On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 3:25 PM, peiman khosravi wrote: > It's true that dissonance/consonance is rooted in our sensory perception. > But that's not all! There is so much that is learnt, some learnt > universally, some are culture specific. For instance the perception of pitch > in the first place is not innate but learnt universally across all cultures. > On the other hand, the perception of musical pitch structures are more > likely to be culture specific. Our tolerance of dissonance is to a large The little-known quintave singing from Georgia is one example of a different perception of pitch structures: some folks believe their music uses the fifth as an interval of equivalence, and they often use an 8th that is sharp from "our" octave, as it is their fourth a quintave up. But others say there are indeed octaves there. At any rate it's one of the few systems I've found that may not use the perfect octave, and it still uses the perfect fifth. It is also worth mentioning that 12-tone equal temperament- when it's actually used- is NOT in accordance with the natural harmonies I'm talking about. It did exist at the time Mozart was writing, but whether modern recordings of Mozart really adhere to it is questionable, his music being overtly tonal. > extent affected by familiarity, exposure and taste. The more complex a sonic > stimuli appears in terms of perception of harmonic patterns within a chord, > the more dissonance it become. So familiarity with pitch patterns is a > prerequisite for the perception of harmonicity and consonance/dissonance in > music. http://www-gewi.uni-graz.at/staff/parncutt/publications/PaStr94.pdf "The perception of the pitch of a complex tone such as a musical tone.... involves pattern recognition. The pattern in question is the pitch pattern formed by the audible harmonics of the tone, corresponding to the lower echelons of the harmonic series. The intervals between the elements of the pattern correspond to octaves, fifths, fourths, thirds, and so on." Maybe this is all learned, but these particular intervals are undeniably important, and, as you say, universal. In fact, if humans must learn these correspondences by listening to speech, all the more reason to give credence to the idea that Mozart's music can help that process. If you want to talk about the intervals between the elements of the harmonic series, Mozart's music is based on them, and represents every possible one up to the 6th harmonic. Beyond that, see below. > Even Reading Zarlino's (1517-1590) 'Art of Counterpoint' one realises that > there is a huge discrepancy between what degree of dissonance/consonance > were attributed to musical intervals by different theorists. Is a third > dissonant!? Is a perfect fourth dissonant?! In John Blacking's 'How Musical Zarlino fought with the best of them. Ancient Greek theorists likewise disagreed on how intervals should be tuned, and why they were considered consonant, but as much as anyone knows the musicians themselves just played whatever sounded right at the time. Mersenne is supposed to have been the first to suggest the 7th harmonic as a consonance. As yet not too many other theorists have agreed, although again, musicians use the interval without knowing it (except for me, I use it knowingly). > In addition it is not the perception of dissonance/consonance alone that > creates musical meaning, but the roll that composers give to such phenomena > (i.e. dissonance/consonance). And this roll has changed dramatically > throughout western music tradition, which is a proof that musical perception > relies far more on learnt (active or passive) behavior than it does on > innate (although this cannot be excluded from the equation either).see David > Huron's 'Sweet Anticipation'. I bought it, alas, I did not bring it to Europe. It looked good. :-/ As far as the role composers give to consonance/dissonance changing, that in itself would seem to require a selective sample. As in, only the "serious" or "respected" composers. Lots and lots and lots and lots of musicians around the world today use consonance and dissonance in very similar ways to each other and their predecessors. I have a hard time believing the music which attempts to change this role is anywhere near as common as that which holds tight to its IV-V-I's and is a delight to millions. > It would be very naive to think that there exists a universal musical > language for all mankind: a rather outdated and eurocentric concept based on > misinformation or intentional (although often unconscious) misrepresentation > of reality. I've looked into lots of tuning systems, and chosen a few that I find very beautiful to work with, and they are anything but eurocentric. My point, that Mozart's music contains harmonies that are present in nature (or "based on physical truths"), stands. That doesn't mean I think his work is the pinnacle of music! I don't mind that I started such a discussion, but don't set me up as the one claiming "our" system is the best! I don't even use it! On the other hand, I do use lots of tonicizations in my own little way. Thanks Europe! -Chuckk > > Best > Peiman > > > > 2008/5/11 Chuckk Hubbard : > > > > > > > On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Dave Seidel wrote: > > > Agreed. This music is very much bound to a particular (Euro-centric) > > > musical tradition. I might accept the idea that if a person had a > > > > It's true that the music is from one tradition, but it is also true > > that the consonances of what's traditionally called tonal music are > > based on physical truths... The major triad, any modulation by a > > fifth, a 9th, or a major third, none of these things are just by > > chance or just "learned", and most of them are not unique to European > > tradition. Actually, when one studies the tunings of Indian music it > > can be a bit of a disappointment to learn most of the notes are > > similar to Western ones, just tuned more accurately (e.g. Pythagorean > > third is not mixed with major third in the same scale; but both are > > used in similar ways as in Western music, but they're not equated). > > And, at least in the Carnatic ragas I looked at, the scale step > > equivalent to SOL is never violated; there are alternate tunings for > > all other notes, but there is always a perfect fifth above the > > "tonic". In other words, Western music implemented its consonances > > because they sounded good, not the other way around. IMO they stopped > > too soon, though; the upper harmonics offer a bounty of harmonic > > richness few care to explore. > > With all the research that's been done on pattern perception, Gestalt, > > Law of Pragnanz, saying that listening to music can't develop a > > child's brain is like saying that solving geometric puzzles can't > > develop a child's brain, or learning multiple languages, or chess. In > > order to hear the patterns in the music, the brain has to exercise its > > pattern recognition ability (a truism). Perhaps this doesn't increase > > intelligence- Nik Lygeros, among others, says that thinking can be > > learned, but intelligence can't- but I don't doubt that it helps > > develop whatever other quality it is that makes people sharp. > > > > > > > background in this music (meaning: some training or education, or at > least > > > immersion) that listening to it might have some beneficial effects, > because > > > then the listener had some cognitive and perceptual preparation. But if > you > > > > For a 2-year-old? I think the contention is that listening to certain > > music *is* that kind of education. > > If anything, I'd say the focus on Mozart is because his music is so > > often melodically simple and straightforward, meaning the parents > > won't object to it. As my father says, it's good for 3-year-olds > > because even a 3-year-old can understand it. > > > > > > > are from a completely different musical culture, I don't expect it would > > > mean very much at all, and might even be perceived as cacophonous (no > > > offense to cacophony). > > > > I don't think that's possible. "Boring", maybe, but cacophonous? > > I don't mean to bash Mozart, I do enjoy his music sometimes, it's just > > not the most exciting for me. > > > > > > > Personally, as someone who grew up in the States and heard both > classical > > > and folk music all the time growing up, it was years before I was able > to > > > listen music from the classical era with any interest at all -- it just > left > > > me cold. For me, Stravinsky was the way in, and I worked both backward > and > > > forward from that. > > > > There will never be an Oprah Book Club book about it, but I suspect > > Stravinsky has a similar effect, but only for more intelligent > > children. Or perhaps they chose Mozart because Stravinsky would > > frighten the parents. Can't have the kids burning down the playpen. > > Thanks to Dad, my way in was all Zappa (literally from infancy), and > > later Zappa was a way in to Stravinsky. Thanks Dad! > > > > -Chuckk > > > > > > > > > > > > - Dave > > > > > > > > > Pedro Ferreira wrote: > > > > > > > I think that _teaching_ music to kids is a great way of stimulating > > > > their intelligence and the development of their abilities, but I find > > > > it hard to believe that the simple fact that they just _listen_ to > > > > music will make them smarter. Maybe your intelligence actually > > > > increases (for a limited amount of time) in response to sound > > > > frequencies: you can stimulate it artificially by other known means, > > > > though with no permanent results. However, all the hype around this > > > > effect seems to be a huge load of BS (actually, the "Mozart effect" is > > > > widely known as a classical example of a scientific myth). > > > > In any case, teach your kids the practice of listening to good music > > > > :). It won't hurt them for sure... > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Pedro > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send bugs reports to this list. > > > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body > "unsubscribe > > > csound" > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.badmuthahubbard.com > > > > > > > > > > > > Send bugs reports to this list. > > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe > csound" > > > > -- http://www.badmuthahubbard.com