Klarinet Archive - Posting 000684.txt from 2002/05

From: w7wright@-----.net (William Wright)
Subj: RE: [kl] A Colour Symphony op. 24
Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 18:50:33 -0400

<><> Mark wrote:
Bill, I know something about visual perception and aural perception, and
they don't work the same way.

I agree with this part of what you say, Mark.

(As many computerphiles have done, I have written a few 'amateurish'
back propagation networks for myself which attempted to process
on-center off-surround, played with phonemes and speech recognition via
a sound card, and so forth. My one and only published magazine article
was on language processing.)

There is no question that our aural and visual hardware function
differently. **BUT** that's not the point that I was trying to make.

My point was that, at some point during the total process of sensation
and response (input & output), the various pathways *DO* trade
information with each other. They influence each other's concept of
the proper context --- that is, which possibilities should be ignored or
emphasized because we are finite and cannot process every possibility.
The pathways excite and inhibit each other from moment to moment. And
so forth.

No sensory or output pathway works alone. This is part of the reason
why I am impressed with the adjective "convincing" that someone on this
list posted a couple of weeks ago. All of the pathways --- locomotion,
hearing & language, vision, probably even taste and touch --- must agree
that a piece of music "makes sense" in order for music to have its
maximum effect on both the audience and the musician.

Cheers,
Bill

---------------------------------------------------------------------