In the proc­ess of gain­ing knowl­edge in mu­sic the ob­jects of knowl­edge may be very dif­fer­ent:
the ob­ject of knowl­edge may con­cern the tone or re­spec­tively, the tonal struc­ture of the mu­si­cal sound-space;
the ob­ject of knowl­edge may be hid­den within the mu­si­cal sound-space in the next finer mu­si­cal fields of knowl­edge: on the motif level;
the ob­ject of knowl­edge may lie on yet an­other, next higher mu­si­cal level of knowl­edge: in the mu­si­cal fields of knowl­edge of the se­quences;
and fur­ther­more, the ob­ject of knowl­edge may lie in the ab­so­lu­te, mu­si­cal cog­ni­tive field of the har­mony.

One would as­sume, that within the mu­si­cal sound-space, al­ways and auto­mati­cally there is a world of mo­tifs, that within the motif-space, al­ways and auto­mati­cally there is a world of se­quences, and that within a se­quence-space, al­ways there is the world of the har­mony.

This as­sump­tion is in­deed valid with re­gard to the spaces them­selves but not with re­gard to their in­ner li­ves.
A body, for ex­ample, might be there with­out life (as in the case of a sculpture) and like­wise, sounds might exist in the mu­si­cal sound-space with­out mo­tifs dwell­ing within them.
And, by anal­ogy, it is well pos­si­ble that in an ap­par­ent motif-space there is no se­quence at all and that fur­ther­more, within the se­quence-spaces the impact of the all-enli­ven­ing har­mony is miss­ing.

One must take into ac­count, how­ever, that it is not quite sim­ple to per­ceive the world of mo­tifs within the mu­si­cal sound-space; for this in­sight re­quires logi­cal deduc­tion pene­trat­ing into the depth of the mu­si­cal event and into the mu­si­cal knowl­edge that re­sults.
And one must con­sider that it is even more dif­fi­cult to dis­cover the se­quence within the motif-space, since the se­quence can be found only by vir­tue of even higher logi­cal deduc­tion.
And, unfor­tu­nately, it was only an ex­tremely rare occurence so far be­long­ing to the field of the high­est mu­si­cal reve­la­tions that some­one dis­cov­ered the har­mony as such in the se­quence-space, be­cause the har­mony can be com­pre­hended only with the high­est mu­si­cal logic, and only on the level of pure selfknowl­edge.

It may also be that in one or the other piece of mu­sic the in­ner mu­si­cal cog­ni­tive forces were not ef­fec­tive even when the mu­sic was cre­ated, and that the com­po­si­tion in the lit­eral mean­ing of the word was purely as­sem­bled from outer ele­ments of the mu­si­cal sound-space like, for ex­ample, from con­ven­tional melo­dies to which a “com­po­si­tion” was then at­tached by means of the knowl­edge ac­quired in con­ven­tional com­po­si­tional classes.

Natu­rally, in such a case the in­ner mu­si­cal fields of knowl­edge can cer­tainly not be lo­cal­ized; at best, they may be simu­lated by ex­pert per­for­mers who are geared to outer suc­cess.
The edu­cated lis­tener iden­ti­fies this lack by the absence of the in­te­grated and com­pre­hen­sive mu­si­cal logic in the mu­si­cal work since this absence of truth ex­pres­ses it­self in all parts of the com­po­si­tion, be­cause they are joined to­gether with­out life like the bran­ches, leaves, and roots of a patched-up tree.