# What function do we use most when we play musical instruments



## damiencoold (Feb 27, 2010)

After almost 5 year playing guitar, I start to realize that though I love interpreting music in my own ways, I often find myself mentally tired when covering a 4 minute song. Near the end or during the bridge my rhythm or hand motion stutter or not stable. I dont dig much about cognitive function but I have the theory that playing music requires using the sensing functions, like Se and Si a lot, which are either inferior or non-existent in my daily lives. That may cause the tiredness I'm having. Im not sure, what do you all think?


----------



## Du_bist_ein_knoedel_brot (Jun 23, 2012)

Er, well, there is one big difference I notice between me and my INTP boyfriend; he loves learning about music theory and using that theory to write his own music or, improvise, or "Bach"-ify a song on the piano. 

For me that is far too much thinking. I don't like thinking about theory when I play. Or theory at all. Don't really care. I prefer to play with sheet music, and I like choosing romantic composers, and simply playing what's on the page and enjoying the sound. I play piano because it makes me feel like I am releasing my emotions (if I am angry, I play Beethoven, and I feel so much better). My boyfriend plays because he, yes, finds the music beautiful, but also because he loves picking it to bits and pieces and seeing how the chords fit together/harmonnies/patterns. 

One could argue I play music with my Fi, and he with his Ti. But, I am weary to make such an assumption because, as I am sure someone will shortly post on this thread, it probably has nothing to do with functions and simply personal preference.


----------



## Little Cloud (Jan 12, 2013)

I think that also Ne it's used when we play a instrument. I play the flute and I could play a song without reading the score after a time of having seeing it. I'm also able to rebuild a song without knowing the tones of it. I feel like I'm using Ne and so I'm trying to find over all the possibilities the right tones for every song.
Do you, sometimes, experience the same? If yes, does that make sense to you? :happy:


----------



## Dastan (Sep 28, 2011)

I guess the motoric act of playing taken by itself is not a part of any of the four functions. Of course it workes closely with the flow of acoustic (and tactile) perception, but the playing itself is not part of the perception. 

Maybe the decision to play something a special way is formed by thinking and feeling. 

When you play intuitively, the act of playing itself is also not part of the intuitive perception function, because motor function is not perception function. (This kind of intuition rather belongs to the general usage of the word intuition, but not one-to-one to the intuitive function.)
But when you compose music mentally, there is very likely much intuition working. Foreseeing how a melody you've never heard before continues is a very typical example of intuitive perception.


----------



## Tainted Streetlight (Jun 13, 2011)

Everyone uses their own primary functions first, and then descends in that order. For instance, I approached my guitar playing first with my Ne, realized that I was too overwhelmed and couldn't really learn anything, so I cut down my options with my Ti, using my Fe to find out what was worth doing, finally, my Si pulled it all together, forcing myself to learn the individual monotonous minutia of songs.

You could create this structuring for any type.


E.G. INFP

Fi -- Learns based on how the music feels to them (focuses on sounding pleasant to the INFP first)
Ne -- Focuses then on innovation, forging new styles
Si -- focuses on learning the details (memorization) of the piece
Te -- Not quite sure how this one would come in... maybe works to structure the music played.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I really think writing music involves feeling and intuition because you need to "feel" (judge, evaluate) what sounds good or not, and how you connect ideas or come up with new ideas would be linked to intuition. There could be other underlying reasons why the OP feels mentally exhausted such as really emotionally investing into playing and when disconnected you realize how much mental energy you put into playing the actual piece.


----------



## RoSoDude (Apr 3, 2012)

Du_bist_ein_knoedel_brot said:


> Er, well, there is one big difference I notice between me and my INTP boyfriend; he loves learning about music theory and using that theory to write his own music or, improvise, or "Bach"-ify a song on the piano.
> 
> For me that is far too much thinking. I don't like thinking about theory when I play. Or theory at all. Don't really care. I prefer to play with sheet music, and I like choosing romantic composers, and simply playing what's on the page and enjoying the sound. I play piano because it makes me feel like I am releasing my emotions (if I am angry, I play Beethoven, and I feel so much better). My boyfriend plays because he, yes, finds the music beautiful, but also because he loves picking it to bits and pieces and seeing how the chords fit together/harmonnies/patterns.
> 
> One could argue I play music with my Fi, and he with his Ti. But, I am weary to make such an assumption because, as I am sure someone will shortly post on this thread, it probably has nothing to do with functions and simply personal preference.


Music is very much about the emotion for me, but I am like your INTP in that when I write, I look for the more intricate patterns of rhythms and harmonies I can pull together to create the music that emotes what I cannot say in words. Though I took piano lessons for ten (maybe eleven?) years, I switched teachers three times, leaving gaps in my understanding of music theory. I quit lessons because I was really tired of playing classical sheet music, because although a lot of it is very well composed, I only rarely feel a personal connection to what I'm playing. When I'm improvising or writing new music, I can actually feel the pieces come together in my mind and on the keys as one. I'm learning something new every time I play, and I'm improving my creative and emotive ability. What I'm playing is sometimes (okay, most of the time) complete garbage, but I pull out the bits that stand out to me and piece them together into something I actually feel proud of.

I think the reason I appreciate music so much is it engages every part of my personality. It taps into my my inward thinking while simultaneously giving me an outlet for outward emotional expression. It soothes my desire for repeating patterns and unique sounds while also showing me how to spiral out with my ideas. Though I am far from perfect or even accomplished in any sense with music, I find it is my best method of communication.


----------



## frenchie (Jul 7, 2011)

I can easily remember something if I put it into words. Music is very emotional for me. I think it is definitely intuition at work. Whether Feeling or thinking is backing up Intuition takes the music to a different level.

I struggle with rhythm but my tone is immaculate. I was always a great solo performer.

It took me a while to learn how to count. It was quite a struggle. Ironically the more I learned rhythm, the better I got at math. Funny.

I see music a lot like a score of music. I can see each line play out and hear where it is going.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

LeaT said:


> I really think writing music involves feeling and intuition because you need to "feel" (judge, evaluate) what sounds good or not, and how you connect ideas or come up with new ideas would be linked to intuition. There could be other underlying reasons why the OP feels mentally exhausted such as really emotionally investing into playing and when disconnected you realize how much mental energy you put into playing the actual piece.


To show you the other side of music and interpretation:

Music is a lot less about feeling than you might think. If you take a Bach prelude as an example here, the first thing you do is creating structure and creating sentences and there are rules for that. Those rules are difficult to comprehend but can be done. Music is math also called intervals→musical theory. Most Bach preludes don't contain more than 3 voices. You have to be able to mathematically understand this process we call voice separation. Then you have to dig in the books when it comes to music history (17th century ornamentation differs from 19th century ornamentation for example). The above is not perfectly explained but if I would explain it in full detail, not a lot of people are able to understand me here. And remember, not a single has been played so far. 

So which functions did I use? I'd think Te and Ti mostly.

Most people think that music is all about feelings but they are wrong. Feelings come into play after the score has been fully understood→reading behind the notes and most people don't even reach that state. They just follow their guts (starting to read behind the notes already) and make a mess of it.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

damiencoold said:


> After almost 5 year playing guitar, I start to realize that though I love interpreting music in my own ways, I often find myself mentally tired when covering a 4 minute song. Near the end or during the bridge my rhythm or hand motion stutter or not stable. I dont dig much about cognitive function but I have the theory that playing music requires using the sensing functions, like Se and Si a lot, which are either inferior or non-existent in my daily lives. That may cause the tiredness I'm having. Im not sure, what do you all think?


I do not think there's any one function at work when playing music. People with various strengths and weaknesses of preferences can find the right combination of functions needed to make music. We are all motivated differently.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

MBTI aside, there's something to be said about examining you technique, how you move your body, hold your instrument, etc. It has little to do with type, however, type can play a role when you're learning a piece of music or the instrument. I used to be a mediocre technician up until my early twenties, mind you i slacked and never had a teacher explain to be me the importance of keeping your wrists loose, not tightening up in the shoulders and so forth. I learned a lot by reading and examining my own movements. For longer songs, I think of them in smaller units fused together. A lot of tension can be created when you're afraid to drop your instruments. Feel free to experiment with different postures and find what works; most people just play by habit, and therefore fail to improve.

I use a lot of Fe in my playing, it's never about expressing my personal emotions, but instead, I go for creating the correct atmosphere with the piece, gauge and adjust according to the audience's response but still in character with the music. The emotion, drama, poetics or whatever you choose to call it is external. Forcing my personal feelings into the performance is something I can't do; I'm not always emotionally involved with the music either. It becomes very meta, like I'm outside myself watching myself play and pulling strings to adjust accordingly. Which I understand to be Ti, cause, effect, cause, effect. When I'm learning a song, everything is patterns. Think of it like language, letters, words, grammar, speech, so forth. Sensors make better technicians, they can perform the piece cleaner and can repeat the same experience over and over and over, which is what you want for the music business. They play accurately and are usually in the moment. Intuitives are the natural improvisers, can become great technicians if they step aside and force themselves to look and don't have to practice as much because we can fake it, to a point. I've been told that I looked stoned out of my mind when I play piano; like I'm there and not there at the same time. Guitar was an impulse buy and I do trick people into thinking that I really know what I'm doing, but, it's called faking. Ne in a can. And, I've never been able to repeat the same interpretation the same way twice, I remember the piece, the emotional idea but never the exacting details. Those get thrown in as I go along. Details, who needs those?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

All in Twilight said:


> To show you the other side of music and interpretation:
> 
> Music is a lot less about feeling than you might think. If you take a Bach prelude as an example here, the first thing you do is creating structure and creating sentences and there are rules for that. Those rules are difficult to comprehend but can be done. Music is math also called intervals→musical theory. Most Bach preludes don't contain more than 3 voices. You have to be able to mathematically understand this process we call voice separation. Then you have to dig in the books when it comes to music history (17th century ornamentation differs from 19th century ornamentation for example). The above is not perfectly explained but if I would explain it in full detail, not a lot of people are able to understand me here. And remember, not a single has been played so far.
> 
> ...


Actually, I studied music myself and I'm a very poor hobby musician I guess you should say so I know about this but this is definitely not how I approach music writing and composition. I also wish to point out that a lot of great musicians haven't studied a single piece of music theory or know how to read notes in order to be musicians. 

Just because you approach music with a thinking attitude (and what you described was Te, I fail to see the Ti) doesn't mean I or others have to do so. I very well realize that music also follows a structure but I would not approach music with the structure in mind. If the music I compose happens to follow a certain structure it does so unintentionally.

Last but not least, you can add a lot of theory in music or for the matter, layers of complexities that in theory indeed sound great. Let's assume for example in order to create tension we decide to use staccato notes played with fortissimo but without the intuitive and feeling evaluation of what kind of feelings this kind of playing will evoke (also, the notes chosen matter here - picking a melodic scale as opposed to chromatic will have widely different effects) therefore necessiates feeling. I still need to judge if this sound is the sound I am intending to create and whether it is good or not. 

That's my personal perspective anyway. With that said, of course functions tend to work in pairs, but I think it is false to say that music composition involves no feeling judgement.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Actually, I studied music myself and I'm a very poor hobby musician I guess you should say so I know about this but this is definitely not how I approach music writing and composition. I also wish to point out that a lot of great musicians haven't studied a single piece of music theory or know how to read notes in order to be musicians.
> 
> Just because you approach music with a thinking attitude (and what you described was Te, I fail to see the Ti) doesn't mean I or others have to do so. I very well realize that music also follows a structure but I would not approach music with the structure in mind. If the music I compose happens to follow a certain structure it does so unintentionally.
> 
> ...


Please learn to read. I said that there is another side attached to this and I didn't say there was _no_ feeling involved. I am not a poor hobby musician, I play master class and I studied classical music.

I wasn't talking about composition, you are. So again, feeling comes into play when logic has been applied.

So let me defile your reasoning:

- a melodic scale is not opposed to chromatic→a b c d e Fis Gis a vs a ais bc cis d dis e f Fis g Gis are no opposites and not even mutually exclusive. They are two scales and that's it. You can't pick a chromatic scale as opposed to a melodic scale. You can use chromaticism when you play a minor scale whether this scale is melodic or harmonic (Mahler for example). This has nothing to do with feeling but with logic. Some things are just illogical and our senses tells us that it is illogical. However, if we do understand this logic, we can use our "feelings and intuition" to apply this logic.

- staccato and fortissimo are fancy words but it has nothing to do with music theory. They are terms invented to enhance a certain emotional effect. In composition, this requires indeed an emotional evaluation but that was not what I was talking about. 

- A fugue, sonata, symphony or whatever is inherently form and structure, you can't ignore that. Most musician do ignore that but they will never able to understand a piece to perfection. 

When it comes to interpretation, you have to learn to get into the head of the composer. That requires logic and an understanding of musical history. After this process, again, then you can apply your intuition and emotions: the ability to read behind the notes←→the dept of the composition. This process is the most difficult process and can only be properly applied once you have totally understood the composition.

Edit: 

Ti comes into play because the perfect interpretation of a piece is a big process. You can compare this with cutting this process into an x amount of parts like musical theory, history, technique of the musical instrument, understanding of the instrument and so one. Then we must try to understand each part through analysis and reassemble it into a whole "being" which we can call interpretation.


----------



## Tharwen (Mar 20, 2013)

mostly i use Ni as a source of infinite creativity, as i only play by improvisation, and my Fe to give it a finishing touch of dramaticism.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

@_All in Twilight_ I won't bother because it's so obvious we are approaching it in such different ways I don't see much of a point continuing this. I never once for example implied that a chromatic scale is opposed to a melodic scale. I did however imply that the use of them will yield very different results when used in practice and to determine which one we'd use my argument is that we would need to apply some kind of feeling judgement.


> - staccato and fortissimo are fancy words but it has nothing to do with music theory. They are terms invented to enhance a certain emotional effect. In composition, this requires indeed an emotional evaluation but that was not what I was talking about.


The fact you didn't understand this in relation to what I meant actually was my point. They enhance the effect. That was my point. Also, the appearances and use differs between different music structures. 



> - A fugue, sonata, symphony or whatever is inherently form and structure, you can't ignore that. Most musician do ignore that but they will never able to understand a piece to perfection.


Yes, they're structures but it doesn't mean you have to write or have music follow a structure at any given point in time. Whether it is called a fugue, sonata or something else is to me anyway quite irrelevant as a whole.

And I leave the rest at that since I don't think you're seeing what I am trying to say now either.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

LeaT said:


> @_All in Twilight_ I won't bother because it's so obvious we are approaching it in such different ways I don't see much of a point continuing this. I never once for example implied that a chromatic scale is opposed to a melodic scale. I did however imply that the use of them will yield very different results when used in practice and to determine which one we'd use my argument is that we would need to apply some kind of feeling judgement.
> 
> 
> The fact you didn't understand this in relation to what I meant actually was my point. They enhance the effect. That was my point.
> ...


What is wrong with you? Again you're talking about composition/writing music and I am talking about interpretation. This is the second that I am telling you this. Learn to read and stop wasting my time.

Drop the ego, you're not the smartest person in the room. Deal with it. Just either face me head on, ask me questions or move. I hate it when people say that they won't bother you but they still have to push their opinion down the throat in the last paragraph. I can't believe that you have the arrogance to challenge a professional musician. 

The problem with you is that there is always a competitive aspect involved while an interesting question could have been something like how structure and form is related to emotion/feeling and what is that relationship.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

SputnikExperiment said:


> Which I understand to be Ti, cause, effect, cause, effect. When I'm learning a song, everything is patterns. Think of it like language, letters, words, grammar, speech, so forth. Sensors make better technicians, they can perform the piece cleaner and can repeat the same experience over and over and over, which is what you want for the music business. They play accurately and are usually in the moment. Intuitives are the natural improvisers, can become great technicians if they step aside and force themselves to look and don't have to practice as much because we can fake it, to a point. I've been told that I looked stoned out of my mind when I play piano; like I'm there and not there at the same time. Guitar was an impulse buy and I do trick people into thinking that I really know what I'm doing, but, it's called faking. Ne in a can. And, I've never been able to repeat the same interpretation the same way twice, I remember the piece, the emotional idea but never the exacting details. Those get thrown in as I go along. Details, who needs those?


Interesting that you described you Fe as meta. I can't relate to that (Fi) but for me it works in total opposite ways so this might be very interesting. 

Sensors are not better technicians. Technique is all about the perfect movement repeating as slow and relaxed and as often as possible. You're basically programming yourself. Example: I play free stroke for 30 minutes a day just the g-string with my index finger or i m i m only just to practice the most natural and perfect movement. Most guitarist start practicing technique in the wrong way (bad teachers) and it's very hard to root out these bad habits. *To climb steep hills, pace slowly at first.

I'm a Ne-dom but voice separation and articulation are crucial elements. Tricking people (the hearing is subjective) can be done by just playing a piece with perfect articulation. When I need to perform, I always start with an easier piece to get rid of my nervousness but I play it crystal clear and perfectly articulated and the audience has no idea that the piece is actually pretty easy.

*W. Shakespeare


----------



## chimeric (Oct 15, 2011)

@_All in Twilight_ -- I think what you're saying applies more to classical music than other forms. Certainly people make a mistake when they assume Al Green, for example, is doing everything through _feeling_ rather than carefully calculated and practiced expertise... but! Improvisational jazz, for instance, largely relies on instant pattern recognition. I don't think it's a coincidence that many jazz musicians are quirky in interviews; wouldn't be surprised if many are Ne doms.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

chimeric said:


> @_All in Twilight_ -- I think what you're saying applies more to classical music than other forms. Certainly people make a mistake when they assume Al Green, for example, is doing everything through _feeling_ rather than carefully calculated and practiced expertise... but! Improvisational jazz, for instance, largely relies on instant pattern recognition. I don't think it's a coincidence that many jazz musicians are quirky in interviews; wouldn't be surprised if many are Ne doms.


Of course you have a point here. That is why I specifically mentioned the name Bach and interpretation in my first post to make that distinction. 

I don't think Ne is (that) important for improvisation by the way because they have all sorts of patterns and scales worked out before they actually perform. Improvisation is less romantic than people think. Improvisation looks more like composition than improvisation as most people know it. Experience plays a crucial part when it comes to improvisation as well.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

If you keep within the preconditioned movements and learned patterns, I don't think Ne plays much of a role. When you're working with free forms, inventing new scale, or harmonic systems, rhythms and such, then Ne does take over. I improvise a lot in my playing, but, seldom within traditional forms. I did not sit down and study different chord progressions at the piano, melodic patterns and such. I just sat down and said, I'm going to play in the style of Franz Liszt and go from there. Same thing with Debussy. I would mess around with new chord ideas, scale systems, etc. however those daring improvisations were not as virtuosic as written composition, or when I just throw in a well rehearsed riff. Maybe the is experience part of improvisation is the Si tail to the Ne? But yeah, improv can be taught by building up a sufficient vocabulary of motifs, chord progressions and structures. I'm usually to lazy to that.

I had piano students who were natural technicians; they didn't have to practice much either. They just engaged the physical object and things just worked for them, it was quite amazing to watch. I got to know one outside of lessons, just talking, and I reckon she was an ESTP. Some of my classmates, the performance majors, we're always talking about being in the moment, engulfed in sound, etc. It was never something I could relate to. This was long before I got into the MBTI but I imagine them to be sensors. Speaking of which, strong Se users, how do you guys relate to playing music?

Practise wise, my record was to spend 10 minutes practising a technique, then, either I would find every possible excuse to take a break or do something else. Like talk to someone, improvise, sight read or maybe work out a passage. It's weird, but, I don't think I could do it all again and keep my sanity.

edit: I wonder if there's a ENTP, ENFP, ISFP way to perform music. Like, how you come off on stage, performing, what you bring out and what you consider important to communicate.


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

I think I got Si involved a lot when I tried to teach myself piano, but then of course Ne took over and saw it wasn't going anywhere and now there's a dusty piano in the backroom..... I might've kept at it longer than I usually do by involving my auxiliaries: thinking about the patterns in the notes and feeling for some combinations that create an awesome atmosphere.


----------



## Vanishing Point (Oct 2, 2012)

To answer the question in the title we use the ones we have. This is a great thread and it's been very interesting to read the input from the classically trained musicians. Fascinating! I'm crashing this thread even though I am a singer but to be honest I feel it's the same. Only difference is my instrument is my body. Plus having been in bands with musicians whose skills have ranged from total beginner to top pro I think I've seen enough to be able to draw some conclusions.  
I wouldn't attribute any dominant function to natural inborn musical ability. I know an amazing ESFP roots guitarist and another Se dom who doesn't really have great musical ability, but is a great showman. Just not a great musician. 
I am mostly self taught and because of the type of music I make it's not necessary to have formal training. I have had a few private tutors though to help with issues I've come accross in performance. It's been really beneficial and I really appreciate the work they've put into honing their craft. 
How I myself approach a piece... 
I pick songs I resonate with: The message of the song is important and that it allows a range of emotional tones to be conveyed. That's my strong area. Then I obviously go over the melody and see which parts are difficult technically and go over those untill I have them down. (I don't read notes so I usually do things by ear) Then I go over the text and the emotional flow of the song. Try different phrasing and dress the melody up a bit.... Wether some phrases would be best spoken softly or belted out...just getting the dynamics right. My process is very intuitive. Then I just repeat the song untill I'm happy with my performance. 
On top of that there are breathing excercises I do. You can incorporate some of those between everyday chores. Some regular vocal excercises. I also do a few yoga poses. I have been inactive now for a good few years so I ve kind of let it slip but when I was actively gigging I was always trying to be mindful of my posture (I tend to slouch) and did muscle ecxercises when I had time. ...on The metro, The train etc.


----------

