Klarinet Archive - Posting 000857.txt from 1996/08

From: Dick Walters <waltersd@-----.NET>
Subj: Re: "Gut" Feel
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 18:41:57 -0400

> From: Dick Walters
> To: Multiple recipients of list KLARINET
> Subject: Re: Re the "gut" feel
> Date: 1996-08-31 18:13
>
>
>
>
> MUSIC@-----.BITNET wrote:
> >
> > So far I have seen about 6 postings asserting that they have a gut
> > feel about differences in instruments, or that someone's wife heard
> > a difference, or their student heard a difference or they heard a
> > difference, and then the poster feels that something conclusive has
> > been established by having said that.
> >
> > It is not the way it works. There has to be unbiased, objective,
> > scientific evidence for assertions of this nature.
> >
> > It does not matter if one's dog hears a difference, this does not
> > consistitute a technical truth. I used to thing that clarinet players
> > were the most noble, intelligent, understanding people in the world.
> > But my faith is shaken when I see "gut feel" being offered as
> > conclusive evidence on anything. One has a built-in bias to hear
> > things in the way that one thinks they are supposed to be heard. And
> > to objectivity, that is a death sentence.
> >
> > I know that music is a subjective business, at least the performance
> > side of it is. But when it comes to matters of physics and
> > whether or not an unbiased listener can tell something, subjectivity
> > is not a reliable tool.
> >
> > And thus, it does not matter what one's wife hears, or one's student,
> > or even the player. We are beset with so many subjective phenomena
> > that we simply cannot trust our ears on issues such as this.
> >
> >
> > It seems that this came about from questioning whether there is a
> > difference in
> > sound from different clarinets. If I understand Dan correctly is saying
> > that you
> > can't rely on your ears to tell if there is a sound difference or not.
> > Therefore
> > I say there is a difference. Of course you can't rely on your ears to
> > prove me
> > wrong. In the interest of being analytical I have tried different
> > mouthpieces
> > with a low frequency spectrum analyzer. There is a difference. I wish
> > that I still
> > had access to that equipment to try different clarinets.
> > Interesting Question. Evidently there is no way to prove the hypothesis
> > is correct
> > or not so why not use gut feel? It's your money.
> > jackD.
> This is an interesting debate, especially for a non professional
> player. If the clarinet is a part of a music making system, along with
> the player and if the only "output" of the system exists in the ear and
> brain of the listener, then how can discernable differences of musical
> pleasure to the listener not be an objective criterion, at least for
> that listener? If the listener(s) have an educated "ear" to evaluate
> that system vs an experiential database of other similar systems and
> judges one of many clarinets (a variable element of the system) it as
> better or worse than others in his experience, why is this not a valid
> objective judgement (at least for systems involving the same player)?
> How can a spectrum analyser be quantified to measure the essence of
> Mozart's musical intention for himself and his listeners with K422? If
> so, what would it prove except during Hewlett-Packard lunchroom
> concerts? Granted, a reedy sound may have been his preference compared
> to a dark sound of a modern instrument; but at least for a single player
> picking between several instruments, seems to me if he and others agree
> one "sounds" better, that's a valid selection criteria, at least for
> him. Certainly if it plays better, or easier, or whatever as well, seems
> important. Granted my wife's subjective evaluation is only important if
> I intend to play in the house without a hassle. The virtual dog is not
> an issue; but what about the principal player from the LA Philharmonic?
> No one has challanged his opinion. Could be he's still lurking in
> cyberspace somewhere and may remember this episode and jump in with an
> opinion.
>
> Dan, you don't have the list license to be a crumudgeon, do you? I hope
> not.