We see that the esthetic experience linked to music experience dont lie in an abstract conception , a Pythagorean one, about Harmony reduced to his mathematical Ratios but to the body itself as a whole not only when playing an instrument singing, dancing , but even listening ...
if you relate this important article to the Cambridge study above and then go reading the Akpan J. Essien article about a new theory of hearing the sound source , an ecological theory of sound not based on just Fourier mapping.you will understand why this is very important revolution in music understanding but also Acoustic ..
Read the conclusion of this important article about a statistical research in music perception :
«We conclude that music induces consistent bodily sensations and
emotions across the studied Western and East Asian cultures.
These subjective feelings were similarly associated with acoustic
and structural features of music in both cultures. These results
demonstrate similar embodiment of music-induced emotions in
geographically distant cultures and suggest that music-induced
emotions transcend cultural boundaries due to cross-culturally
shared emotional connotations of specific musical cues. We argue
that bodily experience, which may arise from skeletomuscular
activity and changes in the physiological state of the body, plays a critical role in the elicitation and differentiation of music-induced emotions.»
«When we use instruments like the bonang, Pythagoras’s special numbers go out the window and we encounter entirely new patterns of consonance and dissonance," Dr. Harrison said.
"The shape of some percussion instruments means that when you hit them, and they resonate, their frequency components don’t respect those traditional mathematical relationships. That’s when we find interesting things happening."
"Western research has focused so much on familiar orchestral instruments, but other musical cultures use instruments that, because of their shape and physics, are what we would call ’inharmonic.’"»
«
The researchers found that the bonang’s consonances mapped neatly onto the particular musical scale used in the Indonesian culture from which it comes. These consonances cannot be replicated on a Western piano, for instance, because they would fall between the cracks of the scale traditionally used.
"Our findings challenge the traditional idea that harmony can only be one way, that chords have to reflect these mathematical relationships. We show that there are many more kinds of harmony out there, and that there are good reasons why other cultures developed them," Dr. Harrison said.
Importantly, the study suggests that its participants—not trained musicians and unfamiliar with Javanese music—were able to appreciate the new consonances of the bonang’s tones instinctively.»
And now this explain why atonal music as Schoenberg is so boring and difficult to fit in the human body ... :
«Importantly, the study suggests that its participants -- not trained musicians and unfamiliar with Javanese music -- were able to appreciate the new consonances of the bonang's tones instinctively.
"Music creation is all about exploring the creative possibilities of a given set of qualities, for example, finding out what kinds of melodies can you play on a flute, or what kinds of sounds can you make with your mouth," Harrison said.
"Our findings suggest that if you use different instruments, you can unlock a whole new harmonic language that people intuitively appreciate, they don't need to study it to appreciate it. A lot of experimental music in the last 100 years of Western classical music has been quite hard for listeners because it involves highly abstract structures that are hard to enjoy. In contrast, psychological findings like ours can help stimulate new music that listeners intuitively enjoy."»
I would say that what makes music revolutionary is the way in each different culture different Timbre instruments experience induce specific feelings and experience in specific body locations...
Then it is not a mathematical choice of tonality scale, be it western one or Eastern one that matter and makes music so enthralling, but the fact that in these tonalities it is their slight imperfection coming with specific instrument timbre properties that is pleasant and makes the sound interesting ...Or as said Ekpan J. Essien , it is the perception of the body image of the vibrating sound source that makes music a discovery and a deep information not only about the vibrating sound source material qualities but about our own vibrating body geography when feeling the sound...
I hope that these posts could be useful to at least one person here ...
😉
This last 12 post of mine through these studies article and one book adress the frontier between musical esthetic and acoustic science ...
We live interesting time...
This explain also why A.I. will never create interesting music because A.I. had no body located in an environment and do not play an instrument and cannnot interpret feelings as location in his body as we can as human ...
A.I. will be a specialized very sophisticated "musical box" able to mimic anything...
this is an interesting tool for sure but also a dangerous path ... 😊
And now, after it’s been pointed out that you posted 13 times in a row, you post 4 times in a row. So very sad.
You did not remark as mean you are that these posts are mostly articles references , extracts and only very few observations of mine ?
You are so idiotic that you post one line suggesting to me or to anybody as me we must obey your judgement : too much posts... You are comically stupid with the appearance of intelligence ...😊
You dare to throw your "opinion" about a content you did not even read , after i pointed to his HISTORICAL importance , why Pythagoras was wrong and what are the consequences on hearing theory and on music understanding...( for you it seems acoustics is panels on a wall )
You called my very important NEWS useless posted by a nut , relating 2 main research which used statistics and one book about a Writer you did not even know , this writer who anticipated BEFORE these very recent experiments their conclusions confirming his theory of hearing which put into a trasbin Pythagoras conception who influenced all acoustics till today ...
You called my reporting adress of these articles hypocritally and in a mean way , patronizing as you allways did , especially people who had something to say you dont like, you call my postings : "very sad" suggesting a psychological unbalanced mind...
i prefer to be "nuts" i dont contest that, than a patronizing ass who came back with the arrogance of closed mind only to be mean ...
Everyone who will read these articles and relate them together will measure the importance of this news..
And do what you have done in your own thread about A.I. and music , quitting and sulking as if posting important articles must be an insult to "the great well known corrector around the world " you are as you already said to me , then why not quitting to sulk far from this thread too ?😁
Because here also i posted multiple science articles and comment you dare not even to read and decided instead with your petty character to insult me in your indirect hypocrital way even if you had read not only one line of these important NEW scientific information...
You are comical so easy to decipher with your frustrated state of mine and mean character and arrogant patronizing polluting a thread with no arguments only insulting hypocritally a thread with real information not just my mere opinion...
Everyone will decide if the information put by the "nuts" i am is valuable’ on his own right or will decide that your mean and hypocrital attack are valuable and true ?
I am not like you. I spell thing as they are and i call an arrogant patronizing dude by his name ... You can play around faking to be sad about a "nuts" ...😊
Now do what you do the best go sulking because you are not recognized by all the best healthier and more intelligent and informed people here ..
Anyway i put all these posts because they are there to be useful for one person... I am amazed by these new discoveries... It is not for you ... You did not even understand why they communicate important news it seems .. 😊
the video above is only few minute of a magazine confirming what i spoke about in this thread as a real NEWS..
This second video will help those you dont know much about all that relation between tonal timbre playing intonation and the mathematical ratio inherited from Pythagoras , it will help through an apparent paradox exposed by this musician to understand why music understanding and feeling is related to the body more than to Pythagoreans ratio theory as it is clearly demonstrated in the two main articles and statistical studies above ......
The sound of these instruments had always revealed to any listener that music is about a controlled expressive imperfection, the intonation coming from the relation between the timbre microdynamics and the human playing gesture and the note ratio...An information received as much by our body than by our ears. An information that must be felt before being thought about.
This discoveries in acoustics studies is very important :
«You may know Pythagoras for the theorem that tells you about the sides of a right-angled triangle but the ancient Greek was a polymath in the true sense of the word, dabbling in philosophy, mathematics and many other fields. But now, a new study has found that one of his theorems may have been wrong.
Pythagoras proposed that “consonance,” or the pleasant-sounding combination of notes is produced by the special relationship between simple numbers. Many researchers have tried to find psychological explanations but these “integer ratios” the ancient Greek philosopher talked about are still often credited with making chords sound beautiful, and it deviating from them is thought to make music “dissonan,” or sound unpleasant.
But a new study published in the journal Nature Communcations this month found two key ways in which Pythagoras was wrong. It showed that it normal listening contexts, humans do not actually prefer chords to be perfectly in these mathematical ratios.
“We prefer slight amounts of deviation. We like a little imperfection because this gives life to the sounds, and that is attractive to us,” said co-author, Peter Harrison, from Cambridge’s Faculty of Music and Director of its Centre for Music and Science, in a press statement. The study was conducted by researchers from University of Cambridge, Princeton and the Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics.
Further, they found that the role played by these mathematical relationships disappears when you consider some musical instruments that are less familiar to Western musicians, audiences and scholars. These instruments could include bells, gongs, xylophones and other pitched percussions instruments. The researchers particularly focused on the “bonang,” an Indonesian instrument that consists of a collection of small gongs.
“When we use instruments like the bonang, Pythagoras’s special numbers go out the window and we encounter entirely new patterns of consonance and dissonance. The shape of some percussion instruments means that when you hit them, and they resonate, their frequency components don’t respect those traditional mathematical relationships. That’s when we find interesting things happening. Western research has focused so much on familiar orchestral instruments, but other musical cultures use instruments that, because of their shape and physics, are what we would call ‘inharmonic’, ” added Harrison.
For the study, the researchers created an online lab with over 4,000 participants from the United States and South Korea participating in 23 behavioural experiments. Chords were played and the participants were asked to give a numeric pleasantness rating or to use a slider to adjust the particular notes to make it sound more pleasant.
The researchers were surprised when they found a major preference for slight imperfection or “inharmonicity.” Other experiments also produced similar results.»
This means that the work thesis of Akpan J. Essien in acoustics is right, it was grounded in a studies of the speaking Yoruba drums , read this stunning article ( i had his book for 4 years now ) :
The Body-Image Theory of Sound: An Ecological Approach to Speech and Music
Paul Barton, once a concert-pianist, lives in the jungle of Thailand where he plays music to blind, injured and orphaned elephants with extraordinary results.pic.twitter.com/2hgDWYbwvQ
I will illustrated the acoustics revolution about Pythagoras being wrong with a new instrument for Most North American with an instrument related to the guitar but more powerful in a way than the guitar which is the father of the guitar ...
Emotions are linked to the way we retrieve timbre information more than to mathematical ratio :
…or perhaps Pythagoras was right ,and humans have just gotten duller over the ages…or perhaps Pythagoras was more right, but the others aren’t completely wrong…
No human characters has nothing to do with this universal facts on Earth .
But you must read some articles i put above to understand... It is two different statisticals studies complementary and very different from one another who reveal the importance and need for an ecological theory of sound ( read the article about the Fourier limit beaten by human hearings and the conclusion ) which is demonstrated by the study about the perception of timbre which dictate the very different tuning compared to the theory of ratio in western Pythagoras tuning which dominated. There is an article by Akpan J. Essien whose doctorate thesis explain all that BEFORE the 2 studies confirmed it . The last study is about the universal way mankind decode music which his body not with only and merely with a computing brain .
As you will see it is an acoustical and psychoacoustical revolution ...
If i measure the interest and reaction to this revelation by acoustics here with only the dumb trolls reaction yes human became duller ...😊 But it is only my subjective probably erroneous experience ...You are here yourself then there is not only trolls but wise people. Thanks for that .😊
And anyway some men actual state of mind or opinions has nothing to do in a direct way with objective facts statistically in psychoacoustics ...
If you want to understand what is an ecological theory of perception read the Wikipedia entry about J.J. Thompson one of the greatest psychologist specialist of ecological theory of the visual perception. The same principle are applied by Akpan J, Essien in the auditory field...Reading his article you will understand why Pythagoras is wrong. I bought his doctorate thesis 4 years ago : "the Sound sources". A true genius.
…or perhaps Pythagoras was right ,and humans have just gotten duller over the ages…or perhaps Pythagoras was more right, but the others aren’t completely wrong…
Now if you want to learn something that will help you understand the acoustic revolution in the making 2 articles and a book i posted above) and refine your own hearing :
Peter Bastian (1943-2017) was a genius-type person who has devoted his life to music.
Here’s him playing a regular drinking straw like a medieval flute, proving that music can be obtained with everything and found everywhere.https://t.co/2cyNrs9ySB
Imagine the notes in a melody as a set of points in a space and imagine you could see them not as they appear linearly but as they are together as one form or meaning or image...
These theories hint at why I find the later music of Deuter to be so attractive. He has what was once used to describe the writing of Ernest Hemingway - " skillful simplicity." The better my sound system has become the more can I appreciate what he does. Outwardly, his work might be derogatorily labelled "new age," but I prefer to think of it as a category of its own. Its effect on me is intensely physiological and entrancing, but that did not start taking effect until my sound system could rise to the occasion.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
