Chess and musical talents both tend not to correlate well with intellectual achievement in other areas. In fact, "idiots savants" seem to be disproportionately gifted in these two areas (along with pure mathematics).
Compare and Contrast: Chess and Music
Sort:
Vease wrote:
waffllemaster wrote:
Both involve pattern recognition. To be very good, both require a lot of technical skill but to be great both require creativity a and drive to make a piece/game your own/unique.
To contrast, great music can be appreciated by non-musicians who, even though they cannot play themselves, can distinguish between a good and a great player. In chess this is not so. All players above ~400 points in skill to you are indistinguishably good. Similarly in music when you hit a bad note anyone can tell. In chess you can blunder and never know it!
Prodigies appear in both. Both are rewarding and challenging enough to be enjoyed for a lifetime.
Pretty much true although I have often wondered about how 'creative' orchestral musicians actually are, after all they don't write the music and usually a conductor tells them how to play it. Solo pianists seem to be able to add their own interpretation to a piece but other than that the other musicians are just hired hands playing whats written in front of them.
Yes, to be honest I was thinking of solo pianists and conductors when writing this :)
Although I do assume if you're playing for an orchestra then you're probably a pretty darn good musician... at least more than a hired hand I would hope :)
Quote by Vasilly Smyslov: A considerable role in the forming of my style was played by an early attraction to study composition.
I always liked that quote. It taught me to use (or try to use) all my pieces together in unison. The way a composer will combine all the instruments in a symphony.
"By some ardent enthusiasts Chess has been elevated into a science or an art. It is neither; but its principal characteristic seems to be - what human nature mostly delights in - a fight!" -- Emmanuel Lasker
"I believe in magic ... There is magic in the creative faculty such as great poets and philosophers conspicuously possess, and equally in the creative chessmaster." -- Emmanuel Lasker
"The most intelligent inspection of any number of fine paintings will not make the observer a painter, nor will listening to a number of operas make the hearer a musician, but good judges of music and painting may so be formed. Chess differs from these. The intelligent perusal of fine games cannot fail to make the reader a better player and a better judge of the play of others." -- Emmanuel Lasker
VERY nice!
checkevrytim wrote:
Most "musicians" in the public eye are like 1100 players, and you have 2500 players struggling to make a living, probably playing at a cafe down the street.
The second part of that sentence is true of chess as well...
madhacker wrote:
checkevrytim wrote:
Most "musicians" in the public eye are like 1100 players, and you have 2500 players struggling to make a living, probably playing at a cafe down the street.
The second part of that sentence is true of chess as well...
I guess my point was, the first part of the sentence doesn't happen in chess, so it makes the second part much more outrageous (in music).
Imagine if 1100 players were among the most famous chess players, all because they wore more interesting clothes and knew someone in the business. This is pop music.
I think that's a bit generous TBH. More like the most famous chess players were 1100s who
- Played the openings their managers told them to play, rather than ones they liked
- Pretended to pick up the pieces and move them, but actually used automatic boards which moved the pieces for them
- Drew large crowds of thick teenagers who pretend to like chess to watch them, because of their steriod-built muscles (males) or breast implants (female)
waffllemaster wrote:
Both involve pattern recognition. To be very good, both require a lot of technical skill but to be great both require creativity a and drive to make a piece/game your own/unique.
To contrast, great music can be appreciated by non-musicians who, even though they cannot play themselves, can distinguish between a good and a great player. In chess this is not so. All players above ~400 points in skill to you are indistinguishably good. Similarly in music when you hit a bad note anyone can tell. In chess you can blunder and never know it!
Prodigies appear in both. Both are rewarding and challenging enough to be enjoyed for a lifetime.
I can assure you that this is not the case. I've been playing violin for seven years, and most people don't notice if you hit the wrong note (they don't know what the piece sounds like).
You don't lose at music.
Speaking as a professional musician,it is my experience that the great unwashed have always had a distorted view concerning classical music in particular and chess in general.Namely that they perceive these two pastimes as primarily intellectual, therefore outside of their comfort zone.I would be the first to suggest that the two subjects inhabit a sense of exclusivity but only because they require engagement and discipline which in comparison to the constant tirade of mind numbing TV et al, is something to rejoice about. Blame for this poor state of affairs must be placed at the doors of our educational establishments and their pathetic misguided PC fueled panic concerning subjects which they consider as elite and somehow only for the few and priveledged.Chess and music are interelated on so many planes, life without them would be pretty morose.
To blake 78613 and mhchess 13.
Yes you can lose in music.Being underprepared,memory and approach haphazard, assuming a superior attitude etc........very similar to chess really!!
I was just going to say you can play and feel like you lost, but I like your answer rayice!
Thankyou Timothy_P
Genghiskhant wrote:
Ŷ
fianchetto123 wrote:
you sound like an ignorant highschooler who appreciates only some stupid rock music and considers yourself smart by posting it in a chess forum. And makes bad jokes...
fianchetto123: Am I right?
mhchess13: No!!!!
...and is a liar.
What a guy, coming on the forum to abuse a kid in 8th grade. Look everybody, look how cool he is.
You have a pretty stretchy definition of abuse...
rayice wrote:
Speaking as a professional musician,it is my experience that the great unwashed have always had a distorted view concerning classical music in particular and chess in general.Namely that they perceive these two pastimes as primarily intellectual, therefore outside of their comfort zone.I would be the first to suggest that the two subjects inhabit a sense of exclusivity but only because they require engagement and discipline which in comparison to the constant tirade of mind numbing TV et al, is something to rejoice about. Blame for this poor state of affairs must be placed at the doors of our educational establishments and their pathetic misguided PC fueled panic concerning subjects which they consider as elite and somehow only for the few and priveledged.Chess and music are interelated on so many planes, life without them would be pretty morose.
+1, although life without chess I'm sure we could manage...
Bite your tongue!
=0
You can't afford mistakes when you play at a professional level. Not in chess, not in music, because it hurts peoples feelings. As a musician I can feel the stress of professional chess players. But then again, music isn't considered to be a game. You are not facing someone else, you play together or you make the best out of it in group. Instead of fearing an opponent, you have to trust your colleagues.
They both evoke emotion. To make sense of music one must be able to hold in their mind what has (1) just been played, what is (2) at that moment being played, and (3) anticipate what is about to be played. These three variables are a function of your mental state or, 'emotion'.
When sat at the chess board, what has (1) just been played, (2) at that moment being played, and (3) what you anticipate is about to be played are also the three variables which bring you to your (at that time) present mental state or, 'emotion' (all other things being equal, of coarse).
For me that normally means i end up as unhappy. I (1) cant believe what i've just done, (2) feel guttedabout what is currently happening, and (3) feel demoralised about my impending doom.
Maybe i should stick to Subo...