Ques­tion: Yes, so far.

Peter Hübner: Con­ven­tional mu­sic can­not be de­fined in a natu­ral-sci­en­tific sense. Here we are talk­ing about art and the free­dom of art and ar­tis­tic in­ter­pre­ta­tion, and this ex­tends from the sen­ti­ment of the pop song to the de­struc­tive fury of hard rock mu­sic.

To ap­proach medi­cal mu­sic in such a con­ven­tional mu­si­cal man­ner would remove the sci­en­tific ob­jec­tiv­ity – this ac­counts for the fail­ure of any at­tempt made to util­ize any kind of ar­tis­tic per­form­ance in mu­sic ther­apy – at least in so far as it can be nei­ther de­fined nor evalu­ated sci­en­tifi­cally.

The sci­en­tifi­cally ob­jec­tive de­fin­able and prov­able medi­cal bene­fit can only be es­tab­lished through a musi­co­logi­cal ap­proach – com­pa­ra­ble to that which we know from phar­ma­ceu­tics: pre­cise fig­ures, pre­cise for­mu­las, clear and re­pro­duci­ble facts, just as Pythagoras had also de­manded and, in do­ing so, es­tab­lished the foun­da­tions of our sci­en­tific age.

And then here too, when knowl­edge of the ma­te­rial – of the mi­cro­cosm of mu­sic – is suf­fi­cient, the de­sired sci­en­tific medi­cal suc­cess is achieved, suc­cess which can be ob­jec­tively meas­ured and re­pro­duced in­de­pend­ently of place and time.

The trans­mis­sion of in­for­ma­tion can in­deed be a ther­apy, eve­ry doc­tor knows this and eve­ry psy­cholo­gist and psy­chia­trist earns his liv­ing on the fact. And the har­monic in­for­ma­tion which the lis­tener re­ceives via Medi­cal Reso­nance Ther­apy Mu­sic^® pro­duces a sci­en­tifi­cally prov­able heal­ing ef­fect.
As such, it is a medi­cally ef­fec­tive ther­apy – based on the reso­nance of har­monic in­for­ma­tion. And the har­monic in­for­ma­tion uses the sound as an in­for­ma­tion car­rier.

In pre­vious medi­cal stud­ies, ex­perts have pri­mar­ily con­cerned them­selves with meas­ur­able medi­cal pa­rame­ters. On the basis of the ap­par­ent re­sults of the re­search, they are now be­gin­ning to look more closely at the prin­ci­ples – how in­com­ing har­monic in­for­ma­tion in­di­vidu­ally ef­fects the body’s own in­ter­nal har­monic in­for­ma­tion and how the body car­ries out any nec­es­sary cor­rec­tions. But these stud­ies are also largely gov­erned by the gen­eral de­vel­op­ment of re­search into the brain.

For all of the rea­sons men­tioned, it seems to me to be ex­pe­di­ent to in­tro­duce Medi­cal Reso­nance Ther­apy Mu­sic^® to the sim­ple lis­tener as ‘medi­cally ef­fec­tive mu­sic’ and to the ex­pert as ‘a medi­cally ef­fec­tive har­monic in­for­ma­tion car­rier’.

Ques­tion: May I repeat the ques­tion, just to get it clear in de­tail? To what ex­tent can Medi­cal Reso­nance Ther­apy Mu­sic^® be de­scribed as in­for­ma­tion?

Peter Hübner:
The in­for­ma­tion as­pect comes from the musi­co­logi­cal view­point. Medi­cal Reso­nance Ther­apy Mu­sic^® only rep­re­sents the struc­tural re­ali­ties of the mi­cro­cosm of mu­sic in so far as it uses these struc­tures as in­for­ma­tion car­ri­ers for the trans­mis­sion of in­for­ma­tion about the laws of har­mony of the mi­cro­cosm of mu­sic.