Chess is related to music; amazing!!!

Sort:
ncghostweirdo

Hello all:

 

I have just had an exciting revelation that I would like to share with the chess.com community. Let me first begin by saying that I am fairly experienced in the world of music, and although I may be a little beginner in the world of chess, I feel like I have just discovered a link between the two subjects.

 

Music (I've played violin and piano, by the way), is usually defined as technique-based in the beginner to amateur level. Correctness of pitch, notes, rhythm, phrasing, etc. and all that good stuff is called technique. However, what separates  professional artists from amateurs (usually) is their ability to link emotion with the music. Professional artists are usually able to express emotion better than amateurs. While there are a few pretty good musicians out there that are extremely good at technique, yet not very proficient at the linkage between emotion and music, they are EXTREMELY rare. Such examples include: Arturo Michelangeli (piano), Jascha Heifetz (violin), and me, believe it or not. Although I've often been praised for extremely good technique (not at the level of Michelangeli and Heifetz of course!), I've usually been unable to link music and emotion together. This barrier has prevented me from placing in national competitions, although I've done pretty well in state competitions.

 

On the other hand, chess starts out with something called tactics. Tactics are forks, skewers, pins and other cool things where you can gain material or force checkmate. Usually, beginner to amateur players need to practice these things as they aren't very good at this stuff. However, what usually separates the professional chess players from the amateurs is something called positional chess. Somehow, people are able to make a great move just by evaluating the overall general position. Things like rook on the 7th file and isolated pawns are some things in the territory of positional chess. However, there are a few rare people who have not understood positional chess and relied and tactics throughout their career, yet are still considered great chess players. An example? Mikhail Tal. 

 

So what can we get here? First things first, chess and music both begin by a technique based study. However, there is a next level in chess and music where things get pretty controversial. There are many different ways to express emotions (This place sounds angry, because there is a forte, but it also sounds sad, because this piece is in A-minor. What should I act like?) , just like there are many good candidate moves when playing positional chess. (Well, this move opens the file, yet when I play this other move, I can make my opponent's pawn structure weaker! What should I do?) Lastly, there are just a few oddballs that don't want get caught into the controversial demilitarized zone but they make themselves famous for their great technique and no understanding of the level above them.

 

Thanks for reading this enlightenment. Give me a comment if this changed your perspective on chess! I hope it did. And if I misunderstood what positional chess meant, give me a shout-out in the comments below, too. Good day to y'all.

Sqod

Either there's a gap in your logic or I'm not following you. Chess is devoid of emotions, so trying to use emotions to connect music and chess is faulty, in my opinion.

Here's what I think you're trying to say, and it is a statement that *is* an important insight, in my opinion:

All the deeper arts and skills can be divided into two components: theory (intellectual knowledge) and fine-tuned ability gained from experience. One can't be substituted for another.

Some examples:

(1) photography

Intellectual component: f-stops, color theory

Ability: focusing without thinking, automatically recognizing good composition

(2) chess

Intellectual component: opening names and moves, book-learned heuristics

Ability: subconsciously-learned heuristics, deep lookahead ability

(3) music

Intellectual component: reading music, music theory, scale fingerings

Ability: playing the desired note without thinking, recognizing a rhythm and melody that would fit well

(4) martial arts

Intellectual component: names and motions of kicks and punches

Ability: muscle training that will allow you to stretch as desired, ability to automatically place a kick where you visualize it

(5) math

Intellectual component: memorized integral tables, memorized constants

Ability: automatically equating a graph with an equation or vice versa, easily associating a differential equation with a verbal statement

ncghostweirdo

It's a misunderstanding. In chess, positional chess is the highest level up there, whilst in music, the highest level up you can go is linking emotions to playing. Highest level meaning professional level. Notice how both of these "high levels" are possible for people to have different interpretations.

 

There is no high level in math... not sure why you used that example. People in the highest level of math still use technique. Math is literally all technique. Also not sure why you are including subconscious components; amateurs have subconscious pattern recognitions as well.

WeedMari0

Your brain loves learning. A master's brain map is a giant web of interconnections. An amateur thinks more linearly. I think it's great that you found a link between two things you're good at. I hope it enriches your understanding of both things and how learning works :)

enotSgnilloR

Japanese idiom:  "Ten men, ten colors."

Ever see five GMS talking about a game? Usually there are three or four different variations that might be selected, based on their style and emotional capabilities.   I don't think chess is emotionless, far from it (note all of the chess.com poor sports); when the chessplayer utilizes this emotional or psychological aspect (Tal, Lasker), then playing chess is akin to music.  (But to say world champion Tal was weak, positionally, please.)