high third - categorical perception

Paul Erlich explained:

> There is a non-vacuous psychological phenomenon known as categorical
> perception in which Western musicians (aside from those with serious
> exposure to microtonal music) tend to hear all intervals in terms as falling
> into one or another familiar category. Tests have shown that these
> categorical intervals are bounded at around 50� above and below the 12-tET
> intervals, except for the unison-semitone boundary, which is about 25� above
> and below the unison. In other words, the fact that you heard John's chord
> out of context means that your ear/brain most likely perceived the 435�
> interval as falling into the "major third" category; meanwhile, Joe Monzo's
> example started with the 386� interval, which you heard as a major third;
> then the upper voice of the major third ascended by small intervals, ending
> up 49� higher -- enough higher so that, categorically speaking, it sounded
> like it had climbed a semitone -- hence the "fourth" perception.
>
> Joe says he's created a MIDI file where a sus chord "resolves" down to a
> 14:18:21 -- maybe he can e-mail it to a few of us -- I'm willing to bet that
> in this context, you'll hear the latter chord as a definite (but dissonant)
> major chord, though it's exactly the same chord you heard at the end of
> Joe's other MIDI file. It's much like the situation where, with two
> identical regions of exactly the same color, one surrounded by white and the
> other surrounded by black, the first appears much darker than the second.

After being seduced for a considerable time by the home page music on Joe's
web site, I went for the attachment and heard the file. (Thanks, Joe. I'm
going to get back to your site and spend some time listening.)

I certainly do see (read: "hear") your point, Paul. And I fully understand
the human tendency to reshape experiences to fit existing concepts. Without
this phenomenon we would need to store an incredible number of concepts for
any simple more-or-less repeatable event. And it makes sense that when an
experience borders on two interpretations, context will very likely play a
part in pushing the perception one way or the other. Joe's illustration
demonstrates that convincingly.

My point in this regard is only that John's guitar chord was played without
establishing _any_ context. It was simply a chord. My instant take on it was
that it was a well-tuned major triad. The fact that Joe's sliding "third"
gave the impression of changing the perceptual concept to a sus chord by
introducing a contrast (your "black and white" above) does not really apply.
The impression (suggestion) of a sus chord occurred when Joe supplied a
context--but not when the isolated chord was played by itself.

While this trip has been most interesting and informative, I'm not sure
where it lands us in regard to the central questions about what the "high
third" is and why it is "preferred" under certain circumstances. I agree
with you that the chord Joe "arrived at" in both contexts is not
particularly agreeable.

Onward,

Jerry

Jerry wrote,

>The fact that Joe's sliding "third"
>gave the impression of changing the perceptual concept to a sus chord by
>introducing a contrast (your "black and white" above) does not really
apply.
>The impression (suggestion) of a sus chord occurred when Joe supplied a
>context--but not when the isolated chord was played by itself [by John Link
on >guitar over the phone].

So it seems you agree that the difference in context (in one case, lack
thereof; in the other case, a very specific context) accounts for the
difference in "sus-ness". That's what I was trying to say!

>I agree
>with you that the chord Joe "arrived at" in both contexts is not
>particularly agreeable.

[For those playing along, that was a reference to the last chord in the MIDI
file Joe previously uploaded and a new version he sent us privately, in
which a sus chord resolves to a 14:18:21 at the end].

Now, does that chord sound the same to you as the one Christopher Chapman
posted? It should if it's a 14:18:21.

> [Jerry Eskelin, TD 518.7]
> The fact that Joe's sliding "third" gave the impression of
> changing the perceptual concept to a sus chord by introducing
> a contrast (your "black and white" above) does not really apply.

It may not apply in comparison to hearing John Link play *only*
the 14:18:21 chord to you over the phone, but it certainly
applies in comparison to your original description of your
vocal experiment.

I crafted my MIDI-file precisely according to your description
of singing a 4:5 'major 3rd' dyad, then adding the '5th' (to
make it a 4:5:6 triad), and hearing the '3rd' slide upward in
pitch until it reaches the unknown-quantity 'high 3rd'.

To my ears, the ones that sound best are the ones that slide
upward to the 2^(4/12) [i.e., 12-eq '3rd'] and the 19:24.

I think Paul's description of how one's perception of one
particular color changes, depending on whether it is surrounded
by black or white, is entirely apt in describing what happens
when we hear the 7:9 'high 3rd' in context of upward or downward
resolution. As he and I have both said *many* times, context
is everything.

> [Jerry]
> I agree with you [Paul] that the chord Joe "arrived at" in
> both contexts [14:18:21] is not particularly agreeable.

And I agree too - along with Paul, I've never been really
fond of the sound of this chord. But this is the one with
the infamous 7:9 that you thought was your 'high 3rd'.

But don't forget that Paul has shown how this chord can
sound fine in other contexts, and certainly there is music
I've heard which makes wonderful use of it - I'm thinking
particularly of pieces by La Monte Young, David Beardsley,
Pat Pagano, Kraig Grady, and of course Harry Partch.

-monz

Joseph L. Monzo Philadelphia monz@juno.com
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/homepage.html
|"...I had broken thru the lattice barrier..."|
| - Erv Wilson |
--------------------------------------------------

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.