Micro Music Laboratories®
Micro Music Laboratories®
Ethnic Music


Site Map



Music and Speech


The Superiority of Music
over the Language of Today

Fundamental Research

The Organ of Speech

The Smithy of Thought

Sovereignty over Bound and Free Creativity

The Dimension of
Creative Unfoldment

Control over the World
of Thinking

Content and Form,
Meaning and Structure

The Share of the
Senses of Perception
in the Process of
Gaining Knowledge

The Language of Music

How Our Ancestors
Used Language

Conclusions from the
Ancient Records

The Legacy of
Our Ancestors

The Task Set by
Our Ancestors


Peter Hübner
Founder of the
Micro Music Laboratories




  Music and Speech
“The lan­guage of mu­sic is the be­gin­ning and the end of the lan­guage of words.”

Rich­ard Wagner


What­ever can be ex­pres­sed in words can be com­mu­ni­cated much shorter and more to the point through the me­dium of mu­sic be­cause, as dif­fer­ent from the com­mon lan­guage of to­day, mu­sic has the po­ten­tial to in­te­grate space and time, and is there­fore able to de­scribe and ex­plain the world of the in­fi­nite even to the phi­loso­phi­cally un­edu­cated mu­sic lover.

The in­ner, com­po­si­tional, for­ma­tive forces of mu­sic are avail­able to speech as well. To­day, how­ever, be­cause the means of outer lin­guis­tic ar­ticu­la­tion are much less cul­ti­vated than the means of mu­si­cal per­form­ance, the physi­ol­ogy of the lar­ynx is un­able to ade­quately carry the thought into the acous­tic field.

The Identity of the Compositional Formative Forces in Music and Speech
More­over, to­day’s lan­guage is not per­fect in that con­tent and form are not in­te­grated in a natu­ral man­ner. Due to articulatory simplifications its em­pha­sis is there­fore on se­man­tics.
The ex­tent of this shift is shown by the ex­is­tence of words which sound quite dif­fer­ently in dif­fer­ent lan­guages but which mean one and the same thing. So, the struc­ture of a word has hardly any re­la­tion to its con­tent, its mean­ing any­more.

The Imperfect Form of Speech Today
When lis­ten­ing to speech we pre­domi­nantly pay at­ten­tion to its mean­ing and not to its struc­ture; there­fore it can fur­ther­more be found that, due to our lack of prac­tice in struc­tural hear­ing, the pho­netic struc­ture of speech has, for our pre­sent in­tel­lec­tual abil­ity to dif­fer­en­ti­ate, an unpro­por­tionately high flow of in­for­ma­tion which can not be mas­tered so quickly.

Limits of the Ability of Differentiation in Speech
To­day, there­fore, we com­pre­hend the spo­ken word pre­domi­nantly through the un­der­stand­ing – and even then, only with a very re­stricted, rather cate­gori­cal mean­ing – and al­most not at all through the feel­ing.
And yet, eve­ry word we speak is also full of emo­tional con­tent which is re­lated to our in­ner de­sires, our in­ner will, and our very per­sonal mo­ti­va­tions, and which we lay into our words to give them greater em­pha­sis to achieve spe­cific ends.

Poverty of Feeling in the Spoken Word
In gen­eral. how­ever, the abil­ity to dif­fer­en­ti­ate on the level of our feel­ing is only lit­tle de­vel­oped, and only very few peo­ple are able to suc­cess­fully ap­ply it in the field of speech.
So, to­day one is used to speak mostly about things which do not carry emo­tional con­tents of their own, e.g. tech­ni­cal equip­ment, tech­ni­cal proc­esses – the en­tire sphere of ma­te­rial life.

Comprehending Speech through Feeling
That is why an emo­tional com­pre­hen­sion of the col­lo­quial lan­guage is al­most not worth­while to­day, and there­fore man has also not learned to ar­ticu­late and to com­mu­ni­cate from the level of feel­ing in a dif­fer­en­ti­ated lan­guage.

Status Quo
  With kind permission of AAR EDITION INTERNATIONAL