My Biggest Musical Pet Peeve

[@12tone]

Some additional thoughts/corrections: 1) One thing I tried to be clear about but may have failed so I'm putting here just in case is that these layer labels are my own, and are not directly drawn from any particular music cognition research. I'm not really _talking_ about music cognition here: I'm talking about music theoretical structures. All of these layers describe processes that music theorists and musicologists work on. 2) On that note, while I structured them as a ladder, I'm not trying to argue that your brain walks through these steps one at a time whenever you hear music. Much of this is simultaneously and overlapping, and obviously there are other processes involved as well. Again, this is not cognition research, it's a useful mental model. 3) On the single pulse sine wave thing, I should note that that was largely for demonstration purposes. I did use Audacity to isolate a single cycle from a 220hz sine wave because that's the sort of thing I do apparently, but the physical realities involved in your speakers recreating that sound wave almost certainly introduced some additional complexities. (And that's if KZbin's compression didn't already distort it in some way.) Point is, it's likely what you heard isn't literally one completely isolated pulse, but hopefully you get what I was going for. 4) When I say the track I played isn't two separate sets of sound waves, I mean that literally. Good mixing often involves creating isolated pockets of frequencies for different instruments so they don't clash and make the mix sound muddy, but ultimately, before those frequencies reach your ears, they're all combined into one single complex wave. Part of what you're doing when you mentally isolate different instruments is locking in on those differences in frequency structures, but the boundaries between them are still something you have to impose on the wave. It's not innately there. (Also good mixing often involves the use of panning to physically separate the sounds, but I mixed those examples down into mono tracks to remove that potential bias.) 5) I should note that some of the higher-level patterns I discussed might show up in a sound wave. Like, sections may differ in volume, so you might be able to get a sense of where the chorus is by looking at changes in amplitude. That feels like an extremely incomplete understanding of what a chorus is, though. (Similarly, you could identify downbeats by spikes in the amplitude, and possibly work out the meter by looking at how many smaller spikes occur between the bigger spikes, but that methodology is, to put it charitably, not particularly sensitive to common rhythmic variations.) 6) On the vocal lines thing, it's true that a spectral analysis of the two lines could, in principle, identify that they shared the same fundamental frequencies, but the imposition of a fundamental frequency on a series of notes is still a human thing. There are many sounds we hear that do not appear to have a fundamental frequency because their overtone structures are too noisy (a snare drum, say) and yet there are also plenty of sounds whose overtone structures are also noisy but do appear to have a fundamental frequency anyway. (Guitar, for instance.) Deciding where the line is between those two is our call. But even so, my point remains that the actual waveforms themselves are very different. That's not supposition: I loaded the two clips into Audacity, lined them up exactly (I believe from how perfectly the piano matched that the backing track was looped in the studio) and compared them visually. It's extremely obvious that they're not the same sound. 7) On the backbeat thing, it's maybe a little misleading to say that _every_ song I played features one, since Take The A Train predates the strong rock backbeat, but in portions of the solo you do hear the brushed snare clearly emphasizing beats 2 and 4. It's more of a proto-backbeat, which is why I hedged my wording a little bit, but for the point I was making I think it's reasonable enough. 8) Actually, interestingly, the better counterexample from the songs I'd played up to that point might be Don't Stop Believin', where for most of the song the drum pattern has a snare on 2 but the back half of the bar is a fill on the toms. There's still usually an accent there, and it's a clear allusion to the standard rock backbeat, but it's not until the fade-out at the end that he starts playing the snare on 4. 9) Another great example of artistic context is the Beyonce album Lemonade. On its own, it's a collection of a bunch of individually really good songs. But knowing that it was her response to discovering her husband's infidelity, working through the pain and the healing through her music, gives it a connective thread that turns it into, I would argue, one of the greatest albums of all time. Going on an emotional journey from from Pray You Catch Me and Hold Up, moving through 6 Inch and Daddy Lessons, and finally arriving at All Night and Formation is a really powerful experience when you understand the place those songs were written from. 10) Over the course of the video, I repeatedly used "would show up on a spectrogram" as my benchmark for "is part of the physical soundwave" but honestly even that is a little questionable, since spectrograms are deconstructing the sound wave into its component frequencies, not representing its actual shape. But your ear also deconstructs sound waves into component frequencies, so specifying physicality beyond that point felt a bit like a cheat. 11) …Yeah, the thumbnail's pretty clickbait, huh? Sorry about that, I guess. Given the broad nature of the discussion, I couldn't think of a way to make it both clear and compelling, and since I actually want people to watch the video, I decided to go with just compelling over just clear.

[@Petch85]

3) Would be interesting to se how many waves you would need for it to sound like a short note. Maybe I will test that some time... Must be different for 20Hz vs 18kHz.

[@grayshadowglade]

@@Petch85 this is what additive synthesis does. Fascinating stuff in that space.

[@Kris_T_]

Cars ARE musical... Just earlier today I was thinking about how my musical ear really helps my sim-racing. When I have established consistent lap times, in a given car, on a given circuit. I become familiar with the 'melody' of the engine over a lap. The peak pitch on each straight, and lowest pitch in each corner, the duration of each ascent and decent into and out of corners. The car sings a tune to me which tells me how fast I'm going. Not only in the moment, but in relation to my previous laps. If I go through a corner & the pitch is sharp, I was faster. But the tires also sing a second part, their pitch raises relative to load, and I know the pitch of the load limit, so as I'm cornering, I'm trying to keep the engine pitch as high as I can (or not descending lower than necessary), whilst sliding the pitch of the tyre (just the pitch, not actually sliding the car) as gently as possibe up to a threshold just below the limit. So I'm controlling two counterpointed glissandos. John Bonham based Moby Dick on V8 Dragster noises. And My Microwave Sings in G.

[@caseyrycenga2864]

Regarding #11: I literally just thought that it looked click baity as I was pressing play and came to this comment to see if I could figure out what it’s actually about… and nope. Guess I’m gonna have to unpause it and see 🤷🏼‍♂️

[@doctorscoot]

re: 4) ... the "sound waves" are combined into a single continuous wave (well, two: left and right) LONG before they even reach your speakers, as sound waves in the mixing studio, then electrical impulses, then converted into numbers (if digital), or grooves in a record, or bits of magnetic orientation on a tape, before being converted back into electricity, and then a single continuous mechanical vibration in your speakers ... everything post-multitrack (if it ever did have a multitrack and wasn't just two mics hanging in the room) the "wave" was combined a single signal before you heard it. Unless you're hearing the music at a small acoustic gig.

[@Saxist007]

I can’t believe he was able to convey all that information just by vibrating air!

[@FosukeLordOfError]

Don't forget that after he produced vibrating air it stimulated electric signals that wore stored and transmitted as electric signals and electromagnetic waves to then produce new vibrating air that simulates his original vibrating air

[@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721]

@@FosukeLordOfError And we also need the molecules to contain all that!

[@killerbee.13]

I can't believe you were able to convey this disbelief by just arranging lines on a flat surface!

[@chrisisbell3080]

@@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721 Pedantic point: ,You do not need molecules. Electromagnetic waves can travel in a vacuum. 😀

[@paultaylor6873]

@Chris Isbel Sure but sound waves aren't electromagnetic

[@KusacUK]

Just reminds me of when, in Terry Pratchett’s Thief of Time, the Auditors reduce paintings down to piles of pigment trying to work out why they’re great works of art.

[@Phoenix2312]

That sounds like a perfect analogy! LOL! I have to be honest... Much as I love music and wish I could play an instrument (I have my Guitars and I have still got to learn... It took me too long to just sit back and take time - I am 49 NOW!!! What have I been doing! Wasting my life when i could have been learning Music!) - I had never heard of the "Wiggle Air" analogy until now... That was a BRILLIANT Comparison! (And yes, I ADORE Terry Pratchett's works... Especially Discworld... It is great to meet a fellow Connoisseur)

[@davidlovingmusic]

Yes. Spot on.

[@elizabethgodwin7679]

Sweet Pratchett tie-in! I just finished reading "Raising Steam" myself

[@viciousdope66]

I need to read this book now!!! Thanks for the random book reference; now I’ll go out and find it!

[@Phoenix2312]

@@viciousdope66 There is a whole series... And you will not be disappointed if you like Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy...

[@DurfMcAllister]

My biggest pet peeve is stylized hand-drawn elephants. I sure hope there aren’t any in this video…

[@MuzikBike]

Well back in 2016 I stupidly thought they were mice, if you can trick yourself into being as blind as I was maybe you'll be able to manage

[@T3sl4]

@@MuzikBike They might still be mice, just three of them, and blind? 😛

[@lazyjackass77]

Blasphemous! Evelyn Evelyn have issued contract to collect your scalp!

[@Aleedis226]

@@MuzikBike Omg dude, as soon as I read your comment I realized I've been seeing mostly mice TOO!! 🙄So don't feel bad lol

[@scottbubb2946]

You said it. There's nothing that makes me more livid than a hand-drawn stylized pachyderm! And I mean NOTHING!

[@MCLegoboy]

"My dishwasher makes soundwaves, my car makes soundwaves, soundwaves are everywhere, but they're not music." Somewhere out there, John Cage is freaking out at such a statement. 😆

[@AskDrannik]

I've seen videos on KZbin where a band will use the sound of a diesel tractor engine as a pedal bass tone, so pretty much any sound can become music.

[@Chigger]

KestrelTapes is likely also freaking out.

[@-LTUIiiin]

I get what it means but honestly any sound can be music. Saying a specific sound cant be music is like saying a specific shade of colour cant ever be used in a painting.

[@yetanotherbassdude]

I kind of feel this is the ultimate expression of the idea that music is an abstraction though. Those sounds on their own aren't music, but if they were presented and contextualised as music then we could still experience it as such. It's the same reason why Marcel Duchamp's urinal that he titled "Fountain" genuinely is art when almost every other urinal on the planet isn't. Duchamp presented the idea of looking at something as completely "unartistic" as a urinal as art, and it's the experience of doing so that's ultimately where the art actually comes from in it. The physical objects and processes of any art are only the medium through which we can experience it, the art is in how it then makes us think or feel.

[@itsaUSBline]

@@-LTUIiiin I don't think he was saying that the sound waves that dish washers and cars make can't be music, simply that they aren't inherently music. Music is a much more complex construct than just sound waves. You know, the entire topic of the video. Anything *can* be music in a musical context, if we treat or view it as music, but not all sound inherently is music.

[@loganstrong5426]

This is exactly why I love the term "musicking" so much. The audience of music is just as integral a part of the musical experience as the artists making the wiggly air. A sad song doesn't exist as an mp3 on your phone, or even as wiggles in the air. A sad song only exists once your brain interprets it as both a song, and sad. A good personal example is that I remember coming up with a story to go along with The Black Parade album by My Chemical Romance. After reading some of the surrounding material, turns out the story intended by the artists was completely different from what I came up with. But does that make my story any less real? When I hear a song, is my experience not altered by the existence of that story in my mind? Are my emotions not affected by how that story related to my life?

[@oscargill423]

On top of that, you also have immediate experience. Listening to a song in isolation is wildly different from listening to it live, and different live environments affect that further. I listened to Aretha Franklin's "Think" in preparation for a gig once. It was groovy, it was catchy, it had some really good stank face moments, it was a good song. But then I played it. The audience dancing and singing along with all their enthusiasm, the band feeding off that energy and reciprocating it, both with audience and each other... it was life changing. I'd never look at live performance the same way again. All that from a change of role, location and vibe. Music is awesome, y'all.

[@InventorZahran]

Very true. I often interpret songs in ways that the songwriters/composers never intended, only to have that interpretation 'ruined' when I paid closer attention to the lyrics or read some background information about the piece.

[@EvanJTao]

I’m curious what the interpretation you came up with was! The black parade is so rich there’s a thousand ways you could read it

[@pizzzaeater1425]

I feel like this thought is related somehow, I just can't put the reason into words. Your quote "a sad song only exists once your brain interprets it as both a song, and sad" is what inspired me to reply. Songs themselves only exist once perceived as songs. The sounds that birds make generally aren't seen as music to us. It's music to the birds. The only thing stopping bird songs from being considered "real" songs is our perception of what a "song" is. Another example is my dishwasher. It makes a low, wet, percussive sound when it runs. It has a pattern, too. I can count 1, 2, 3, 4 in time with the sounds, and I can even feel a pulse with strong and weak beats. It sounds like music to me. My brain registers that as a form of music. I might just be insane, but any sound or set of sounds can be perceived as music if the listener chooses to. It reminds me of the old philosophy question turned joke: if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it still make a sound? Well yes, technically. But it's irrelevant whether the sound happened or not because no one was there to perceive it. Music only exists in the perception of the listener. Sounds still get made regardless, but *music* only exists once perceived, which includes the performer. The performer (usually!) perceives their own music, thus counting them as a listener. But that's not to say that performers who don't perceive their own works aren't making music. If *no one* hears it, then I might argue that the music "doesn't exist" (although that's up for debate as well). Then there's ambient music, drone, etc which make everything just that much more muddy. But I don't think it matters. I think that if someone is perceiving sound(s), and they are perceiving it/them as music, then that sound/set of sounds is music. I think it really is that simple. Music is something that is so abstract, uncontainable, and undefinable, that trying to give hard-set rules and definitions to music is not only logistically impossible, but pointless. Who cares? I say we need to stop trying to apply strict definitions to art, and start letting the art define itself. That was pretty much the whole point of Jackson Pollock making the art he did (my interpretation of it, anyway). The art isn't "meant" to be anything. It's just meant to be it, itself, nothing but itself, and contained within itself. It's an invitation to perceive it. A door beckoning you to open it just to see what's inside. Without the perception, the piece is nothing. Music is the same, in my eyes (ears?), yet somehow even more abstract. We can only hold our tools, our instruments. We cannot hold the music itself. In the case of music, the abstraction is what makes the art. The fleeting perceptibility of music is what brings out the beauty in it. It's what makes music, music. You can argue that Sweet Home Alabama isn't music because you don't perceive it as such just as easily as you can argue that heavy machinery operating at a construction is IS music because you do perceive it as such. Industrial music in its purest form lol.

[@WarrenPostma]

Musicking. A human thing. Absolutely.

[@guitarwally1]

OK, but Mozart with a backbeat kinda slaps

[@xxPenjoxx]

There is a DDR dance machine track (think euro dance beat) that has Beethoven's Pathetique movement combined with an amazing beat track. Dance and EDM are not my favourite styles, but damn I can listen to that piece on repeat 😂 Beethoven Virus - Spatial Jaguar

[@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721]

Absolutely. I want someone to rap over it.

[@nondescriptcat5620]

@@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721 Busdriver does kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z5KTimB5h91npKc

[@screaminggecko7660]

I scrolled down to comment this exact thing and then saw it was already right here

[@quincy9908]

This is a good example of enculturation in play, since you're use to backbeats

[@BR0K3NARCH3TYP3]

11:10 To your point about why context is so important to music's impact, it is important to understand that the Nine Inch Nails version of Hurt is the closing track of a concept album. Yes, Johnny Cash's version is emotional in the context of his life (and even Trent Reznor himself conceded that it wasn't his song anymore), but the original version of Hurt derives its gravitas from the harrowing story being woven by the rest of The Downward Spiral. Without understanding the album's narrative framework and how that central character's journey is relatable, the song of course will not mean nearly as much as something more well-known like Cash's life and death

[@Caseyuptobat]

THANK YOU

[@RudeMyDude]

exactly! as a single, I can see the johnny cash version being more impactful for your average listener. but listen to all of the downward spiral and get to hurt....absolutely crushing, there's not much like it.

[@Lurker-dk8jk]

Thank you for putting into words exactly what I was thinking. As a fan of NIN's early albums, I can still appreciate the original in its self-destructive context. I had experienced significant personal losses and could easily relate to Reznor's album when I listened in my youth. In Cash's rendition the central theme is regret. As an older man, this version speaks to me entirely differently. The anguish expressed is more immediate given the circumstances under which it was recorded. It is about his own pain and his own loss. He gave the song a life of its own. His.

[@TRminecrafter]

jesus i forget how fast "Jolene" actually is... in my mind the song is much slower everytime.

[@LuxurioMusic]

Same, I've spent too long listening to the 33rpm version.

[@LuisDrGt]

Great video as always. Speaking of context, what you played at 14:14 just made me laugh due to the number of times it was used on funny memes.

[@badmanjones179]

i was really hoping that that was what he was going to talk about lol

[@itsaUSBline]

Same here, I just instantly started giggling as soon as I heard it. Really illustrates his points about personal and cultural context effecting how we hear music.

[@nzubechukwu]

Just add the air horn to it and it becomes MLG

[@AhrenAKADan]

I just find the wiggly air bit fascinating from a "look at what we do with our pattern-recognizing brains." It's not a comment on music so much as the majesty of our brains. It was something I first noticed as a kid when my computer would crash while playing a game with music and the same sine would repeat, a horrifying sound in isolation but it's basically one 'frame' of a wonderful arrangement. It's like talking about what we can do with computers with, at the core, just on-off switches.

[@randomjunkohyeah1]

Completely agreed. This video is really fascinating but I think at its core 12tone kinda missed the forest for the trees in terms of what that saying is actually meant to convey.

[@craenor]

I like to think of how, when someone throws a football for you to catch, there's no way you could do the math on where that ball is going to wind up so you can catch it. Your brain, however, does that calculus almost instantly. The ball has barely started traveling before your mind has assessed the velocity (speed, angle, and direction), accounted for environmental factors like wind, adjusted for how effectively the ball seems to have been thrown (tight spiral vs wobbling mess), and starts your muscles moving to get you in the right place...all without you having had to expend a single conscious thought on how you're going to do it, beyond firmly committing that you will. But another part of your brain is also assessing that commitment and cross checking any known threats. You will avoid where you know a sprinkler head to be. You'll stop before you venture into a street. You'll change course before you collide with a post or piece of installed equipment. You've performed high level calculus, started a physical response, and monitored potential threats while carrying out that physical response, and the only conscious thought was: I'm going to catch this ball. But relatively few football players would consider themselves to be math experts, and music is more than wiggly air.

[@samus88]

And yet most people enjoy shitty music, which means they aren't using the majestic pattern recognizing brains to their full potential, which kinda defeats their entire point of "music is so much more than wiggly air".

[@craenor]

@@samus88 I feel like that downplays the influence of both nostalgia (the music we grew up listening to before we had our own opinions) and community. Music appreciation for many people is less about the sound textures and qualities of the music and more about cultural appreciation and immersion. Despite that, exceptional songs still manage to bridge cultural divides with broad appeal. At the end of the day, community and nostalgia aside, a great song is a great song.

[@randomjunkohyeah1]

@@samus88 “Shitty” according to who?

[@grayshadowglade]

Johnny Cash's cover of Hurt was probably the greatest love letter in music that Trent Reznor ever received. It so perfectly reflects and amplifies the original intent and emotion of the song with the beauty and simplicity of Cash's performance. I'm not even a Cash fan and it is still one of the greatest covers ever made. That said, I wanted to expand on your point a little bit. You skirted around it but music is effectively linguistic emotional expression. It is emotional in it's use of timing, intonation, and harmony, while at the same time linguistic in it's use of near and long term context. It is in a way the most pure form of language in that it needs no words in a given language, and even if it hails from another culture there is an undeniable evocation of feeling. I think this stems from a very low level perception of dissonance and resonance we hear in spoken language. You can listen to any language and after a short period of time the emotional intonation is abundantly clear once you adapt to the timing and intensity of it. Japanese is quiet and very rhythmic while German is loud and arrhythmic by comparison. Never the less you can still sense the emotion once you adapt to those differences. I think this effect underpins musicality and explains why it is so 'universal' so to speak. Granted the conventional tonal theory may not match, but the tension between resonance and dissonance seems universal. To date I have never found an exception to this. Indeed as a result I find the sound of languages I don't know to have an innate beauty to them which is only lost if I try to follow it's meaning in translation. There is something ineffable and precious there that I can't quite describe properly. I can only suggest listening to other languages in passing as much as possible to experience it. Food for thought, and yes I absolutely loved this video. Thanks!

[@SuperCookieGaming_]

I always viewed that wiggly air makes you cry as a way to show the beauty that is human thought and conciseness. our brains are so powerful and complex that these vibrations can transform into music. But any use of wiggly air is unhelpful.

[@T3sl4]

Indeed it's a uniquely human experience, as near as we've seen, to parse grammatical and semantic meaning from sequences of stimuli. Animals can be taught basic gestures or sounds, but don't appear to have any capacity for context or grammar, or if they do, only to a very shallow degree. (Not sure what the current science is on e.g. dolphins, but gorillas -- somewhat in/famously -- seem reasonably settled.) Computers can be "taught" -- instructed, rather -- to parse grammars, indeed often quite complex ones, but do so only very exactly, and generally aren't tolerant of even small errors (granted, the things we want them to parse -- such as programming languages -- do need to be as precise as a CPU, in order to do the things we most expect them to). We're only just beginning to unravel the complexities of human communication -- natural sounding speech, or natural language composition, or various graphical art forms -- and at that, we're mostly doing it by brute force statistics (machine learning), because even we don't understand ourselves to quite that level of precision. Note that we habitually derive meaning from any kind of stimuli; we take semantic meaning from the vibration of a car ride, or the taste or smell of our environment, or meals; we often even find meaning -- presumably, erroneously -- from complete randomness, not just in the context of traditions like divination, but also in the ebb and flow of games from plain old dice/card/etc. up to whatever complicated videogames we like to play these days. Often times, such games are just "a bunch of stuff that happened", but every so often some sequence of events occurs that we can map onto some familiar story, perhaps part of the game itself, perhaps subverting it instead, etc. There's technically nothing to understand at all about such circumstances -- as far as the videogame is concerned, it truly is just a bunch of stuff that happened by chance, and yes some of those will reward, and some will punish, the player in various ways -- that just happens. But we feel it as something more than that! It's also been shown (IIRC) humans have the talent of recognizing "random" scribble sorts of paintings (Pollack most iconically) with much better than random chance; put enough data in, no matter how narrow, and we'll tell you every minute seemingly-meaningful detail about those data! (See also: xkcd 915.)

[@stefan1024]

@@T3sl4 Many birds seem quite musical to me actually.

[@ernie5229]

Dude, I thinked you screwed up in reverse. After watching this video, I'm even more amazed that wiggly air can move me to tears. Oop!

[@paulbadertscher]

Coming here 5 months later to thank you for a very engaging look at a bunch of ways to get at the question of why music elicits an emotional response. I’m almost 57 years old now and have only started thinking about this question over the past couple of years. I’m glad folks like you have done so much in such a relatable way. Thanks!

[@jasonbraun127]

The thing is everything you've described happens in our brains and not really in the sounds themselves. I think what people are trying to express with this "wiggly air" comment is how amazing it is that these abstract, by themself completely meaningless waves in the air can produce such complex emotional responses within us.

[@randomjunkohyeah1]

Completely agree, I think that’s the ultimate intended meaning of the saying. Which is ironically basically the same as the meaning of this video despite it ostensibly being a refutation

A good point.

[@dragon-id5uj]

wiggly air vs. zappy neuron

[@lukefilcek3020]

Bro just leaked the new Pokémon games💀

[@dark2023-1lovesoni]

What he's described is the field of psychoacoustics. Music isn't just sound or waveforms unless no-one hears it.

[@chriswhitfill2785]

Something I did in school was train an algorithm to "demix" songs into component tracks (e.g. bass, drums, vocals, etc.), so I want to push back a little on you saying the information to separate them isn't in the waveform. It's maybe not the most straightforward information to decode, but it is there in the vibrations. And sure, that information only means something because of cultural context, but the amount of information you can encode in a linear sum of sinusoids still feels profound to me

[@toptext455]

All music is wiggly air, but not all wiggly air is music

[@MxLexi]

Sound waves that a dishwasher or car make can be music, when it is experienced musically. My old dryer used to make a regular beat that sounded like the theme of Game of Thrones. But they only become music when interpreted and experienced. If you saw the sound waves from my dryer and the sound waves from the Game of Thrones theme, you'd be hard pressed to see any similarity

[@djsmeguk]

This boils down to a very important discussion on why ART is so much more than just "wiggly air molecules" or "squiggles on paper" or even "polygons on a computer screen".

[@jml6263]

And by extension why saying things like art and english and music degrees are worthless is harmful and reductive as fuck.

[@nothingEvil101]

If only we knew what art really is. It’s so fascinating

[@nickb20]

Every time you draw Bill Cipher I just nerd out; truly a man of taste!

[@ConvincingPeople]

One minor counterpoint to the conclusion: Anything can be music if you listen to it as music precisely because of the context that we bring to sound. It's what's so magical about music and listening.

[@Ishkybibble]

Found the “noise music” connoisseur

[@Ergoperidot]

Like 4’33

[@TheShadowPerson.]

Nature is music if you are creative enough.

[@Chris-mc2dt]

This is the technicality by which Weezer albums count as music

[@esthersmith3056]

@@Chris-mc2dt weezer's first two albums are all-time classics tho

[@imagecrafting]

My high school music theory teacher on the first day of music theory 101 asked everybody what music was. And after about 30 minutes of tortured answers from students along the lines of its notes with pitches and rhythms etc etc, he said no it's a one-word answer: emotion. That has stuck with me for over 40 years and I find it true.

[@wellurban]

All very good points, and underlined by the way that you use “just ink on paper” to summon up so many references, thus representing the importance of context in any medium. But I’d argue that there *are* some ways in which “just wiggly air” can be a useful frame of reference. By stripping away all of the context we use to interpret a piece and treating it as a pure sonic object, we can remove possibly trite and tired interpretations and allow fresh interpretations to form. Various movements, from musique concrète, Steve Reich’s phasing and Pauline Oliveros’ Deep Listening to modern forms of extreme sample manipulation, have sought to do just that, and help us bring fresh ears to sound. And I’d also argue that your fridge and car *are* making music if you choose to listen to it as such: as John Cage said, “the music never stops, only the listening”.

[@hotdogskid]

14:15 illustrates the "personal experience" point very well, that clip sounds FAR from sad to anyone who grew up with those old memes

[@ububox2087]

"The capacity for music to convey raw sentiment without fixed meaning allows you to create a narrative journey while still letting your listener personalize their own experience, filling in the details that best fit their own life." Precisely why I love lyric-free electronic music.

[@MutantBurglar]

I mean this is how we perceive music and how we are able to tell the difference between different instruments, but it is still just sound waves

[@cameroncoleman4516]

When people tell me this, I'm just going to respond with, "It's crazy that a collection of atoms runs the country's government." Love it lol

[@blasphemouspickle]

Was not expecting the Animorphs reference.

[@leaveitorsinkit242]

“It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure.”

[@mollywantshugs5944]

I love this quote now.

[@bmac4]

"I swear those are the same chord" I cannot escape from B minor can I Damn you Pink Floyd

[@othervinny]

Awesome video! I think another factor that separates music from "just wiggly air" is the medium of recorded music; especially in the modern era of highly-produced tracks, I would argue that a .wav file on my computer is still music before and after I play it through my speakers and turn it into wiggly air. It would be sort of like saying that visual art mediums are "just photons hitting your eyeballs," when the artist sure spends a lot of time working with stuff like paint and canvas, not photons.

[@jeremiasrobinson]

My pet peeve is wiggly photons.

[@Quiltfish]

I know, right? They're a particle, they're a wave, pick a fucking -slit- lane, photons!

[@jeremiasrobinson]

What are you, ⁣@@Quiltfish or something? (I actually don't know what a garf is)

[@yfidalv]

@@jeremiasrobinson lasang

[@Quiltfish]

@@jeremiasrobinson Trust me, the backstory of any one of my usernames are a long walk down a windy beach to a cafe that's closed. (Thanks, Bill Bailey)

[@cameronhector9074]

"To communicate rich, complex stories and ideas" *Draws Keywork symbol* Ah, a fellow cultured Child of the Fence I see!

[@Kris_T_]

Cars ARE musical... Just earlier today I was thinking about how my musical ear really helps my sim-racing. When I have established consistent lap times, in a given car, on a given circuit. I become familiar with the 'melody' of the engine over a lap. The peak pitch on each straight, and lowest pitch in each corner, the duration of each ascent and decent into and out of corners. The car sings a tune to me which tells me how fast I'm going. Not only in the moment, but in relation to my previous laps. If I go through a corner & the pitch is sharp, I was faster. But the tires also sing a second part, their pitch raises relative to load, and I know the pitch of the load limit, so as I'm cornering, I'm trying to keep the engine pitch as high as I can (or not descending lower than necessary), whilst sliding the pitch of the tyre (just the pitch, not actually sliding the car) as gently as possibe up to a threshold just below the limit. So I'm controlling two counterpointed glissandos. John Bonham based Moby Dick on V8 Dragster noises. And My Microwave Sings in G.

[@Osric24]

The Animorph fan in me is thrilled to see an Andalite in a youtube video from one of my favorite video essayists. Also, I love this video for more than that. Lots of bits that show how music is *far* more than just wiggly air.

[@steamsuhonen9529]

Sometimes the sound waves that come out of my car *do* reduce me to tears.

[@somedude5414]

"Music is hope. Music is Passion. Music is Life." - Dany V., guitarist of The Warning

[@user-on6uf6om7s]

Music is Shrek?

[@rachelfey]

You are technically correct. The best kind of correct.

[@jakelawson4047]

Requisition me a beat!

[@Aaarrrgh89]

This is such a good way to think about things. Humans absolutely have a tendency to over-simplify complicated concepts.

[@HenrytheFifth]

Thanks for your Keywork drawing, I’m sure the Children of the Fence will all be as ecstatic as I was.

[@yuvalne]

"To someone living in 18th century Vienna, adding a backbeat to a Mozart Sonata will just be confusing" 8:50 *Hooked on Classics has joined the chat*

[@breakbumper]

My biggest pet peeve, not just music education, is the explanation "wants to" as in, a perfect fourth wants to resolve to a major third. Does it? Do two sound waves say to each other "Bugger! We're a perfect fourth apart! Quick, we'd better turn into a major third or Zarlino's gonna shout at us again!".

[@LesterBrunt]

Yea it needs to be heavily contextualized by mentioning that in functional harmony this is the case and not actually a physical fact of reality.

[@sueedenjin]

6:22 Max Martin would call those two extracts completely different as they use different vowels. He would be upset.

[@davidg5898]

11:22 I don't think Trent would be offended -- I've read interviews where he said Cash's version gives him goosebumps and feels it surpasses his own version in some ways. Great video, as always!

[@MatejNovakCreative]

I love your videos. I love your attitude, your analysis and the broad range of music you pull from. This might be my favourite video of yours yet.

[@kumoyuki]

OMG. You made me cry. First with two of the most intense (within pop genres, anyway) musical moments of the last century (yes, Jimi & Johnny were definitive with their cover's in ways that take too many words) - and then with a thorough - even inexorable - defense of the deep meaning of music as an ART encompassing all of life. Much of the last three decades has conspired to convince me to lower my expectation, my desire, and my ability to create music; and yet, here you are, telling me this may be one of the most important things there is. Yes, of *COURSE* I exaggerate. But I want to tell you this: this video was also ART. And yes, I also hear a non-trivial musicality in your presentation. You speak and edit your discourse into readily identifiable rhythms, and your semantics have made this aging human think that they should give it all another go. Thank you, I think

[@theinfant]

8:56 kinda goes hard af ngl Great vid :)

[@chicken_punk_pie]

^^

[@SilverScarletSpider]

Can you please do videos on Zelda, Final Fantasy 7, Linkin Park, and Attack on Titan music? Specifically, the Zelda Theme, Tifa’s Theme, Numb, and The Rumbling are particularly pleasing to my ears.

[@TsunamiBeefPies]

I loved this video. It was a love letter to music, and I heartily endorse that! Apropos of nothing, I think my favorite of your recurring visual motifs is the use of the bicycle logo of The Village. I love that it pops up in so many different contexts: "information" in this video, but in all sorts of other ways. Best of all is when you use it for "6"!

[@gabe_s_videos]

I'm reminded of an anecdote from one of Disney's original animators, about how they watched audiences cry during the scene of the dwarves mourning Snow White and thinking to themselves "It's just a stack of drawings. We're making audiences cry just by showing them a stack of drawings!" They weren't saying "Stacks of drawings make people cry," they were saying "This is an art form that can elicit emotion just as well as any other." There's a similar quote from George Martin about how he fell in love with music after watching an orchestra and being blown away by how people scraping horsehair together and blowing into brass tubes could make such wonderful noise. It wasn't reducing the art of music to this very literal, emotionless form, it was more like "How could something that looks so normal and boring create something that makes me feel so good?" The "wiggly air" remark is something said by people who think they know more about something than they really do without having any respect for it.

[@jeffmansfield914]

Fantastic! This should be viewed by basically everyone. Music is so much more than some sounds that go together in a nice way. It has the ability to communicate so much and to cut right into your emotions of all varieties.

[@rohiogerv22]

Where I think the "wiggly air" analogy comes in especially handy is remembering that sound actually occupies DIMENSIONAL SPACE when thinking about things like acoustics, resonance, or even LFOs and modulators and sample rates and that kind of stuff in the digital space. When you have dead zones, weird interference or difference tones, etc, it can be useful to remember there's a bunch of larger-than-you'd-think air slinkies bouncing around your room. Or another example is the "human hearing only goes down to 20Hz" problem. Hz is literally a measurement of how many times a thing happens per second, so it's not as though you're unable to experience a sound recurring 4 times per second instead of 20 times. And in fact, if you put a sawtooth wave at 4Hz, you can hear it really well; you can't "hear" the fundamental as a pitch, but you can hear its overtones pulsing four times per second. The thing we can't *perceive* as sound is gentle vacillations in air pressure that are that slow. The same way we can't feel the rotation of the planet. The air wiggles are too big.

[@terribly1]

I generally love all your vids, but this one crushed it. Thank you - great video.

[@penguindrummaster]

I expected you to make a reference to Techno Jeep when you said "my car makes sound but...". I'm realtively new to your channel, but as a musician that never studied theory, I really appreciate the deep dive you make on various topics. I'm hoping one day I might see an analysis on some of EDM's greatest hits, like Strobe by DeadMau5, but I'll stay for the witty commentary either way

[@dhpbear2]

I believe some well-known person quipped many years ago something to the effect "it's the silence *between* the notes that matters." :)

[@XDSDDLord]

I have had many discussions about music with many people and never in my life have I heard music being reduced to nothing more than sound waves.

[@arribalaschivas91]

I’m just here to say that when you added the snare backbeat to the Mozart sonata at 8:57, it goes hard. That is all; I have nothing intellectual to add

[@alpineuniverse]

One of your best videos and one of the most insightful way to approach music. Period. Thanks for your work man

[@josesolares7346]

great insight! I do like the wiggly air joke, but part of what it makes it funny to me is the exaggerated reduction of what music is

[@empty_rivers]

i love that you used mozart's sonata no 16 for that backbeat example. I've watched SO MUCH cracking the cryptic that i first assumed i'd accidentally opened one of their videos while watching.

[@MaladyKayjo]

I think the perfect example of a title affecting how you hear An instrumental is Only Somewhat Seen by the vocaloid producer Ghost on the instrumental ep Perfect Nothing, without the title Its just a creepy sounding track but you don’t know the context, with the title it’s suddenly clear, it’s about the terrible pain of Isolation and not being seen by the people around you even while you suffer from mental health problems, the feeling of being Only Somewhat seen, and with that the song is AGONIZING, and it leaves me crying every time

[@morganherring6958]

Jokes on 12tone cause I really do think sometimes, "Man, isn't crazy that we're all literally just tiny atoms that make up... everything?" So the wiggly air thing is still just as crazy to me. xD

[@Anonymous-df8it]

Isn't it crazy that music is just wiggly air and brain tissue? jk

[@infinite1der]

I listen to a LOT of movie scores, and I sometimes (well, often) listen to them before actually watching the movie -- I should REALLY stop doing this. For reasons you explore in this video, there are some score pieces that are so well written to convey emotion *without* the need for the on-screen context. However, going back to watch the movie and getting that context makes the music have such a greater emotional impact. My favorite example of this is the track "The Great Eatlon" from James Newton Howard's score from "The Lady In The Water'. Having already been a fan of JNH's work, I listened to this score *well* before seeing the movie. I knew that track would be a very climatic moment (especially for one particular cue...) Getting to that scene, I knew the roller coaster was coming, but I was totally unprepared for its impact.

[@RJFerret]

That right handed sketch though... Brilliant. PS: You caused me to search KZbin for "Mozart back beat" and I found and enjoyed the drill remixes. We need more like those.

[@Gnurklesquimp]

The wiggly air is the medium, I do think that's really fascinating, especially when you consider rhythm is amplitude over time, and tone is faster amplitude over time, an amazing consequence of our perception's limitations.

[@laonda.originals]

Your videos allow my fleeting attention span to be distracted things that lure me right back in. Gracias.

[@davidurban528]

Isn't it amazing how the electrodynamic forces between atoms can reduce you to tears

[@RobertsMind]

This is an awesome video and I love the way you explain different musical concepts in your videos. As a vocalist, graphic artist, brand new (still learning the basics) music producer and car guy, The sounds of cars can be music depending on your perspective. I can fall asleep to the pur of a well built motor as easily as Tchaikovsky. The different undertones of a well tooned motor with the right exhaust is like listening to a song. It can have a smooth range and patern of distinktly sepearate lows, mids and highs that may not always fallow the exact same pattern due to the way the different frequencies resonate through the exahaust system and surrounding elements. Everything from the diameter of the exhaust, type of metal it's made from, and thinkness of that metal can all change the sound of what the same motor can sound like. Now these tones can also be very subjective and can even be influenced by the elevation that you are at as well as the barometric pressure and humidity. But, I digress. Awesome video and keep em coming.

[@wizardish1264]

We need a 12tone video were instead of teaching us about music it's a elephant drawing tutorial

[@Frankster86]

Cash version is devastating! Every time except the first time. I was in a pool hall getting a beer between games and the jukebox started playing his version. When I heard his voice it stopped me in my tracks! So that's where I stood right in front of the jukebox in absolute awe! Since then, tears stream when I'm towards the end of his performance of Hurt by Johnny Cash! It is as you so perfectly said, DEVASTATING. This due to the known context! Love your vids man!

[@viciousdope66]

I just noticed you’re LEFT-HANDED!!! I’m not alone!!! 😂 😆 😝 😆 😂 Seriously though, I love this channel; I’ve been here since the beginning (2017, I believe), and I relate to so much of what you do. Out of all my friends and acquaintances, I probably know more about Music Theory (the few exceptions being my former Music Professors and my best friend/rival from High School who is a studio musician/sax instructor in Atlanta). Please NEVER STOP doing what you do. This channel is SO IMPORTANT. I love it! Rock on, Mr. 12-Tone.

[@r-pupz7032]

When I used to take hallucinogens ordinary sounds started becoming indistinguishable from music. Cars driving by, a kettle boiling, my heartbeat - it wasn't just that it sounded kinda like music, it sounded indistinguishable. What kind of music usually depended on what we had been listening to that night, although techno / drum & bass / breakcore was common for obvious reasons - but it didn't just sound like the baseline, it sounded like the melody and harmony and everything. Small environmental sounds would somehow link up and our brains would conjure up patterns and we would experience it as music. I should note, we weren't experiencing auditory hallucinations, in fact I noticed it most often while walking home after the hallucinogens had worn off, or sometimes after staying up all night minus any hallucinogens. It's hard to explain clearly but that really taught me how much of music is created in our heads. We weren't having auditory hallucinations, the sound existed, other noises like talking sounded perfectly ordinary, our pattern-finding brains just interpreted background noise differently while tripping. Also, side note but hallucinogens that give you synaesthesia are a wild ride, seeing purple teardrops and glowing spirals pulse out of speakers is an experience I will NEVER forget. That was still my brain experiencing music but in a very different way!

[@r-pupz7032]

Oh, PSA, I'm not advocating everyone go out and trip!! Just wanted to share an interesting experience. I do think hallucinogens are generally less harmful than stimulants or opioids or whatever but please, be aware that hallucinogens can fuck you up if you aren't in the right mindset or situation, or if you don't use them responsibly, or you have mental health issues, or what you buy is mislabeled, etc etc. I do feel that they can give us some really interesting perspectives on how the brain works (and potentially help us treat certain disorders) but a bad trip can be a living nightmare and long term psychiatric conditions can arise. Be safe everyone :)

[@dyscotopia]

I sometimes like walking around without headphones and hearing the ambient sounds around. This works particularly well in nature where there are birds and other creatures that make melodic and rhythmic sounds, but even in the city you can hear the unusual harmonies of distant car traffic over the hum of a neon sign. Because we're pattern recognition machines, if we listen closely enough we can train our ears to hear everything as music, and recapturing that feeling can be the beginning of our own musical expression

[@anatolyFct]

Thanks for getting Kryptonite stuck in my head for another week, just as I finally forgot about it

[@jaybarls]

I normally like these vids and on one level this is a good in-depth discussion about the importance of context and interpretation in how we respond to music, but I can't deny feeling frustrated at how reductive the starting premise for this whole argument is. It's not a zero-sum game whereby talking about the sound, in and of itself, somehow renders the personal and cultural 'framing' of the listener irrelevant. It feels like the discussion here could have been more positive and a matter of 'this is another great and valuable aspect of how we respond to music', and less of a po-faced flex on how the theoretical and contextual elements of 'music as art' somehow trump the importance of 'just noise.' It doesn't need to be that polarising, and I was definitely lost at the point where you claimed that the alternative viewpoint was a 'good joke' compared to 'serious philosophical discussions of art.' This feels like overreaching. To me they're different sides of the same coin, one is more conceptual and the other is more 'basic,' but they're no more or less important than each other. Moreover, why take a 'joke', and run with it as if it were a serious and literal argument to be debunked? I doubt that many who talk about 'wiggly air' are talking about music purely as 'vibrations' (though some might), but it is undeniably a very critical component. You use examples of different songs in the same key, or with very similar patterns, and seem to conclude that the wildly perceived difference between them must therefore be centred around our interpretation, something 'extra' to the music itself. But even sonically speaking, they're incredibly different - tone, timbre, instrumentation etc etc. Even someone making a very simplistic 'wiggly air' kind of argument could say 'but they sound different in themselves,' because... they do. Put them in a spectral analyser and they'd look really different. And I'm sure I'd perceive them / respond to them completely differently, even if I had never heard a note of music before in my life. I know they're simple examples and this isn't exactly what you're saying, but I felt it made for a really unsatisfying point, as it looked like you were conveniently ignoring all of those very real differences so that you could focus purely on context and interpretation. Arguing against an oversimplified viewpoint by oversimplifying your own just doesn't work. You seem to have misunderstood what people tend to mean when they make this statement, which isn't actually counter to any of your points (and could even be seen to enhance them). The fact that we extract so much meaning from sounds is amazing. There is of course a separate argument to be made about the primal response that humans have to sound and rhythm, which I think is quite context-independent. Perhaps that is what people are getting at, albeit in an oversimplified way, when they say it's just 'wiggly air' or vibrations? The word 'just' being questionable of course - yes there is more to it, but I don't think you can say, in good faith, that it *isn't* about this either. Music is more than pattern recognition, cultural interpretation, theoretical context etc, there are many aspects inherent to the sound that affect people in different ways. We might laugh at guitarists chasing a 'perfect tone' but there is a lot to how things sound in and of themselves, and a lot of subtle, appreciable differences before we reduce our response to thinking 'oh that's a guitar', for example.

[@peabody1976]

"... music can't touch that" **draws a hammer** Me: Impressed. :)

[@sqwwrrwl]

I think this is why I love "it's just wiggly air" so much - because sound *is* just wiggly air, and all this - all this that you just talked about, is everything that I think of when I say it. Like sarcasm, it's something I think about because it isn't true - because it highlights how deeply human the experience is that *we* create every second of every day. Not everyone may have this association, just like you need a fair bit of context to fully understand sarcasm, but for me these ideas fill me with a thrill every time I hear "it's just wiggly air". Because you're right, it's not just wiggly air. But wiggling is all the air does; we do the rest. P.S. it's the same feeling I get when someone says a secret handshake is just a fancy handshake. Yes, yes it is.

[@iSvCrux]

Loved this video. The level of passion you have for music is infectious.

[@radgiraffe5519]

I got ur point but u hadn't rlly sold me on ur idea until 13:27, now I'm absolutely sold lmfao

[@Packbat]

The other thing I notice about "isn't it amazing that wiggly air can do this"? It assumes that all that context is shared. That assumption can be deeply exclusionary: when people are expected to cry at the same songs no matter whether those songs exist in their cultures or not, it makes people outside the culture of the loudmouths the subjects of pity or scorn for not knowing they were supposed to weep. And the loudest culture is the one that has centuries of colonialism money pushing its voice. It's important to remember that music is not universal, even though wiggly air is, and to accept those differences when they reveal themselves.

[@othervinny]

Not even wiggly air is universal! There are deaf people who enjoy music by feeling the vibrations through the floor or through their physical surroundings. Yes, wiggly air plays a part, but you can still be a fan of music or even a musician yourself who cannot perceive wiggly air as sound.

[@Rupert3434]

I am very happy that you drew an andalite for the phrase "takes all kinds of different shapes".

[@badfish41969]

Bruh did he just draw an obscure Futurama character from a meme? Love this guy

[@jhonbus]

"Wiggly air" describes what _sound_ is. Saying music is wiggly air is like saying a story is blobs of ink. "Blobs of ink" describes what _writing_ is. A story is the information encoded in a specific arrangement of blobs of ink. Writing is (one) physical medium by which a story can enter a mind. Writing can exist that encodes no story, and a story can exist independently of writing. It is information. Music is the information encoded in a specific arrangement of wiggles in air. Sound is (one) medium by which music can enter a mind. Sound can exist that encodes no music, and music can exist independently of sound. It is information.

[@jhonbus]

I imagine in a world where we didn't have writing, and stories were still passed on verbally, we might be just as likely to say "A story is just wiggly air". It's interesting to think about the difference between music and stories. Why does music feel so much more intimately connected with sound than stories do? Is it because most people can read writing but not many of us can read music? I think that's partly it. I think a big factor is the fact we engage our visual and abstract imaginations much more often than we do our audio imaginations, so it's harder for us to experience music without real sound waves than it is to experience something from a story without reading it directly. And then reading a story asks us to engage our imaginations anyway, which I think music does to a lesser extent. Perhaps films, rather than written stories, are a more direct analogy to music. We experience the story with our own senses rather than imagining it, like we experience a musical performance rather than imagining it. Sometimes (especially if I'm very tired) I can imagine music just as well as I can imagine images. At first this seemed amazing to me, it seemed unreasonable that I should be able to hear a complex piece of music with dozens of instruments in my mind almost as well as if I were really listening to it. But then it seems perfectly natural that I can summon to mind a detailed image of a landcape with individual trees, clouds in the sky, people swimming on the lake... Why do we use our audio imaginations so comparatively little? I think most people probably use it mainly to have imaginary arguments where they win, I know I do 😂

[@danielnice1695]

After close to 7 minutes I burst out laughing, imagining this intense response to somebody saying music is just wiggly air💛

[@aprx2980]

music is wiggly air in the same way that a painting is just wiggly light. fun to meme about but rather reductive :)

[@james.randorff]

When I started this day, the last thing I expected was a direct, side-by-side comparison of Whiskey Lullaby and Mr. Saxobeat. Thank you for making it happen.

[@tattooedclarinetist]

This is incredibly insightful, thank you for making this video

[@Wes_Darvin]

This is exactly what I needed for my stories. A simple lesson to explain why music is more than just "magic sounds." This is a perfect first lesson in a story based in a college for bards. Thank you.

[@darkskinwhite]

you made the whole argument & it was solid bro & then you turned around & literally said it's just a vibe😂😂

[@michaelclements5793]

My dishwasher plays Schubert's "The Trout" to me. Checkmate 12tone.

[@mattlivingston2192]

It is *just as much* about when the air doesn't wiggle as when does.

[@truefilm6991]

As always: very clever choice of visual puns/images. Chord = snowman? Ha! Of course: a triad in whole or half notes written out looks like a snowman. Meaning: if I don't understand a certain image, I just need to think harder. Awesome content as always!

[@elizabethgodwin7679]

Gotta admit, while I could culturally tell it didn't belong there, I kinda loved the "Mozart with a Backbeat" clip

[@torstenschneider670]

tldr: all sounds are wiggly air, but music is _special_ wiggly air. personal addition: technically it's wiggly fluids, air is just the most common medium for music on earth. wiggly.

[@yetanotherbassdude]

This very much reminded me of a quote from Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels. The gods used to think it was funny to make great composers deaf until they realised that doing this never stopped the composers from hearing the music, it just stopped them from *hearing the distractions*. This is maybe an extreme example, but anyone who's experienced getting a song or part of a song stuck in their head will understand innately that while sound is almost always the way we communicate music to each other, we can all pretty easily experience music even while there's no sound around us at all for us to perceive.

[@williamwalters3796]

~~~~

[@felipecortegana3209]

I considering calling music wiggly air the bare truth. At the end of the day we give music meaning. To respond back to the US senate being atoms. In a bare truth way, yup, pretty much, we are just sentient atoms trying to understand other atoms

[@maloneymaloney5204]

I love when you make extremely specific pop culture references in your drawings. I have trouble convincing people that “The Prisoner” ever existed.

[@ImSquiggs]

Whenever I hear Kryptonite, I think of a very specific picnic table where me and my friend played a cover of this song on dual acoustics and I tried to play the solo behind my head but couldn't really get the guitar up and around there, haha.