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

Re: Absolute pitch discussion


Sorry, it's probably not a very scientific term, but it is an idea well known among musicians being an ability to sing or recognize a note. I have heard it called "body tone" as well. I used to teach two versions of it in class, one being the "D" in the middle of the piano, and the other in the form of having people sing and 'register' their "lowest" comfortable note.

At G an 11th below middle C, in the middle of the day, my singing voice is 'clear', but not "full", at F#, my voice is no longer "clear" or "full". Fullness comes into my voice around A or Bb. Given a piece, I will sing my lowest comfortable note (around G) and then compare it to some given note in the piece I am listening to. I then continue on with my relative pitch to work out harmony, modulations etc, or in the case of (for example) Berg songs, I use my 'abstracted intervals' to hear where I am.

I know a singer who carries a tuning fork in her purse, and in order to 'hear' and A, she reaches in and touches it, and her aural memory produces an oral memory. In doing testing of string applicants who claim not to have AP, I ask them to pretend hold their instrument and play the A (or E on guitar), and then to sing the note. Many can do this but hadn't realized it. I also call it physiological pitch. I'm sure that researchers have much better terms for these things, I just don't know the names of things any more.




I am sorry for my ignorance, but I have never heard about 'reference
pitch'. I know about relative and absolute pitch, but not 'reference'.
What is that?



 Thanks for the ideas.

My experience, not based on lab research but rather the concentrated individual testing of may hundreds of music students over a period of a decade is that there is not 'real' continuum. There are a number of musicians who lodge a reference note in their mind (such as the violinist who can sing A, D, G and E in the octave of the violin strings) but do not demonstrate strong octave equivalence, and it is my understanding from Diana's work that AP is octave equivalent.

My experience is that there are two groups, AP, and non-AP. The non-AP have skills ranging from nil (poor pitch discrimination), through varying degrees of relative pitch, and a group of 'reference note' hearers. The reference note hearers may or may not have good relative pitch.

 In my experience with people 17 to 77, AP cannot be taught or
 trained. Reference pitch can be. I used to start every class with the
 singing of D above middle C. Towards the end of each year (2 - 3 classes
 per year for over 20 years), one day I would have the class sit and
 without playing, I would ask them to imagine themselves walking into class
 and preparing to sing the "D".

 When everyone was settled, I would play a note on the piano, and ask
 if it was "the D". I would get up to 80% "correct" responses. In some cases
 when I would play (for example) the Eb, some people would say, "That's too
 high." They would work out how much too high (a minor second), but they
 did not "hear" Eb, as my AP students did.

 I found virtuoso performers with dreadful relative pitch, but upon
 their having "learned" the melody, were fine. They couldn't find a
 descending major sixth without singing a descending minor scale out loud.

 My 'non-lab' testing cycle was a 10-15 minute individual examination
 six times per year, which amounts to up to 50 hours per year for a decade.

 I don't have a control group and the only documentation I have is my
 database of the grading of the exams, and the limiting factor of course, as
 in any such experiment / test, is the limitations on my own pitch
 perception, and I guess you just have to take my word that I have ok
 relative pitch. My reference tones are all a fourth off.


 > Kevin


Arturo Camacho
PhD Candidate
Computer and Information Science and Engineering
University of Florida

E-mail: acamacho@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Web page: www.cise.ufl.edu/~acamacho