For the re­spon­si­ble, right­eous mu­si­cal art­ist, the per­sonal in­sight into the natu­ral re­la­tion­ship be­tween self-aware­ness, in­tel­lect, feel­ing and un­der­stand­ing, mind and neu­ro­physi­ol­ogy, is of cru­cial im­por­tance.

Even the mu­si­cian at work de­pends on the ex­cel­lent func­tion of his neu­ro­physi­ol­ogy.
But the lis­tener, too, needs an in­ner-mu­si­cal tech­nol­ogy to sys­tem­ati­cally in­crease his neu­ro­physi­ologi­cal per­form­ance – if he wants to go to the bot­tom of the mu­si­cal mean­ing.

Not only is our neu­ro­physi­ol­ogy re­spon­si­ble for our outer hear­ing abil­ity, it also de­ter­mines the accuracy of the mu­si­cal rep­re­sen­ta­tion of the tones in our mind.

The av­er­age neu­ro­physi­ologi­cal func­tion­ing of an in­di­vid­ual not prac­tised in gain­ing knowl­edge in mu­sic is able to grasp only lim­ited val­ues of the mu­si­cal sound-space – only cer­tain tone se­ries, cer­tain in­ter­val steps, as well as pre­domi­nantly pe­ri­odic, rhyth­mi­cal struc­tures.

With the ex­cep­tion of the gen­ius, the depth of even the mu­si­cal tone-space is un­known to the av­er­age mu­sic lis­tener, to the mu­si­cian, and unfor­tu­nately also to the mu­sic teacher not prac­tised in the proc­ess of gain­ing knowl­edge in mu­sic.

The motif-space, but even more so the se­quence-space – let alone the space of the har­mony – remain com­pletely in­ac­ces­si­ble to the ex­peri­ence of an in­di­vid­ual un­trained in the re­fine­ment of the mu­si­cal hear­ing.

Our gain­ing of knowl­edge in mu­sic and our crea­tive ac­tiv­ity in mu­sic, there­fore, de­pend on a di­rect in­crease of per­form­ance in the field of our neu­ro­physi­ol­ogy, and a mod­ern sci­ence of mu­sic – if it intends to be suc­cess­ful in the clas­si­cal field of mu­sic – will have to unlock this gate to true un­der­stand­ing of mu­sic and true mu­si­cal-hu­man works by chang­ing its think­ing on clas­si­cal mu­sic.

The neu­ro­physi­ol­ogy in par­ticu­lar is an im­por­tant means of cog­ni­tion for the mu­si­cal crea­tor to ex­peri­ence the outer in­di­vid­ual ef­fect of his mu­sic and to judge its value for the lis­tener.
Even if the gen­ius mu­sic crea­tor, or also the mu­si­cian skilled in re­fined mu­si­cal think­ing, only thinks the mu­si­cal work on the level of his mind, then very spon­ta­ne­ously he makes the di­rect ex­peri­ence in his neu­ro­physi­ol­ogy of the ef­fect of this mu­sic on the har­mo­ni­ous func­tion­ing of his or­gans.

Mu­sic may in­flu­ence the or­der of the en­ergy proc­esses in our nerv­ous sys­tem.
Ample proof of this fact is given by the frenzy of de­struc­tion of young peo­ple in the wake of beat and pop con­certs.

By means of clas­si­cal mu­sic, it is pos­si­ble to­day to gain com­plete, ho­lis­tic in­sight into the natu­ral re­la­tions of our in­ner hu­man worlds of cog­ni­tion and of crea­tion.

Based on this in­sight, we mu­si­cians can con­ceive and for­mu­late ob­ser­va­tions, au­then­tic by sci­en­tific cri­te­ria, with a depth of ex­pres­sion that has al­ways been at the com­mand of our great clas­si­cal mu­sic crea­tors in a natu­ral way; a depth which they de­sire for their lis­tener, which they ex­pect from the mu­si­cian as well as from the mu­sic teacher.

The sci­ence of mu­sic will have to de­vote it­self to this in­crease in per­form­ance of the neu­ro­physi­ol­ogy.