013)

Queen of Mars said:


> Intuitives are better at creative processes, sensors are better at doing things that they already know. Sensors are really good at learning skills, an intuitive is not as good at learning pre-made skills. Also, sensors are typically better at sports or things like that. Of course, this isn't always the case, people are not black and white and they're all different. Being a sensor does not make you talentless, it means your talent is focused on different things. I hate when people think different types are better than others. Ugh.


What if I'm a sensor who wants to be an artist though? Wouldn't people saying N types are more creative discourage me?


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

JTHearts said:


> just curious, if YOU were a sensor, how would YOU feel about someone saying S types aren't as creative as N types? Because it sure makes me think that if I'm a sensor I should hate myself.


You lied to me, bro...



JTHearts said:


> How about this, if you give me ONE strength of ISJs, that has a positive connotation in western society, I will never bother you about typism again!


----------



## Queen of Mars (Jan 10, 2015)

JTHearts said:


> What if I'm a sensor who wants to be an artist though? Wouldn't people saying N types are more creative discourage me?
> 
> I'm not going to let you people tell people what they can and can't be because of some psychological theory.


It's like people telling me I can't be a scientist because I'm a feeler. Don't listen to them, as I said in my last post, everyone is different.
Also, sensors _are_ creative! They just tend to have realistic creativity based off what they already know, whereas an intuitive is a bit radical, especially an INFP, they're ideas aren't things based off what they already know. 

Once again, you cannot really categorize a person perfectly, cognitive functions are really only to know how your brain works, and nothing else.


----------



## JTHearts (Aug 6, 2013)

Queen of Mars said:


> It's like people telling me I can't be a scientist because I'm a feeler. Don't listen to them, as I said in my last post, everyone is different.
> Also, sensors _are_ creative! They just tend to have realistic creativity based off what they already know, whereas an intuitive is a bit radical, especially an INFP, they're ideas aren't things based off what they already know.
> 
> Once again, you cannot really categorize a person perfectly, cognitive functions are really only to know how your brain works, and nothing else.


What type would a person who is not creative in any way whatsoever be then? I am not creative at all, not in a single way.


----------



## Queen of Mars (Jan 10, 2015)

Ardielley said:


> Not type related, in my opinion. I'm Ne-aux and have perfect pitch as well. As far as actually _using _musical abilities, though, I do relate to what other people have said in that I love just sitting down at the piano and making up compositions as I go along. I don't actually write down any of what I play (to keep a record of it) as doing so would probably take the fun out of it.


Ahaha, I do the same thing. It sucks because I have no way of actually writing a piece because I forget everything within a day.


----------



## Queen of Mars (Jan 10, 2015)

JTHearts said:


> What type would a person who is not creative in any way whatsoever be then? I am not creative at all, not in a single way.


Every person has some form of creativity. By saying you're not creative at all is basically saying:
"Hi! I never come up with ideas and I don't know how to act for myself! I only follow others! D"


----------



## JTHearts (Aug 6, 2013)

reckful said:


> You lied to me, bro...


I didn't accuse you of typism, I just wanted you to think about how that would make you feel if you were a sensor.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

JTHearts said:


> I didn't accuse you of typism, I just wanted you to think about how that would make you feel if you were a sensor.


Assuming I was a sensor that was smart enough to understand that type is all about _tendencies and probabilities_, and that there are undoubtedly plenty of sensors who are more creative in one or more ways than plenty of intuitives, I'd say how I "felt about myself" in that regard would depend on how creative I thought _I_ was, regardless of how _typical_ or _atypical_ that might be for my type.

Now as far as you individually go, you've told us...



JTHearts said:


> I am not creative at all, not in a single way.


... so I realize that my "never mind my type, how creative am I?" approach is not likely to be particularly helpful for you.


----------



## Innogen (Oct 22, 2014)

My ENFP friend is great at writing music. Back in high school, we would often work together, writing songs for school projects. He would often be the one writing the lyrics and the melody and whatever, and people liked his stuff. But I would do the singing, because I'm the better singer. That isn't to say he has a bad voice, though. He's actually really good.

So, perhaps S = playing music, and N = writing music?


----------



## Lord Fudgingsley (Mar 3, 2013)

Music is my addiction. I realised this when I'd gone a whole day without listening to music. Good fudgery, I could not concentrate. Music was buzzing around my head like crazy. Ah, I needed it!

I've always wanted to make my own music, and I have a few songs produced on Soundcloud. All of the projects that I've actually completed thus far have been very spontaneous works, many of them giving out a fantasy-induced, transcending feel. I make others feel my world. It's absolutely an Se-user's mark. I am devoted now to making music; it's something I want to perfect. I have bright and awesome ideas, yet right now not the impeccable understanding of structure to make them all work.

But then, not all artists are SPs. Many are not.


----------



## Queen of Mars (Jan 10, 2015)

oraphel said:


> My ENFP friend is great at writing music. Back in high school, we would often work together, writing songs for school projects. He would often be the one writing the lyrics and the melody and whatever, and people liked his stuff. But I would do the singing, because I'm the better singer. That isn't to say he has a bad voice, though. He's actually really good.
> 
> So, perhaps S = playing music, and N = writing music?


Every musician requires abilities in both in order to be a successful musician. However, N's tend to be more into writing the music and S's are better performances, so yeah, I agree with this.


----------



## ferroequinologist (Jul 27, 2012)

Queen of Mars said:


> Now before you say: "Oh! Of course it's an Se quality." Bear with me.
> I'm a strong Ni user, and I have a very unique talent in music. I was born with absolute pitch (or perfect pitch depending on who you ask.) In essence, I can identify a note by its particular sound and put the correct name to it, similar to how the everyday person can identify that the color red, is in fact red. I've been playing the violin since I was a kid, and although its a hobby, throughout school I was one of the best, partially due to my absolute pitch and just general intuition in the field. Additionally, I can write music very easily. Music comes naturally partially because despite being an art, its very mathematically based, and math is one of my strong suits. Think about it... rhythm? That is all numbers. Additionally, writing music requires the sort of mindset that a mathematician needs, you need to fit things together to make logical sense, or it ends up weird. It's not like visual art where everything is all over the place.
> A lot of people say that music is a sensory skill because it deals with the senses (obviously.) However, especially when writing music or in my case, knowing a note, it's definitely an intuitive thing. I just somehow _know_ how the note is or how I think it should be played.
> I'm curious, what is everyone's opinion on this matter?


Personally, I think it's more an Se-Ni thing than Si-Ne, with feeling thrown in for good measure. But that's just my own bias speaking. I have three daughters, and all three are natural musicians. Two are NFJ types and one SFP. My son is also a good musician--ESTP, but he was more mechanical in his playing, and less emotive. He's good, but bored quickly with it. He can read music, and remembers how to play, so sometimes he works out songs either by ear, or by reading music, but his music is less emotive. 

Of course, to throw a spanner into the works, my nephew is most likely an INFP, and he's an excellent pianist--but his technique is a bit less precise, but very evocative. He turns his weakness into a strength with his strong feeling. 

On the other hand, I want to say this is not function related, but so many musicians are ISFPs and SPs that it's frightening (I know lots of them are called Ns on this site, but lots of those are mistypes, IMO, simply based on the false concept that ISFPs can't do words, or other vague anti-Se blather) so I I think that personality does play into it--not necessarily "skill" as that's a learned thing, but natural talent and desire and "heart" also all play a part, but it's an interplay between functions and other non-function-related aspects of personality (upbringing, etc.)


----------



## Zee Bee (Aug 19, 2014)

Queen of Mars said:


> I'm curious, what is everyone's opinion on this matter?


There is wine, women and song

Obviously ISFP have to have at least *one* past time!


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

I don't think it has anything to do with MTBI. Not the talent and passion.

How it manifests, sure. I'm sure all attributes of personality play into that. Ns are probably a little more into music theory and Ss probably usually a little more into the experience of performance. 

I've been playing piano for years as a pleasant hobby, and I enjoy and am decent at it. My INTP dad and ISTP brother - they are the real musicians, it's their lifeblood. I think F affects my musical style - I most enjoy slower, expressive, dramatic pieces that I can imbue emotion into. My INTP dad is really into improvisation based on scales and my brother likes to learn and practice pieces from his favorite musicians. They're both into a really immersive music experience (amps blaring, etc.) they're both Enneagram tritype 953 and sx-sp (Dad is 539 sp/sx, brother 953 sx/sp) and I think for them those elements of their personalities play into the way they go about, experience, and enjoy music as well.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

None of this relates to cognitive functions.


----------

