RE: [tuning] Re: music on the mind

Jason Yust wrote,

>Although I sympathize with some of the ideas in this article, the claim
>that music is "wired into the brain at birth," especially with regards to
>consonant frequency ratios, is very contentious and at odds, I believe,
>with the opinions of a large majority of musicologists and psychologists.

Certainly one could take issue with that way of phrasing it. However, I
think the findings with regard to babies' preferences for consonant
frequency ratios can be explained quite readily in the framework of
established psychoacoustical theory. First you have sensory roughness, the
main factor considered in Sethares' book, and the fact that with musical
tones having ordinary, periodic waveforms (and hence harmonic overtones),
simple frequency ratios will be the intervals of least sensory roughness.
One could come up with many possible evolutionary reasons why sensory
roughness could be linked with feelings of discomfort. Secondly, you have
harmonic entropy, the degree of difficulty of fitting a stimulus into a
harmonic series framework. Parncutt has postulated that familiarity with the
harmonic series framework is acquired prenatally, through the mother's
voice; other proposed mechanisms in which harmonic entropy would operate,
including periodicity detection, could again have evolutionary origins.
While music is of course a cultural construct and creates no evolutionary
stresses on its own, the basic aesthetic characteristics of musical sounds
could have some degree of universality. As another example, clothing is a
cultural construct and yet the perception of certain fabrics being more
comfortable than others is relatively universal . . .

Paul!
Yes it would be nice if there was such a universality, but we are not so fortunate.
Pleasing and unpleasant sounds are a result to a very large degree, cultural constructs.
Otherwise i can only pity those that are subjected to the intervals of Pelog at an early age.
I doubt this is the case and the same test done in Jakarta might result in the fifth as being
perceived as unpleasant due to its lifelessness The only universality seems to be melody, that
different tones are strung together as heard belonging together. Rhythm is another universal
that seems to be cross cultural. Consonance and disconance-we can't even come to any consensus
on this list!

"Paul H. Erlich" wrote:

> While music is of course a cultural construct and creates no evolutionary
> stresses on its own, the basic aesthetic characteristics of musical sounds
> could have some degree of universality. As another example, clothing is a
> cultural construct and yet the perception of certain fabrics being more
> comfortable than others is relatively universal . . .

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com

Kraig wrote,

>I doubt this is the case and the same test done in Jakarta might result in
the fifth as being perceived as unpleasant due to its >lifelessness

Kraig, most Western musicians find ordinary Western music retuned in JI to
sound "lifeless" since they're used to 12-tET. Someone from India might
object to food that is not spicy enough. That does not invalidate that
"spicy" might have a meaning that applies to all humans regardless of
culture.

Paul!
There is more evidence to assume that the 3/2 fifth is not heard as the most pleasant of
the fifths in such area as Indonesia!

"Paul H. Erlich" wrote:

> Kraig wrote,
>
> >I doubt this is the case and the same test done in Jakarta might result in
> the fifth as being perceived as unpleasant due to its >lifelessness
>
> Kraig, most Western musicians find ordinary Western music retuned in JI to
> sound "lifeless" since they're used to 12-tET. Someone from India might
> object to food that is not spicy enough. That does not invalidate that
> "spicy" might have a meaning that applies to all humans regardless of
> culture.
>
> s.

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com