Indeed, it is very interesting. As I understood from searching the web the bird ( Snowball) made sensation between scholars. They supposed before that only man possesses the ability of beat induction because of according experiments even apes don’t. Experiments provoked by Snowball showed that between birds only few ones do. It indicates that this ability is provided by some relative simple addition in the brain structure which happened on last stages of evolution and was not able to spread on many species. So Dr.Patel(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/ index.php?title=Aniruddh_D._Patel&action=edit&redlink=1) has suggested that “the capability of both humans and cockatoos to move synchronously to a rhythmic beat may be a byproduct of a link between the auditory and motor parts of the brain". I like to think that case of Snowball doesn’t prove the role of overtone series in music perception. On the contrary it confirms role of beat which is derived from sound loudness, hence it connected with functions of surviving (defense, assault and flight) and apparently must have great emotional effect on all people. The modern mass music culture is a proof. Besides the ability of beat indication exist by species which is able to mimic human speech which sounds determined by presence of spectral components in definite spectral diapasons. Thus frequency ratios of these components are not essential and necessary components are formed from any suitable high overtones by means of resonances and not from first overtones as for harmony.
>> Proof that the overtone series is real!!! >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7IZmRnAo6s > I like to think that case of Snowball doesn’t prove the role of > overtone series in music perception.
True.
> On the contrary it confirms role of beat which is derived from sound > loudness, hence it connected with functions of surviving (defense, > assault and flight) and apparently must have great emotional effect > on all people.
But not on all organisms - synchronizing with a beat is a very rare in the animal kingdom. One of the few other examples doesn't involve sound at all: there's a species of South-East Asian firefly where the males gather in huge clusters in a tree and all flash their glowing arses in sync to attract females to it from miles around.
==== j a c k at c a m p i n . m e . u k === <http://www.campin.me.uk> ==== Jack Campin, 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland == mob 07800 739 557 CD-ROMs and free stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, and Mac logic fonts ****** I killfile Google posts - email me if you want to be whitelisted ******
> Indeed, it is very interesting. As I understood from searching the web > the bird ( Snowball) made sensation between scholars. They supposed > before that only man possesses the ability of beat induction because > of according experiments even apes don’t. Experiments provoked by > Snowball showed that between birds only few ones do. It indicates that > this ability is provided by some relative simple addition in the brain > structure which happened on last stages of evolution and was not able > to spread on many species. So Dr.Patel(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/ > index.php?title=Aniruddh_D._Patel&action=edit&redlink=1) has suggested > that “the capability of both humans and cockatoos to move > synchronously to a rhythmic beat may be a byproduct of a link between > the auditory and motor parts of the brain". > I like to think that case of Snowball doesn’t prove the role of > overtone series in music perception. On the contrary it confirms role > of beat which is derived from sound loudness, hence it connected with > functions of surviving (defense, assault and flight) and apparently > must have great emotional effect on all people. The modern mass music > culture is a proof. Besides the ability of beat indication exist by > species which is able to mimic human speech which sounds determined by > presence of spectral components in definite spectral diapasons. Thus > frequency ratios of these components are not essential and necessary > components are formed from any suitable high overtones by means of > resonances and not from first overtones as for harmony.
> Best Regards
> Yuri Vilenkin
All true, but you might want to look at the short study I made and the discussion leading up to it abouit the relationship of the OTS and Rhythm. The results of my discussion supports the OTS through the early centuries of the Western music culture. I am not saying that Snowball's performance has any direct relationship to this but only that rhythm and the OTS may not be as unrelated as you seem to think.
Personally, I think that Snowball could be responding only to the strong beats in the same manner as she (?) might respond to a rhythmic physical touch stimulus. Her dancing may not have anything to do with rhythnm at all. Now if I see another bird pecking rhythmically on a drum and a group of birds dancint to that rhythm, THEN I would be impressed!
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:56:39 -0700 (PDT), Vilen <vi...@online.de> wrote: >On the contrary it confirms role >of beat which is derived from sound loudness, hence it connected with >functions of surviving (defense, assault and flight) and apparently >must have great emotional effect on all people.
Come to think of it - why exactly does (did) the Army go to such great lengths to provide drummers and buglers (sometimes) to accompany soldiers into battle. I mean, with everything else that needed to be attended to, there must be *some* advantage to the forces to having musical support.
Maybe just to keep the troops energized?
I haven't ever thought about it before - hence, I never investigated it. Guess it's off to the google and Wiki to start to see exactly what that's all about.
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:33:57 GMT, Danny Schorr <.@.> wrote: >On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:56:39 -0700 (PDT), Vilen <vi...@online.de> wrote:
>>On the contrary it confirms role >>of beat which is derived from sound loudness, hence it connected with >>functions of surviving (defense, assault and flight) and apparently >>must have great emotional effect on all people.
>Come to think of it - why exactly does (did) the Army go to such great >lengths to provide drummers and buglers (sometimes) to accompany soldiers >into battle. I mean, with everything else that needed to be attended to, >there must be *some* advantage to the forces to having musical support.
> Maybe just to keep the troops energized?
>I haven't ever thought about it before - hence, I never investigated it. >Guess it's off to the google and Wiki to start to see exactly what that's >all about.
Danny Schorr wrote: >> Come to think of it - why exactly does (did) the Army go to such great >> lengths to provide drummers and buglers (sometimes) to accompany soldiers >> into battle. I mean, with everything else that needed to be attended to, >> there must be *some* advantage to the forces to having musical support.
I think it was used for military signals in battle, too. Like, if the general would want a specific group moving here or there, they could be signaled.
>Danny Schorr wrote: >>> Come to think of it - why exactly does (did) the Army go to such great >>> lengths to provide drummers and buglers (sometimes) to accompany soldiers >>> into battle. I mean, with everything else that needed to be attended to, >>> there must be *some* advantage to the forces to having musical support.
>I think it was used for military signals in battle, too. Like, if the >general would want a specific group moving here or there, they could be >signaled.
> Hans
i think so, also. The wiki article mentioned that bugles and clarions were better equipped for that though, since the sound could be heard clearly over long distances. Probably also a greater variety of 'tunes' for signalling.
Suddenly I'm in the mood to watch Apocalypse Now again.
Danny Schorr wrote: >>>> Come to think of it - why exactly does (did) the Army go to such great >>>> lengths to provide drummers and buglers (sometimes) to accompany soldiers >>>> into battle. I mean, with everything else that needed to be attended to, >>>> there must be *some* advantage to the forces to having musical support.
>>>> Maybe just to keep the troops energized? ... >> I think it was used for military signals in battle, too. Like, if the >> general would want a specific group moving here or there, they could be >> signaled. > i think so, also. The wiki article mentioned that bugles and clarions were > better equipped for that though, since the sound could be heard clearly > over long distances. Probably also a greater variety of 'tunes' for > signalling.
One of the loudest instruments I have heard is the Zurna, though I do not know about its military use. But this article says it was used by the Turkish Ottoman military http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zurna
> Suddenly I'm in the mood to watch Apocalypse Now again.
> Bugle calls and WAGNER TOO!!!
I just found <http://xbmc.org/>, another multimedia player (the core is from MPlayer, but the interface is more TV like).
> On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:56:39 -0700 (PDT), Vilen <vi...@online.de> wrote: > >On the contrary it confirms role > >of beat which is derived from sound loudness, hence it connected with > >functions of surviving (defense, assault and flight) and apparently > >must have great emotional effect on all people.
> Come to think of it - why exactly does (did) the Army go to such great > lengths to provide drummers and buglers (sometimes) to accompany soldiers > into battle. I mean, with everything else that needed to be attended to, > there must be *some* advantage to the forces to having musical support.
> Maybe just to keep the troops energized?
> I haven't ever thought about it before - hence, I never investigated it. > Guess it's off to the google and Wiki to start to see exactly what that's > all about.
> Danny
The cadence for marching moved the troops along quicker. Remember the Phonecian ships with the oars on the side? well they always used a drummer as well!
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:20:55 -0700 (PDT), LJS <ljsche...@gmail.com> wrote: >The cadence for marching moved the troops along quicker. Remember the >Phonecian ships with the oars on the side?
Uhhhh -not particularly ;-)
>well they always used a >drummer as well!
The Google says you are right! Found some interesting links - Thanks.
> On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:33:57 GMT, Danny Schorr <.@.> wrote: > >On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:56:39 -0700 (PDT), Vilen <vi...@online.de> wrote:
> >>On the contrary it confirms role > >>of beat which is derived from sound loudness, hence it connected with > >>functions of surviving (defense, assault and flight) and apparently > >>must have great emotional effect on all people.
> >Come to think of it - why exactly does (did) the Army go to such great > >lengths to provide drummers and buglers (sometimes) to accompany soldiers > >into battle. I mean, with everything else that needed to be attended to, > >there must be *some* advantage to the forces to having musical support.
> > Maybe just to keep the troops energized?
> >I haven't ever thought about it before - hence, I never investigated it. > >Guess it's off to the google and Wiki to start to see exactly what that's > >all about.
apparently department stores use music psychologically as well to stimulate sales. slower songs first, gradually speeding up tempo, they believe "rev" an individual's desire... also, it is sometimes used in the workplace for better job performance: concentration, focus, speed, etc...
now, to figure out what is the advantage of using it when the corporation keeps you holding on the phone line?
> > On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:33:57 GMT, Danny Schorr <.@.> wrote: > > >On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:56:39 -0700 (PDT), Vilen <vi...@online.de> wrote:
> > >>On the contrary it confirms role > > >>of beat which is derived from sound loudness, hence it connected with > > >>functions of surviving (defense, assault and flight) and apparently > > >>must have great emotional effect on all people.
> > >Come to think of it - why exactly does (did) the Army go to such great > > >lengths to provide drummers and buglers (sometimes) to accompany soldiers > > >into battle. I mean, with everything else that needed to be attended to, > > >there must be *some* advantage to the forces to having musical support.
> > > Maybe just to keep the troops energized?
> > >I haven't ever thought about it before - hence, I never investigated it. > > >Guess it's off to the google and Wiki to start to see exactly what that's > > >all about.
> apparently department stores use music psychologically as well to > stimulate sales. slower songs first, gradually speeding up tempo, > they believe "rev" an individual's desire... also, it is sometimes > used in the workplace for better job performance: concentration, > focus, speed, etc...
> now, to figure out what is the advantage of using it when the > corporation keeps you holding on the phone line?
Maybe you should ask Steve L about that. If I remember correctly (it has been a long time) that he flat out denied any use of music for psychological advantage or control. Maybe Steve can set the record straight if my memory is in err.
news:595b099b-b51e-4272-90ea-c7da5ed6d58c@l5g2000vbp.googlegroups.com... (...) now, to figure out what is the advantage of using it when the corporation keeps you holding on the phone line? (...) If you are paying or potentially paying and listening, then entertainment, even if it does not meet your taste, will make you perceive less time passing than has actually passed. It is in the vein of "Time Flies when you're having fun". If you stay on the line, then the business has better odds of either retaining your custom or getting it. It does not work all that well if you are already listening to a radio or a recording. It can work double if one ear is listening to speech.
|
