Klarinet Archive - Posting 000083.txt from 2007/03

From: "Forest Aten" <forestaten@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] orchestral sounds
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 09:50:19 -0500


> This does not mean that the person expressing that idea is
> conning us. On the contrary, he or she hears a difference.
> There is nothing wrong with that. It is when that opinion is
> elevated to the level of a physical principle, that I get all
> woozy.
>
> Dan Leeson
> DNLeeson@-----.net
>
>
>
>

Dan,

Say you do a careful scientific analysis....of....say 40 player's
sound/tone. You then have the same players listen to these forty sounds and
make an evaluation with regard to darkness or brightness of these sounds.

Do you believe that you could go back to your scientific data and find
corollaries that might pin the tail on the donkey?

Do you think if you added more player's sounds that you might eventually
determine a "break point" (with maybe a gray area between) where
players/listeners determine recipes for sound that might work like this:
sounds with criteria from A to L = "dark" and sounds with criteria from N to
Z = "bright"? Do you think in an even more complex study, that you break
this down into Nationalistic groups and see if the "break points" that you
might find, fall at different places in the scientific data sets per these
unique groups of players? Etc.

Why can't there be science that describes why and what set of circumstances
make "bright" or "dark" sound for both players and listeners?....identified
through (quantitative) analysis?

Do you think there might be a scientific model developed (perhaps already is
in the world of auditory science...I just don't know) to describe what so
many players and listeners perceive as "dark" or "bright"?

Just a thought.

Forest

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