 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-08-28 16:29
Siguard Rascher talked about this a bit. He said all competent musicians have perfect pitch on their instrument- eg. pianists can tell the pitch of piano easily but not guitar.
This is why when a trumpet player takes the trumpet out of the case they can play middle C without referance to it- even if they have not played anything for the whole day. The sound is in their head from years of practice.
Rascher thought that with training and time you could train yourself to have actual perfect pitch.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ChrisArcand
Date: 2007-08-28 16:39
I've always thought that a clarinetist is doing an absolute fantastic job with quality of tone and eveness when I can't tell what note they're on, especially when relative to the others. I mean this in a very general way - of course with concentration I would figure out what they're playing, but I find that somebody can REALLY play fantastic when it takes me a long time to discern where exactly they are in the registers.
CA
PS So I guess the instrument thing is right; we're used to listening to the specific timbre of certain notes on our own instruments which helps us tune and figure out what note we're on.
Post Edited (2007-08-28 16:40)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ski
Date: 2007-08-28 19:01
Since the subject of perfect pitch came up here yesterday, I've been looking at various websites that attempt to explain what perfect pitch is. A lot of what I've read is hogwash. So here's my "treatise" on perfect pitch...
Perfect Pitch can describe one of two distinct abilities:
a) accurate recognition of notes
b) accurate vocalization of notes
and then there's...
c) ability to do both
I have perfect pitch but I have trouble singing and holding a note in tune. So when asked to provide an "A", I can do so, but it takes me a while to achieve stability in my vocalization of that note, whether it's by humming, whistling, or singing "aah".
Among the degrees of perfect pitch ability there are the following variations:
• The ability to sing any note at concert pitch without any external reference. Those with innate pitch sense can be woken from a sound sleep and sing/whistle/hum any note requested of them.
• The ability to recognize any note at concert pitch without any external reference. Same as above, where the ability can be demonstrated upon being woken from a sound sleep.
• The ability to provide an accurate "A=44?" without aid of external reference, but can't vocalize other pitches as accurately.
• As mentioned in a post above, the ability to recognize notes of a particular instrument while having difficulty identifying the notes of other instruments. So someone can have "perfect piano" and recognize what pitch(es) are played, but their ability to recognize the proper note name for oboe or clarinet isn't as good. In these cases, some of the pitch recognition comes from extra-musical sounds produced by a particular instrument; in the case of "perfect piano", the sound of the knock of the hammer against any one particular string is learned by the ear as much as the pitch.
• The ability to discern pitches but not be able to accurately determine what octave it's being played in. (In cases such as this, discerning the proper octave can be taught).
• "Flexible" Perfect Pitch --- where it's possible to adjust one's recognition of notes when working at different tuning standards.
• "Inflexible" Perfect Pitch --- the opposite of above, where "everything" sounds out of tune if it's not played in the tuning standard under which that musician trained.
There are other variations, I'm sure, including those who have musical synesthesia.
Post Edited (2007-08-29 03:05)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-08-29 03:08
as a side note (pun), most of my theory and history professors were pianists. They all said that they had 'piano pitch', but limited abilities with other instruments. Flute, brasses, oboe, marimba, violin and viola, were generally easy for most. Many said they had trouble withe the pitch of clarinet, tuba and timpani.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paumartin
Date: 2007-08-29 04:09
I posted this question at a piano forum:
____________
I don't know much about music. I cannot play any instrument. So please bear with me.
I have a son who is 15 years old and a sophomore in high school.
I down loaded a free ear training software about two yars ago and asked my son to try it. He was able to identify notes without the cadences. So I wrote the software author who said that my son probably had perfect pitch. This was confirmed by a subsequent test from a university doing research on perfect pitch.
I told this a local high school music director who discussed this with another music director and he said they came to the conclusion that perfect pitch is a liability because it makes it the player have difficulty following out of tune band members.
I researched the internet. I found that considering how rare it is, there are more professional concert players with perfect pitch (ratio of performers with PP vs without) than what you would expect in the general population.
In the general population few (only 3% or even as low as one to 10,000) has perfect pitch however in professional player the occurrence is much higher than that. Some people have argued that people with perfect pitch are probably more interested in music and that is why they discovered they have perfect pitch or have developed it.
I had the opportunity to speak to a piano professor who teaches graduate students and he said that there are two kinds of perfect pitches. One where the subject can not only identify the pitch but also how many cents higher or lower the pitch is. Another is where the subject can only identify the the pitch. This professor says that he has also the second kind (i.e. he can identify the pitch but cannot say how many cents off it is). He thinks having the second kind is good but having the first can lead to problems.
My son meanwhile has won several honors/awards for his saxophone playing. He is currently learning the piano because his saxophone teacher has told him to get piano lessons because to get to graduate a good music school, piano proficiency is necessary. My son's piano teacher says my son is at intermediate level that is after about 8 months or studying the piano.
Is having perfect pitch a liability or an asset? How can you maximize the benefit and lessen the liability. My son really would love to pursue music as a career.
Thank you so much for your help and input
Peter
---------
I posted this 6 months ago. My son is now a junior in high school. Now he is learning the clarinet in order to double (pun intended) his chances of going to a good music school...
I hope this contributes to the discussion of this interesting topic.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ski
Date: 2007-08-29 08:53
Hi Peter,
I told this a local high school music director who discussed this with another music director and he said they came to the conclusion that perfect pitch is a liability because it makes it the player have difficulty following out of tune band members.
Assigning liability to a person's natural musical ability? Puh-lease... Both of those teachers are, frankly, sheer idiots. If the other kids are out of tune, it's not your son's fault that he can hear that. It's the teachers' fault for not doing a better job at getting the other kids in the band to be in tune.
The mind boggles...
Perfect pitch ("PP") is a natural ability which should be fostered, practiced, and honed.
I exhibited PP from the time I was four or five. I'm now 45. I started piano lessons at 5 and I've been a professional musician since I got out of conservatory. My ability to discern pitches and tell when people are out of tune (and by how much) has done nothing but serve me well over the course of my musical life.
I rarely ever discuss my resume on forums, but save it to say this: if you saw the roster of artists I've worked for and the types of jobs I've done over the course of my professional life, musical director, composer, pianist, orchestrator, arranger, and transcriptionist, you'd clearly see that having PP is not a liability.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2007-08-29 23:15
''My ability to discern pitches and tell when people are out of tune (and by how much) has done nothing but serve me well over the course of my musical life.''
I too, can tell when other players are out of tune, relative to the playing situation, but I don't have perfect pitch as I can't pass the 'blindfold' test.
The blindfold test, were it to be conducted would consist of a person being played a note, on an instrument of choice, and out of sight of that instrument and being then asked to name that note....(a typical response might be).......''it's middle C (on the piano, say).
This is my understanding of perfect pitch.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2007-08-30 06:05
I have been practicing this tune called ''When My Dreamboat Comes Home'' on the clarinet, for a couple of days now (key of Ab concert).
I last played it about 15 hours ago and as I was strolling past my piano just now I was humming this ditty and guess what? I hit the Ab chord on the piano and I was perfectly in tune with my ''hummed'' rendition.
Coincidence maybe? It must have something to do with the intense repetition of the number, I'd say, I'm not reading any music, just playing along to a recording. I can't think of another reason, PP does not come in to it for me.
I'll repeat the exercise after another day or so and see what happens, as I don't recall this ever happening to me before.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ski
Date: 2007-08-30 06:53
Cool! Well, if it was coincidence, you beat the odds, as you had a 1:12 chance of getting it right on the first try. ![[grin]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie5.gif) Anyway, at the very least you have good pitch retention! But who knows, maybe you do have some form of perfect pitch. Time will tell. In any event, it would be interesting to see if, at some time in the future when you repeat the exercise, and you hit the wrong chord, just how far off you are. In any event, I think it's great that you could do that today. Very cool!
And I can see the headlines now:
Cyber Clarinetist Claims Perusing Posts Precipitates Perfect Pitch
by A. Flat
Perth, Australia, a woodwind player and member of an online clarinetist's forum made the astonishing claim today that the strange ability to name pitches out of thin air (known in the music world as "perfect pitch") can be learned simply by participating in a forum thread in which the topic is being discussed. As explained by the clarinetist Ned, who was only willing to give his first name to reporters, "I don't recall this ever happening to me before." As a result of Ned's claim, a buzz has begun in the musicologist community, with calls to study Ned's new-found ability day and night for the next forty years. Tests include being woken up in the middle of the night and being asked to sing any note requested of him. Sources say his accuracy will be rewarded with occasional visits by family members, though Ned is already said to be demanding at least a change of sheets and a new box of Vandoren 3.5's every two weeks.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2007-08-30 08:12
''with calls to study Ned's new-found ability day and night for the next forty years.''
Most amusing Ski - I'm 59 actually and would appreciate being in the position of actually being able to be woken up........at age 99!
By the way, I'm based in Melbourne, it's just that my email server is apparently housed in Perth...and your use of alliteration is clever.
More to the point - I DID repeat the exercise about an hour after the first. I hummed the same tune and it was approximately concert G. So......in the region......but far from accurate.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2007-08-30 12:02
The blindfold test, were it to be conducted would consist of a person being played a note, on an instrument of choice, and out of sight of that instrument and being then asked to name that note....(a typical response might be).......''it's middle C (on the piano, say).
This is my understanding of perfect pitch.
----------------------------------------------
Nope, not instrument of choice - I don't have perfect pitch, but can tell any note on the Clarinet from it's timbre. Perfect pitch is being able to know a pitch without hearing it on any instrument first.
http://www.SkypeClarinetLessons.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2007-08-30 12:18
> Perfect pitch is being able to know a pitch without hearing it on any
> instrument first.
Jjust a sine generator and headphones?
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Granger
Date: 2007-08-30 16:24
Imagine being a professional traveling musician with this ability in an era when pitch standards varied from town to town, church to court.
Ed
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2007-08-30 22:27
''Perfect pitch is being able to know a pitch without hearing it on any instrument first.''
David, you are saying that the subject would vocalise a particular note and then have another person check the pitch on an instrument?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Koo Young Chung
Date: 2007-08-31 00:41
Perfect pitch is nothing but an acute early memory.
If there were only five notes on the piano,anyone would have perfect pitch.
If we use 29 or 53 scale system(*),nobody would have perfect pitch.
* 29, 53 scale system is the next musically(scientifically) meaningful
scale system after 12 system we use now.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ski
Date: 2007-08-31 01:11
Koo, what do you base your statement on -- personal experience? Research?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ski
Date: 2007-08-31 04:48
OK, let's assume for a moment that perfect pitch ability doesn't have a genetic origin. Imagine two different youngsters growing up in households where their parents play piano regularly. When they're a little older they both take piano lessons but only one child develops perfect pitch ability. How might you explain this phenomenon?
I would argue that almost anyone can learn English even if it's not their first language. But not everyone can learn to have an innate sense of pitch.
To your other point, I have two questions for you:
First, how do you equate a "scientifically musical" (whatever that means) set of pitch divisions with "meaningfulness". Meaningful to whom? There are numerous non-Western cultures which use fewer than 12 scale steps, and others that use more. And I know several US-based musicians who play in microtonal ensembles. Which scale system, then, is more "meaningful"?
Second, how can you say with certainty that the pitches of a 29 step, 53 step, or any other microtonal scale couldn't be recognized by someone with perfect pitch ability in those systems? Is it that you think it's just too many steps for anyone to be able to recognize? Or is your statement based on some kind of experience, or research that you're familiar with?
Post Edited (2007-08-31 07:39)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clockwiser
Date: 2007-08-31 10:05
I think everyone is born with perfect pitch (i saw this in a article too), its a matter of finding it and discovering it in your childhood. The ability of perfect pitch deteriorates gradually after you're born. That's why adults rarely suddenly discover perfect pitch, whereas people with perfect pitch realise they had it when they were young.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Granger
Date: 2007-08-31 11:00
I think this may be yet another of those topics where the either/or of nature/nurture is really a product of the psychological need to pin down the origins of something in a single, "original" source. Like many things, I suspect perfect pitch is a product of both inate ability and environment. Why must it be one or the other? There may be a genetic predisposition that makes perfect pitch more likely to develop, or more easily developed, but that doesn't make it the "origin" of prefect pitch, necessarily. It's the meeting of that nascent capacity with a conducive environment and the working out of that relationship in experience that I think is most likely the genesis of perfect pitch. I doubt anyone is born "with" perfect pitch, but some people are probably far more likely to develop it, while others may be far less likely to develop it but may overcome that lack of natural ability, as with the acquisition of so many other skills. But that's still a guess on my part, as there's still a lot we don't know.
And I have heard more than one person with perfect pitch say it was both a blessing and a curse in the sense of presenting obstacles other musicians didn't face.
Ed
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2007-08-31 14:18
If it's not genetics, then how does explain synesthesia, the phenomenon where a person visually perceives different colors when listening to different pitches? Surely this is related to perfect pitch, where people recognize aural colors.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2007-08-31 14:22
vin wrote:
> Surely this is related to
> perfect pitch, where people recognize aural colors.
Surely that's a helluva jump in an assumption. A hypothesis it is; now you need to disprove it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Granger
Date: 2007-08-31 15:08
Interestingly, whilst googling this topic, I came across an article that appeared in yesterday's Washington Post on this very topic:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/30/AR2007083000642.html
The reseach in the article seems to suggest that perfect pitch is a discrete phenomenon, which you either have or you don't, and which supports David's contention that it is genetic. There is an op-ed element to the article as well. But it does suggest that the kind of perfect pitch revealed by the study is a distinctly different skill from relative pitch.
I still believe there's a developmental aspect, but am willing to be proven wrong in the long haul. Seems to me you'd want to isolate the specific gene responsible for perfect pitch, then identify people who have it through genetic testing, then subject people with that gene with no real musical background to pitch testing of some kind.
Ed
Post Edited (2007-08-31 15:28)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ski
Date: 2007-08-31 16:13
UCSF online perfect pitch (absolute pitch) test.
http://perfectpitch.ucsf.edu
The survey includes a question asking participants if they have synesthesia.
Ed, I can tell you first hand that perfect pitch (PP) ability and relative pitch ability are two entirely different animals. In fact, taking that test should bear this out.
When I hear a note, it's akin to smelling something distinctive, i.e., the smell of strawberries is unmistakably different from that of bread baking; the smell of freshly sawn pine can't be confused with that of peanut butter. (I'm using smell for sake of example/analogy. I don't have "smellesthesia" ). So when I hear a note I get a "feeling", and that feeling is akin to being able to instantly tell if the pitch is "peanut butter" or "pine".
When I'm transcribing a particularly difficult or dense chord, I'll listen for intervals, probably like any other musician would. But intervals don't evoke the same kind of response as do discreet pitches. Any two notes played a fifth apart in the low register on piano, or, a fifth hocketed between orchestral instruments produce a different sensation that says "fifth", but it's not a "that's peanut butter" or "that's bread baking" kind of recognition.
Hope that explains, to a small extent, the difference -- as I see and experience it -- between hearing intervals and naming notes vis a vis perfect pitch.
Post Edited (2007-08-31 16:14)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Granger
Date: 2007-08-31 16:23
Ski wrote:
>
> Ed, I can tell you first hand that perfect pitch (PP) ability
> and relative pitch ability are two entirely different animals.
> In fact, taking that test should bear this out.
>
Of this, at least, I have little doubt, and didn't mean to imply otherwise. I'm sure they're very distinct abilities. I have very good relative pitch, but not a whiff of being able to identify individual notes. My mother, on the other hand, does have perfect pitch, and for her different keys invoke different distinct moods. Wonder if she might have some low-level form of synesthesia as well.
Ed
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: joannew
Date: 2007-09-02 11:44
I have a couple of comments, after reading the full perfect pitch study mentioned in these news reports (available free from PNAS.org).
First, this study in no way tested a genetic basis for perfect pitch - no DNA was studied, no family groups analysed, nothing that might actually help them identify a gene for perfect pitch. This is a typical case of the headline not representing the content of the study. They only make this surmise based on a bimodal distribution (ie. you have it or you don't), rather than seeing perfect pitch as an extreme of a broad distribution. Perhaps there is some extent of genetic control, but I can imagine other mechanisms which could give the same result. Someone mentioned above a possible window of opportunity to develop this ability. Perhaps many of us are born with the capability, but without training at a specific point in our brain development, the ability is lost.
In any case, it's a very nice study. They show a systematic bias towards too-sharp identification with age, and discuss possible mechanisms, like changes in elasticity of the membrane within the cochlea, or reduction in the density of hair cells.
But what was really interesting to me was the distribution of accuracy in note naming. Almost everyone nailed the A and the D, but there were systematic errors in the 'black key' notes. They proposed a kind of magnet effect, due to heightened perception caused by tuning to A (at various pitch standards), which is quite a nice idea, but remains to be tested.
But independently of the 'A magnet', I think this tells us as much about our tuning system as about the neurobiology of pitch perception. Our standard equal tempered tuning forces our scale into even intervals, rather than optimizing the primary intervals depending on the key of the music. So the C#, D# and G# were almost always identified too sharp, very rarely too flat. But I wonder: if the test had included justified tuning scales, in which C# and Db, for example, are actually different notes, would this bias would have disappeared?
Proponents of just temperament have argued that we have done music a huge disservice by switching to equal temperament. Perhaps this is the bioloical evidence that equal temperament doesn't quite resonate with our brains.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Koo Young Chung
Date: 2007-09-02 14:50
In order to perfect pitch has a genetic origin,the 12 tone scale should be
the only choice for musical scale.
But that's not the case.
Even though 12 scale system is very good system,it is not predetermined.
We can use any number of scale system.
It is the convention. Just like red light is for stop.etc.
How in the world genes know what we would choose for the musical scale?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Koo Young Chung
Date: 2007-09-02 14:54
There are finite number of genes.
But you can make up almost infinite number of human traits and characteristics!
You don't need clarinet gene to play clarinet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ski
Date: 2007-09-02 15:45
In order to perfect pitch has a genetic origin,the 12 tone scale should be the only choice for musical scale.
I'd venture a guess that people who exhibit perfect pitch ability aren't limited to those musicians acclimated to the 12-note per octave scale system.
How in the world genes know what we would choose for the musical scale?
I don't think anyone here is saying that genetics determine what scales are adopted by a given society/culture.
In any event, I think it would be quite revealing to see a similar test to the one linked to above for people who use different tuning/scale systems.
[ EDIT & ADDENDUM ]
There are what Westerners would consider as "microtonal scale steps" in some traditional styles of Arabic music; but to those musicians those notes are not microtonal. They're notes, just the like all the other ones. It goes without saying that there must be a standard by which those notes are determined to be in- or out-of-tune. I'd be hard pressed to think that a young musician studying the oud wouldn't be corrected by his teacher if he bent a note an 1/8 tone sharp instead of the expected 1/4-tone sharp. And with this perspective I would offer that there are, for one, Arabic musicians who must have perfect pitch regarding those scales.
Even blues singers will only go so far "out" when gliding up to a note or singing a "grace note" or other typical blues embellishment.
My point is that there are standards of tuning -- and hence, note recognition -- that aren't tied to the 12-tone scale; and that certain people's ability to hear whether a note is sung in or out of tune or to recognize those notes discreetly must imply a perfect pitch corollary in all musical cultures.
Post Edited (2007-09-02 16:12)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2007-09-04 05:05
Perfect pitch is a blessing and a curse, trust me as I've got it. It's very disconcerting hearing a train horn sound and think ... that G is sharp. Then there's the whole scenario of period instrument performance where the pitch isn't exactly a semitone - very painfulSki wrote:
> In order to perfect pitch has a genetic origin,the 12 tone
> scale should be the only choice for musical scale.
>
> I'd venture a guess that people who exhibit perfect pitch
> ability aren't limited to those musicians acclimated to the
> 12-note per octave scale system.
>
> How in the world genes know what we would choose for the
> musical scale?
>
> I don't think anyone here is saying that genetics determine
> what scales are adopted by a given society/culture.
>
> In any event, I think it would be quite revealing to see a
> similar test to the one linked to above for people who use
> different tuning/scale systems.
>
> [ EDIT & ADDENDUM ]
>
> There are what Westerners would consider as "microtonal scale
> steps" in some traditional styles of Arabic music; but to those
> musicians those notes are not microtonal. They're notes,
> just the like all the other ones. It goes without saying that
> there must be a standard by which those notes are determined to
> be in- or out-of-tune. I'd be hard pressed to think that a
> young musician studying the oud wouldn't be corrected by his
> teacher if he bent a note an 1/8 tone sharp instead of the
> expected 1/4-tone sharp. And with this perspective I would
> offer that there are, for one, Arabic musicians who must have
> perfect pitch regarding those scales.
>
> Even blues singers will only go so far "out" when gliding up to
> a note or singing a "grace note" or other typical blues
> embellishment.
>
> My point is that there are standards of tuning -- and hence,
> note recognition -- that aren't tied to the 12-tone scale; and
> that certain people's ability to hear whether a note is sung in
> or out of tune or to recognize those notes discreetly must
> imply a perfect pitch corollary in all musical cultures.
>
>
> Post Edited (2007-09-02 16:12)
Without music, the world would be grey, very grey.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MichaelR
Date: 2007-09-04 18:33
Ski wrote:
> I would argue that almost anyone can learn English even if it's
> not their first language. But not everyone can learn to have an
> innate sense of pitch.
People who grow up with tonally based languages (e.g. Mandarin) do.
some observations to this phenomena:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=perfect+pitch+tonal+language&btnG=Google+Search
--
Michael of Portland, OR
Be Appropriate and Follow Your Curiosity
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ski
Date: 2007-09-04 18:43
Thanks for that link. Fascinating stuff.
Regarding my comment which you quoted... it was in reference to the phenomenon that some people are tone deaf, i.e., those who "couldn't carry a tune in a paper bag".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ski
Date: 2007-09-04 18:59
Follow up... So it would seem that the tonal nature of Mandarin (as well as Vietnamese and similar tonally-based languages) would attune people to be able to recognize pitches or pitch "areas"; I using the term "area" here to describe a pitch which isn't pure or steady, but is produced with an inheret pitch bend (pitch inflection) of some kind either leading to a "target" pitch or descending from an "initial" pitch. If you've ever heard a Chinese person demonstrate the four variations of "ma" (as cited in the articles found via Michale's link), you'd know what I mean. I heard these first hand myself many years ago when my (native Chinese) girlfriend at the time tried to teach me some simple words. She spoke Toi San, a Chinese dialect. After I ended up calling her mother a horse in the pronounciation faux pas of the century, I gave up.
So to the tones and their pitch bends/inflections used to pronounce the different variants of "ma" in Chinese, for one, I would imagine that the "depth" of bend in either direction wouldn't likely exhibit a great degree of variation on average from one speaker to another.
It's unlikely that the pitches used in the pronounciation of Mandarin et al would have direct tuning analogs to the 12 tone/octave scale regardless of the tuning standard; but I can understand on a "feel level" how the tonal nature of these languages would more readily pre-dispose people to be able to associate pitch 'sounds' with pitch names. Makes sense!
Post Edited (2007-09-04 19:01)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paumartin
Date: 2007-09-05 06:09
In my sons case when he was learning to identify notes with the help of a cadence. He at first almost perfectly identified the note C everytime it occurred. Later on he was able to identify every note in the saxophone and shortly thereafter the electronic piano, guitar and the bell kit and even the UC San Francisco test which I think is a sine wave. Now he can identify 3 notes pressed in the piano together. As he gets older he seems to go better so it seems that training has a lot to do with the development of this ability. ( I apologize for my shameless talking about my son too much...But what could a father do?)
I wonder whether it is possible to have perfect pitch on one note and then have a relative pitch for the other note i.e. if you can Identify C and have a good relative pitch then theoretically you can identify any other note.
Relative pitch as I understand it can be learned by associating interval with the first two notes of a well known song. So if you know the first note and know the interval then you can identify the second note.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-09-05 08:36
About Chinese- the different tones are not absolute, they are relative to eachother. If you hear them pronounced by any 2 native speakers it will be easily noticed.
It should be noted that many Asian parents and music teachers often drill their children on pitch recognition for about 15-30minutes/day if they want their child to be a virtuoso. This starts from a young age. I know teachers and students that do this and perfect pitch for them is no more a gift than learning colors. Some people are better than others but that is true of anything. Some people see 'red' and 'red' but others see 'red' and 'crimson red'.
Post Edited (2007-09-06 11:48)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rgames
Date: 2007-09-05 16:53
An interesting recurring topic - keep a few things in mind:
While the relationships among notes are clear, are based in physics, and are common among all cultures (e.g. fifths, octaves, implications of the overtone series, etc.), the idea of "absolutes" is absurd. Even within western culture, the idea of absolutes is nonsense. If you have perfect pitch, to which common tuning reference are you "perfect"? And to which temperament?
What we call "perfect pitch" is just a form of memory; it's not based on an absolute reference. I'm certain there are people with perfect pitch in all cultures, with many different pitch standards. A person may be genetically predisposed to remembering the pitches to which he is exposed but the idea that there is some genetically-based absolute is unfounded (at least, there's no evidence of it that I've seen).
Everybody has some degree of perfect pitch. If I play you a note on a tuba and ask you to come back the next day and repeat it, are you going to do it on a piccolo? Of course not, you remember that it was a "low note". People with perfect pitch are just able to localize it with a much higher degree of accuracy. Ask someone with perfect pitch to identify 10 microtonal variants of A=440 Hz. I bet his/her pitch will seem a bit, well, "imperfect" shall we say?
Consider this paradox: if you are a clarinetist with perfect pitch, are you going to insist on playing your note in tune to a reference A=440 Hz and an equally tempered scale at all times? What if two of those people try to play a major third apart? Uh-oh - now one is out of tune...
rgames
____________________________
Richard G. Ames
Composer - Arranger - Producer
www.rgamesmusic.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ski
Date: 2007-09-05 18:53
rgames,
Terminology, eh? I'll submit that a person claiming to have "perfect pitch" runs the risk of being characterized as somewhat obnoxious and superior when compared to, say, their claim that they have the "perfect hairdo" after visiting their stylist.
However, it's a term that's been in use for a long time, and doesn't -- or shouldn't -- imply perfection or superiority. It's a trait, it's a gift, it's a "whatever", but regardless, it's a real ability that takes on many degrees of accuracy (see my "treatise" above for an idea of the degrees to which the ability is manifest in different people).
I prefer the term "absolute pitch" and find it a bit more palatable in this regard. However, explain to people that you have "absolute pitch" and most of them won't know what you're talking about. So I'll suggest that the tenured term "perfect pitch" is the more convenient of the two when discussing the ability, despite the fact that it's in imperfect bit of terminology.
People with perfect pitch are just able to localize it with a much higher degree of accuracy. Ask someone with perfect pitch to identify 10 microtonal variants of A=440 Hz. I bet his/her pitch will seem a bit, well, "imperfect" shall we say?
Depending on who you test, you might lose the bet! You'd be surprised at how good some people would be at identifying the "real" A (440) in such a test. Some of them could tell you if any one microtonal variant was simply sharp or flat, while others could go one step further and tell you how many cents off-center it was. And there are still those with otherwise excellent perfect pitch ability who wouldn't do as well on the test, but would still feel that "lightbulb" go off when they hear an A or a pitch very close to it.
There's no guarantee that any one of the test subjects would be 100% accurate, but you have to admit that it'd be pretty uncanny if someone was able to tell if an A is 3 cents sharp or 4 cents flat. Does this ability have much practical value? Depends on the context. For some people it might. For others it might not.
But you seem to take affront to the terms "perfect" and "absolute" in describing a perfect-pitch-possessor's abilities, and seek to demean or diminish this ability based on your objection to the terminology more than the reality of the ability itself. I think it's safe to say that people with perfect pitch are no more perfect than you or the next guy, just like the guy with "perfect color" (ability to mentally "demix" the quantity of color components in any non-primary color) are more perfect than those who wouldn't know from cobalt, cyan, or cerulean.
So perfect pitch doesn't make anyone a better or worse musician, nor does it make them a better or worse person. OK, I'd say they'd be "worse" if they went around bragging about how they could tell an A=442 from an A=442 minus 1 cent. But that's not a reflection of their ability, despite their being an obnoxious brat. If someone has this trait and they can use it to advantage as a musician, then what can you say? Well, one thing you can't say is that having perfect pitch doesn't automatically mean that the person with the ability is necessarily as obnoxious as the term itself.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
