[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Discrimination / Identification / Reproduction

Many thanks to all for providing insights into this issue. I understand
that this is probably more of a "music" (whatever that is) issue than an
<auditory> issue, matters related to 'music perception' are frequently
frowned upon (and ignored) by performers and music educators.

My apologies for not being scientific about this.

I asked an opthomologist what a red/green color-blind person sees. He
said ... "I don't know, I can only tell you that they cannot discriminate
between the two."

The elements which are of particular interest to me here, as a teacher of
traditional ear-training and electroacoustic music techniques and
composition, are those of discrimination, identification and reproduction.
And underlying this, whether the basis of traditional ear-training
(sight-singing and dictation) is isomorphic, cognate or unrelated to the
basic constituent elements of ASA.

Is it possible to have a 'sound-designer' (eg composition, film, radio,
tv, theater), who has weak, or poor 'traditional' ear-training ability?

There is currently a discussion taking place in the Department as to
whether students in electroacoustics [music] 'should' have traditional
ear-training. (Should English Fiction Majors have Latin?) While it is
agreed that for many it would be helpful, the questions relate to how
much, and more importantly, what kind. [75% of the students in the ea/cm
courses do not take 'traditional music' courses, and do not use pitch
structure as a major element of sonic organization.]

While is is agreed that it would be 'useful' to do some ear-training, the
questions are those of necessity, and the 'type' of ear-training best
suited to the objectives. And just how transferable is 'pitch
discrimination' and identification to ASA applications?