Perceptions of Sound

[Steve Reynolds]

what is the sound we hear?

do they change - no, of course they do not

then we change - do we change day to day?

how does the way we listen change?

I gave a friend who never heard any post-Coltrane jazz of any type Cecil Taylor's "Nailed" and Evan Parker's "The Ayes Have It" and he likes them - he likes Evan

maybe he doesn't know it is supposed to be hard to like

why do I hear things differently on a day to day or week to week basis

and I've got a clear head these days....

just some thoughts - would like to hear some of yours

[Richardo Caerleoni]

"In three words I can sum up everything I've learned about life - It goes on."


"Most of the change we think we see in life is due to truths being in and out of favour."

- Robert Frost,

RC.

[Brian Olewnick]

A few years ago, some folk in the arts and sciences were asked what they thought was the single most interesting unanswered question? The psychologist (and all-around admirable guy) Nicholas Humphrey offered: Why is music such a pleasure?

[Steve Reynolds]

good question - but it is only a pleasure for me when I'm ok

and what a pleasure it is this morning

[Gentle Giant]

Why does the world seem right when I play Gentle Giant, but a single bar of their music drives my wife insane?

I've often thought that our brains are hard-wired to accept certain sounds and rhythms. I've always felt that there was a pre-fab slot in my brain of a certain shape and certain music occupies the exact same dimensions.

The key pursuit in life, therefore, should be to seek out as diverse an array of music as possible, and figure out what you're intended to hear. Imagine going through life never hearing something exciting and surprising simply because you chained yourself to Top 40 radio.

[Suibne]

GG, well said. I like your point about seeking out the music that fits one's sensibility. And true enough, few people bother to try (and that goes for other arts forms too; how many great books go unread by the majority of people?).

[sonic1]

Not only what mood I am in effects music. But also what people are in the room, what room I am in, what season it is, all effects the way I percieve music.

[AntManBee]

Originally Posted by sonic1

Not only what mood I am in effects music. But also what people are in the room, what room I am in, what season it is, all effects the way I percieve music.

Indeed, and sometimes a certain music has been great when you've heard at a friend's place and when you get home it just doesn't sound the same anymore. And sometimes you hear the music you're playing to others through their ears so to speak and it just sounds weird and completely incomprehensible and alien.

I think Steve's question is really interesting. The psychology of listening, a favourite topic of mine but I always fail to say something relevant about it...

[AntManBee]

I've undergone several periods of fasting, and listening to music during these periods are a rather amazing experience. Music sounds sharper and more open and the way I can connect with music while fasting seems more intense than otherwise.

[Dr Dave]

The original page that the following text appears on is almost unreadable because of the background it is presented on, so I've taken the liberty of reproducing it here. For authorship, footnotes, and links to other sites on the same subject, click here. This was published by the Neurosciences Program at Macalester University in St. Paul, MN. I have made a very few edits, and there is a point noted below where the original text was garbled. Here it is:


Music Process And Perception"

by Nicole Kahn

"Music is a strange thing," Heinrich Heine wrote. "I would almost say it is a miracle. For it stands half way between thought and phenomenon, between spirit and matter, a sort of nebulous mediator, like and unlike each of the things it mediates - spirit that requires manifestation in time, and matter that can do without space ... we do not know what music is" (Critchley, 1977, 217).

Introduction
For the most part, the process by which the human brain is able to perceive and translate music into neural impulses is still a mystery. Though a few attempts have been made to isolate the particular locations in the brain that play a role in music perception and processing, research in this area has not been extensive and findings are somewhat inconclusive. Different theories have been proposed to explain how we perceive and remember pitches, tones, and intervals, but these hypotheses require an in depth understanding of technical terms and concepts that are not explained in this general overview. This section will endeavor to provide a comprehensive summary of the information that is available concerning musical function, the specialization of cerebral hemispheres in relation to music perception in the brain, and the internalization of rhythm in the brain.

Basics of Sound
Sound is composed of pitch, loudness, and timbre. Pitch corresponds to the fundamental frequency of the sound being perceived. Loudness, or intensity, is a perceptual dimesion of sound that is the function of the degree to which the condensations and rarefications of air differ from each other. Timbre refers to the complexity of a sound and this is determined by the unique blend of frquencies of vibrations that compose a particular sound. For musicians, the sense of sound is enhanced to enable them to perceive tonal relationships, melody, harmony, and tones sounded consecutivley or simultaneously, and tones sounded in terms of time and rhythm (Hanson, 1942). Music exists on three interrelated levels: notes, chords and keys. Combinations of tones and rhythms in connection with these three levels creates what we know as melody and harmony.

How do we listen to music?
Most of us as musical listeners, have certain expectations concerning the way music sounds. These expectations are almost intuitive, based on our previous experiences with music. "The listener expects to hear a particular set of harmonic relationships, expects certain chords to resolve to others, and expects the notes of one key to modulate to the notes of another key" ( (Handel, 1989, 380). Listening is like reading in that each note serves as a point of reference for perviously heard notes and future tones in the melody. If the melody is new to the listener, then he or she able to form a framework with these points of reference that give meaning to the melody, much as unknown words give meaning to unknown sentences (Handel, 1989).


What is musical functioning?
Before looking at other aspects of music processing in the brain, it is important to establish a working definition of musical functions. According to Critchley and Henson (1977), this term refers to a set of three specific elements: a sense of rhythm, a sense of sounds, and "the aptitude to convert musical perception into emotional or intellectual content." The rhythmic sense is thought to be biologically based and extends beyond the musical context to encompass the rhythms that regulate many of the systems in our bodies (more about this coming soon). The sense of sounds is the ability that allows one to correctly perceive the four basic physical properties of a sound [garbled text] empirical study of music performance and theory that is pursued by musicians. While performers and composers may demonstrate higher levels of musical ability based on further development in the three areas mentioned here, normal musical function simply requires a basic combination of these main elements.

Cerebral Dominance
Cerebral dominance is noted in many abilities, such as language. Can such patterns be extended to musical ability? The survey says...YES! Some aspects of musical ability correlated with cerebral dominance are: (a) musical execution, independent of musical knowledge and training (right hemisphere specialization), and (b) dominance for musical perception. Specifically, right hemisphere dominance for musical perception occurs in those with little musical knowledge while left hemisphere dominance is prevalent among musically adept individuals. One possible explanation for this disparity is that dominance begins in the right hemisphere but is gradually transferred to the opposite hemisphere as musical knowledge increases (Critchley and Henson, 1977). A study by Zalanowski (1990) regarding effective methods for increasing music appreciation among college students found that individuals with right hemisphere orientation reported greater appreciaiton when drawing a visual representation of music they heard. Conversely, students with left hemisphere orientation reported greater appreciation when writing a verbal description of the music that was played. In discussing cerebral hemisphere dominance in musicians, it is important to ask whether differences may be attributed to the individuals musical training, the location in which music develops in passive listening tasks, or whether specialization is determined by a random act of nature (Gordon, 1983).

Rhythm
Rhythm is the structural support of a musical composition. It dictates the perceived motion of the piece through note lengths and accents. Tempo is related to rhythm and refers to the pacing of the music and its internal rhythmic structure. Tempo is linked to pulse which is the steady level of rhythm that can be felt throughout the piece. Pulse is thought to have a biological as well as musical basis. "The periodic manner in which our biological timing mechanisms function is seen as the quintessential factor that controls our sense of pulse" (Epstein, 1995, p. 136). Many systems within our bodies are based on rhythm, for instance, the cardio-vascular system, the glandular system, and the nervous system. Rhythm is present in the nervous system on three levels: first, the rhythmic mode by which the nervous system acts and transmits signals, second, fusing the perception of rhythmic activity such as light or sound waves with rhythmic movement like breathing and talking, and third, the interaction between the nervous system and biological rhythm found in other systems in the body.

Though evidence is inconclusive, it is possible that the natural internal rhythms of our nervous system play a key role in the brain's ability to perceive musical rhythm (Epstein, 1995). Aside from this physiological theory, different theories have been proposed to explain how people respond to rhythm. These include instinctual theory, and motor theory (Lundin, 1953). According to Seashore, the instinctual theory is based on the hypothesis that "subjective rhythm is deeply ingrained in us, since we have an irresistible tendency to group uniform successions of sound" (Lundin, 1953)
The motor theory described by Lundin (1953) centers around the idea that rhythmic responses are dependent on the action of voluntary muscles.

According to this theory, our perception of rhythm is based on our responses to our own sequential voluntary muscular activity. One example of our voluntary muscular responses to music is our natural tendency to tap our feet or hands to the beat of a song. Stetson, a supporter of this theory, points out that "even when larger muscle groups are not observed responding to rhythmic stimuli, there are smaller groups still operating often in a more implicit way" (Lundin, 1953). A study by Ruckmick found that muscle movements are an essential part of the rhythmic response. He further noted that the rhythmic response is not confined to a particular set of muscles, but can actually occur in any part of the body. Evidence has shown that people exhibit muscle responses in the head, chest, limbs, and even in respiration (Lundin 110).


-30-

Make of this what you will.

[John L]

Interesting stuff.

I like the way that Steve posed the question. It is not just that two different people can hear things completely differently. One person tends to hear things very differently at different times, depending on mood or other factors.

I actually think that one important factor is the way that we program our ears at any given moment in time. If we take a certain music that has real substance and listen to it repeatedly with concentration, it reveals itself more and more in various dimensions. We become, so to speak, programmed to it. But if we stop listening to it, the programming can unravel. The music might sound more distant the next time we hear it. Or it might sound even better as the rediscovery of an old friend. But it won't usually sound the same.

[Nate Dorward]

Music isn't a pleasure, it's an obsession.

[Gentle Giant]

A friend of mine can't listen to a particular album we used to always like because he played it one time when he was reeling from the news that his grandfather had just died. Now when he thinks of that music, it bums him out.

Music that we know too well we often eventually don't like as much. We listen ahead of where the performance is at and we lose the element of surprise. One must "fast" from one's favorite music every now and then to keep it fresh and enjoyable.

Van Morrison's "Queen of the Slipstream" in my mind "belongs" to a woman I've lusted over for 20 years. This woman knows not only my feelings about her but also that this song seems to me to be about her. She doesn't understand why this song is about her, and I can't explain it. The literal lyrics are not about her or me. But from the moment I first heard this song, it's been hers. I can't listen to it without thinking of her. I love this song.

The first Miles album I ever heard was In a Silent Way. The first Coltrane album I ever heard was Africa/Brass. Whatever else I know and have heard about these artists, these works form the basis for my appreciation for them and my preferences regarding the arc of their work.

[groover]

Steve's questions are more within the realm of cognitive psychology than psychoacoustics, though there may be some overlap.

http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~cplack/Psycho.html

What is Psychoacoustics?

Psychoacoustics can be defined simply as the psychological study of hearing. The aim of psychoacoustic research is to find out how hearing works. In other words, the aim is to discover how sounds entering the ear are processed by the ear and the brain in order to give the listener useful information about the world outside.

The connection of psychoacoustics with psychology can be misleading, as I have discovered over and over again while trying to describe my job at parties. Many of the problems approached by psychoacousticians have very little to do with what the popular conception of psychology. For example, some of my own research has been concerned with how the loudness of sounds is represented by nerve cells in the ear. Some might imagine that this would be a concern of neurophysiology, and indeed it is. However, whereas an auditory physiologist might approach the problem by sticking an electrode into a hapless rodent, a psychoacoustician would approach the problem by measuring the ability of human listeners to make discriminations between carefully chosen sounds presented over headphones. The fact that we measure the behavioural responses of human listeners is essentially why psychoacoustics is regarded as a branch of psychology.

Psychoacoustics is not concerned with how sounds produce a particular emotional or cognitive response. We leave these aspects to the cognitive psychologists and stick to the basics. Having said that, psychoacoustics is a very broad area, and while there is a large overlap with physiology at one end, at the other end we sometimes appeal to mainstream psychology in order to account for our more complex experimental results.

Some of the hot areas of psychoacoustic research at the time of writing are:

• How do we separate sounds occurring simultaneously (e.g. two speakers speaking at once)?
• How do we localise sounds in space?
• How do we determine the pitch of, say, a musical instrument?
• How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components?

Thrilling stuff, eh? Note: researchers in this field are properly called psychoacousticians and they should not be confused with the infinitely more dangerous psycho acousticians who have a tendency to stab people in the back with tuning forks.

[sonic1]

Originally Posted by AntManBee

I've undergone several periods of fasting, and listening to music during these periods are a rather amazing experience. Music sounds sharper and more open and the way I can connect with music while fasting seems more intense than otherwise.

AntManBee who is the guy in your avatar?

[mke]

A little "test":

Download this short sound file. For each pair of the four pair of notes, say whether you hear them as moving up or down.








I heard down up up up.
What does it all mean?

[Rob C]

"My epitaph, should I ever need one, God forbid: 'The only proof he ever needed of the existence of God was music.'"

--Kurt Vonnegut

[groover]

Originally Posted by mke

A little "test":

Download this short sound file. For each pair of the four pair of notes, say whether you hear them as moving up or down.

I heard down up up up.
What does it all mean?

The Tritone Paradox seems to largely explain why English speakers from different parts of the world all believe they're speaking totally unaccented English, while their accent seems affected to others.

I've actually used the Shepard principle myself while playing bass, to create the illusion of an endlessly descending bassline.

[mtaylorjazz]

I remember the day I realized that everyone didn't hear music the way I did (I think I was about 12 or so). I was very, very sad.

M

http://www.mark-taylor.biz

[Steve Reynolds]

this was always the case for me as well, Mark

then again, I didn't really get into music until my late teens - and I never found jazz until I was over 30

thank god I found jazz central station years ago and found a few musical lifelong soul mates

[AntManBee]

Originally Posted by sonic1

AntManBee who is the guy in your avatar?

French writer Antonin Artaud.
You trace any connnection to music & fasting...?

[Dr Dave]

Only to the sharpening of senses that comes with deprivation.

[LutherBlissett]

Re : Cerebral Dominance

With more musical training the left side of the brain begins to dominate , so pervesely becoming a musician is sometimes fatal to listening , there are plenty of musos I know that cannot simply hear, enjoy or dance to music without becoming overly analytical or intetellectual.

[sonic1]

I had a lot of hungry moments as a child and music was around to help. I still am not a big eater, or forget to eat a lot. I think it is a problem. I am much more likely to play music.

Oliver Messiaen when doing Quatuor pour la Fin du Temps in the camps was severely malnourished and said he saw sound as color as a result.

I can totally relate to this as I see sound as color, texture, etc. Very visual as an experience. But I don't need to be hungry to do so.

I think fasting effects all your senses. It can make you more lucid, but make you less able to manage the information that comes in. You just have to yeild to it.

[Ryan B.]

Originally Posted by sonic1

Oliver Messiaen when doing Quatuor pour la Fin du Temps in the camps was severely malnourished and said he saw sound as color as a result.

Apparently Kandinsky was synaesthetic as well. This is common amongst children with absolute pitch, who are also more statistically inclined towards autism.

Neuroscientists love music because it's pure neural code--it doesn't have a referent out there in the world like vision (supposedly) does, but is rather just our relative response to a set of energy-relations.

So apparently there is tonality coded in the brain itself (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/298/5601/2167.pdf). I wonder where do we process the sound of a screw rattling around on a piano string, or the squawk of a quarter tone clarinet or mixing-board feedback? I don't think they've done those studies.

There's a clinic in the Bronx where music therapists work with patients recovering from all sorts of illness--stroke, etc. Apparently, there are patients who have dementia who can't remember who they're talking to but who can write a song and recall the lyrics a week later to record it. This place is amazing: http://www.bethabe.org/MUSIC_INSTITUTE55.html.

[sonic1]

can you print that article here? I don't have a subscription.

[walto]

Neuroscientists love music because it's pure neural code--it doesn't have a referent out there in the world like vision (supposedly) does, but is rather just our relative response to a set of energy-relations.

I don't understand this. Can you elaborate? I mean, how does "vision" get to be compared with "music" rather than with, say, "hearing"? Wouldn't music more sensibly be compared with, e.g., "visual art"?

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by John L

Interesting stuff.

I like the way that Steve posed the question. It is not just that two different people can hear things completely differently. One person tends to hear things very differently at different times, depending on mood or other factors.

I actually think that one important factor is the way that we program our ears at any given moment in time. If we take a certain music that has real substance and listen to it repeatedly with concentration, it reveals itself more and more in various dimensions. We become, so to speak, programmed to it. But if we stop listening to it, the programming can unravel. The music might sound more distant the next time we hear it. Or it might sound even better as the rediscovery of an old friend. But it won't usually sound the same.

What John L said.


Excellent post.

[AntManBee]

Originally Posted by sonic1

I think fasting effects all your senses.

Certainly.

Not that you said so, but I just want to point out that fasting doesn't equal starvation.