[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
>Pierre Divenyi wrote:
>>I would venture pointing out that (as they have shown) identification
>>and discrimination >>can be regarded as esentially identical processes.
Dan Tollin wrote:
>This is correct as detection and discrimination are simply special cases of
>identification where the number of stimuli is two.
Sorry to be so thick on this one, but are they two essentialy identical
processes or are they the same process (both special cases of one process)
I apologize that to the scientific mind this may seem a non-question, but
when applied to teaching (intervals, or even auditory scene analysis in
electroacoustic music), the pedagogical approach could be different,
depending upon whether these are thought of as points on a continuum, or
two different, but identical processes.
Siamese twins and identical (MZ) twins come to mind as a visual analogy
to the difference. In terms of the development of a vocabulary for the
description / analysis of electroacoustic (music) [possibly very similar
to ASA], this is (in my experience) not a trivial matter.
Identification follows discrimination (in many circumstances), and
frequently informs it. A case that I have found is that of hearing harmonic
partials in the singing voice. Many first and second year (music) students
who have not worked in electroacoustics do not perceive (report
discriminating) resonated partials in a highly nasalized sung sound (like
/i/ - /e/ - /u/), but identify the 'vowels' (trithong).
They identify (with a label) the 'vowel', but do not segregate the
resonated partial. (The sound is similar to that found in David Hykes
'Harmonic Choir', Tibetan chant, or Tuvim resonated singing.)
A most enlightening thread for an electroacoustic (music) teacher.
McGill is running a new version of LISTSERV (1.8d on Windows NT).
Information is available on the WEB at http://www.mcgill.ca/cc/listserv