Ear Training...Getting a trained ear.

[jancivil]

I can string a guitar from no strings on it at all and get pretty close to what would be A=440. But that's just memory.

[shankfiddle]

another interesting idea to think about: apply the binaural concept to chord structure.

when certain perfectly-in-tune chords "buzz" in your ear, it is from a similar interaction between the overtones. For instance when you play a C solo, it has overtones at C G and E. When you add in these pitches to make a chord the octave partials of the G and E align with 5th/3rd partials of C, respectively. But it's nearly impossible to play these notes *exactly* in tune to match C's overtone series.

So the overtones are incredibly close, but not dead-on... cool buzzing effects generated from the difference between partials

[tapper mike]

Almost every app game is based on relative pitch because once you are rewarded with a tone all notes have a reference point.

Re tuning and out of tune guitars.... That again is relative pitch at work. When I tune my guitars without a tuner they are all south of A440 to variying degrees. I can tune the strings intune with one another without a tuner but not at A440. I always need a tuner or other instrument to tune my guitar to A440

Band in a box comes with a free "Note Match" program which allows you to set key/chromatic and keep the tones in an octave. It's kind of like wack a mole. There are two grids. Push a button on the top grid and it produces a note. Then rollover the buttons on the lower grid to find the match. When you think you've found it then press the button. It also does the same thing with chords and phrases.

BIAB also has a few ear trainer programs

[jancivil]

the thing of strong overtones on a guitar has always made me tune in a particular way

if you get an open G chord to be true, the third string of the open E chord, with that low E sounding is a nightmare. the clash of that overtone and the major third as fretted on the first fret, and this is exacerbated by the nut often enough, is not desirable to me, so I have hedge tunings and I'll change them. I have never used a mechanical tuner.

this btw is the basis for power chords, with no thirds, you get that 'harmonic distortion' ie., the 'true' major third very present, the fretted M 3rds are [~14¢] sharp and it's a harsh clash.

[tapper mike]

When was the last time you set your intonation? And if it is an electric are you tuning it coming out of an amp when you do set it?

Just kidding,,,
Way back earlier in this thread I stated of all us You Jan most likely have the most accurate ear. Usually guitarists who only have ever played guitar accept tuning/intonation for what it is or think it's actually supposed to sound like it does.

Todd Keehn guitars are really the best for intonation though he usually tunes his to perfect fifths
http://www.tkinstruments.com/id17.htm



Noticed how the frets are "spanned" across the fretboard

[sammy24]

That might be true for "aquired" PP (if that was possible, which still is not proven at all, more to the opposite, the general scientific consensus is that you can't aquire PP). For those that just "have it", there seems to be no need to actually (and also actively) remember any pitches. They're just there. At least that's what the folks I asked answered.

I'm guessing that people who "just have it" are least likely to be able to explain the mechanics of how they do what they do. They just do it, and are unlikely to be able to explain it. It is possible that those who have to work hard toward acquiring it (again, assuming it is attainable for those not born with it) may actually do it the same way, in the end, as those who can do it intuitively, but having learned it slowly they probably have a better idea, in fact, of the mechanics.

A good example of this is with regard to relative pitch-- some people are such intuitive musicians they really cannot explain to others how they do it-- you just hear it, man. But that is something that is definitely possible to attain, on a very natural and intutive level, even though one could not hear those things when they started studying. And breaking down the skill into its components can help those trying to learn it know what kind of practice routines to focus on, etc., in order to attain their goal. (And being a good educator may sometimes involve slowly breaking down certain skills that one already has, in such a way that they can explain to others who as yet have not acquired those skills how to focus their attention and time to make the best progress in improving.)

[jancivil]

... I started in life without even a very good general sense of 'what pitch?'. I sang off key. I knew from up versus down, and real wide versus real narrow intervals but I wasn't singing the songs I liked with any accuracy.

I just wanted it really bad. The first thing I think I transcribed by ear, really by ear, was the break in Proud Mary where it turns around back into the key. bVII// V... bVII// V... bVII// V.. IV/ bIII /// bIII/ >I.

It seems so simple, minor pentatonic. A mystery to me, I couldn't center on that V as a temporory new tonic, vs the I of the song. I sang it until the two centers gelled in my head. I got centered like that not from remembering finger positions on a board but vibration in my body.

I think I becaume hypersensitized to intonation from taking a lot of LSD (and listening to music, some of it via bad reproduction media, and warped records, say) to be honest. At that era of my life I spent all day figuring out shit off of records. Particularly Hendrix or Clapton solos, and as much of the whole arrangement as I could manage on Beatles' Abbey Road, which I mostly sussed after a few months. I do think having an instrument where bending notes was so desirable is very different than a keyboardist's idea of pitch, where it seems one does learn acceptance. I still cringe at a piano, not so much from someone that can really handle one, but in front of me and writing for it. To me there are things you learn simply to avoid or leave out, there, to get the most desirable end result.

[jancivil]

when certain perfectly-in-tune ...
interaction between the overtones...
When you add in these pitches to make ... align with 5th/3rd partials ...

in my experience, Indian classical music has appeared to place the most minute emphasis on intonation. there are theories! but the people that play it don't talk that much about it, there isn't any good consensus on a system. it's taught orally and when applied to an instrument it's 'here is the spot'. Before you do, you have learned it singing it.

But you have a constant tonic and fifth to put your melody choices against, rather than a chord. it's a resonant and IN TUNE drone and the intervals are not compromised in order to change key, they are the good ones, always seeking for the perfection. So you have a kind of harmony horizontally with concords lining up against home.

so, when you have a lydian-seeming line, the #4 is pushing against that drone fifth, and it also is found in nature as the 11th partial. Open up your ear enough and it's there for you. Cheat a little and get some feedback going with that Marshall and it's there growing off the fundamental. 7th, 9th, 11th partials...

The major 7th might be the subdominant and the major third the dominant. The ^7 isn't required to resolve up, it's where you dwell for a minute. these relationships are harmonic but there is no chord to be named let alone fully described. It's very subtle in these ways. I seem to have a little genetic memory, my great grandfather was a drummer from India.

[tapper mike]

Jan didn't you start learning an instrument in elementary school?

Singing and developing a good relative ear don't always walk hand in hand. Though it helps. As well I notice that I'm better at certain keys and not others. I was playing a few games of pitch invasion tonite. I scored 98 percent on Eb. Yet only 70 percent on C
Both games went 2000



Note.....
I was using 7 note scale tones not the simple major triad shown on the video.

[jancivil]

I had a Bb trumpet for a few months in the fifth grade. had to have braces and moved to drums. saw Hendrix May 9 1969, started lobbying for a guitar.

[jancivil]

When a song switches from major to parallel minor, does that sound like La-Mi? doesn't the ear just simply hear same tonic, with the mediant being altered down by a half-step?

I'm not passionate enough to reply everything, but yes it does. It doesn't take that much effort to switch unless you can't hold a pitch for half a second in your head.

Still don't see the reason why Do HAS to be the tonic.

it's the tonic for major, period, right? then minor, being but a poor stepchild is conceptually inferior to major, since its Do begins another major scale. that is a skewed conception to begin with. the tonic is the tonic. 'the tonic' should consistently have an identifier that means 'the tonic'. why be more complex than is necessary? you might be used to it, but I'm not seeing any good argument for it.


so if the tonic is Do for major, and parallel minor comes up, you're saying that Do can no longer be Do because we now have minor mode? that seems horribly ill-advised as it's just confusing. the tonic = Do; the tonic = Do again.
vs., Do is Do; now what was Do must now be 'La', previously the identifier for the sixth degree, so Do is the third scale degree? seriously? I guess people can be entrained to any idea but I would not advise that at all.

[shankfiddle]

in my experience, Indian classical music has appeared to place the most minute emphasis on intonation. there are theories! but the people that play it don't talk that much about it, there isn't any good consensus on a system. it's taught orally and when applied to an instrument it's 'here is the spot'. Before you do, you have learned it singing it.

Exactly. indian musicians are taught to "just do it" and as such have an incredibly difficult time explaining their thought processes. When I took violin lessons in India, my teacher made me sing ragas before even attempting to play them. And it was incredibly frustrating because my vocal intonation is not as good as that on my instrument. Even If i have the correct pitch in my head, I can more quickly and reliably reproduce it on the instrument which I do not think is so strange...? But "teacher" would not let me touch the violin until I could sing it properly. didn't get very far with that one. we got into ego conflicts and those lessons went: nowhere.

there is an academic consensus although it is not frequently taught that way, and the scales/ragas are rigorously mathematically classified. I was fortunate enough to have a discussion with Dr. M Narmadha,a carnatic-trained PhD violinist. She was incredibly intelligent and able to effectively communicate her ideas: we "spoke the same language".

From what I gathered,
-Some scales use different pitches on the ascent and on the descent (ascent of one scale + descent of another = new scale).
-Some have the exact same pitches but a turn in them, ie a FEDEDC in Cmajor descent, that is a different scale from C major.
-The same scale/microtones, with a decorative gamaka (slide, but not in the Derek Trucks sense) in a different place is a different scale
-There are also conventions as to the root note of each scale. Some scales are "moveable" as in Do could begin on any note, but certain ragas have only 2-3 possible starting points, the note you start on gives the scale a completely different flavor. Being trained to recognize this is very rudimentary perfect pitch.

And Jancivil: I don't think drugs have anything to do with your pitch-sensitivity (other than maybe activating your awareness of it). I would argue that having a grandfather from India affects your ear more. That's my 2 cents without knowing anything about you...

[Hink]

I had a Bb trumpet for a few months in the fifth grade. had to have braces and moved to drums. saw Hendrix May 9 1969, started lobbying for a guitar.

roughly the same era I started with trumpet (5th grade, 1970), in 3rd grade I remember students taking a test where the teacher played one note and then another, each student was to indentify something about the notes...I cannot recall the criteria but from there some students were offered to take up an instrument. In my school if you played the violin you started in 4th grade and 5th grade for all other instruments. I chose violin but my mother would not allow it because I could never (in her eyes) be coordinated enough to play a violin. I then chose trumpet which I stuck with through 7th grade but was not very good and by that time had fallen in love with the guitar.

Now here is a twist that has had my mind spinning for two days, my mother's attitude was repeated my whole life (she sent my music to my cousin Rob Chiarelli in the 90s hoping he would tell me to give up but he said the opposite). She hated my playing guitar, she did allow me to take lessons but my first teacher was using the Mel Bay books only and I had no interest. Instead I turned my acoustic into a bass (which my mother viewed as my destroying my guitar out of anger because I wasn't able to play it) and then I got my first electric. After getting my first electric the town 'rocker' became my teacher, my mother stopped paying for lessons after a month because in her eyes he was stringing me along teaching me useless stuff. He in fact was teaching me blues bars, blues scales and pentatonic scales.

Where's the twist? Sunday like always I was at my mom's with my wife and daughter doing her cleaning, laundry and other household chores. I was in the other room and overheard my mother say to my wife "I regret not encouraging John to go to Berklee"...I almost hit the floor.

Now I do not think musically I was Berklee material, intectually wise yes* but certainly not talent wise. But that's not what my point is, I'm not saying I should have gone to Berklee. What gets me is after 40 years this is the first time my mother has said anything positive about my music. When I wrote a song for my sister's memorial service it was 'nice', the song I wrote from my father's poem was 'nice' and both said the in the same dismissive manner. My mother went to a few shows I played without any comment except that my best friend's wife talked her ear off once (his wife was a major coke head) . I asked my wife about it on the way home and she said my mother told her that my grade school said I had a strong apptitude for music. I'm still not sure how to do deal with this comment last Sunday.

*in basic training I was taken aside for three days with about 30 other guys, given three days worth of tests and in the end there were three of us left...we were all offered 1 year OCS and then we would go to West Point...I turned it down.

[Sascha Franck]

I would argue that having a grandfather from India affects your ear more.

What nonsense is that? Just like your "indian bloodline"?
Seriously, BS like this is putting me of from posting in this thread any longer.
Yes, there might be some genetic advances in terms of perceiving music, but if so, it's defenitely not as easy as you seem to think (or well, let's better say "as you want to make it up").
First off: For anything like this to actually matter, whatever genes need to be dominant. Do you have any scientific evidence that the "superior indian listening" genes are dominant?
Next: Do you even remotely have an idea about how long it takes for such things to actually get "manifested" in whatever gene pool? Not only would the gene have to be dominant, no, to actually get spread, it'd also had to offer whatever evolutional advances to the owner, so he could spread his semen some more (and yes, that's pretty much a male thing, females usually aren't receiving all too much different semens during their lifetime, at least not traditionally).
There goes your idea about whatever musically superior race.

- Sascha

[jancivil]

there is an academic consensus although it is not frequently taught that way, and the scales/ragas are rigorously mathematically classified. I was fortunate enough to have a discussion with Dr. M Narmadha,a carnatic-trained PhD violinist. She was incredibly intelligent and able to effectively communicate her ideas: we "spoke the same language".

From what I gathered,
...
-There are [] conventions as to the root note of each scale. Some scales are "moveable" as in Do could begin on any note, but certain ragas have only 2-3 possible starting points, the note you start on gives the scale a completely different flavor. Being trained to recognize this is very rudimentary perfect pitch.

Carnatic music is classified and more theoretically detailed than Hindustani. 'Do' [in fact 'Sa'] isn't considered moveable at all except that an individual, especially a singer has their own tonic. There isn't so much a convention such as A=440 observed, but for instruments the tonic tends to be around D to Db put next to western system.

What you may be thinking about is, there are the old theories in Carnatic music where the structures are derived from, well similar to what westerners in pre-baroqute conception would call plagal, a 'Ma' form (Cf. 'Sa', 'IV/I') but that is strictly from theoretical foundations. Kind of more like music history class put beside theory study, such as at conservatory here, you might get modal counterpoint or Fux.

Tonic is tonic and is always the same, there is no modulation of home.

Carnatic [The South] has 72 melakartas, which are scalar forms and parents to ragas. The conception is mathematical; the 'suddha' or first form in Carnatic is every degree is the flattest version of each tone.

Hindustani [The North] has 10 thaats which are heptatonic scales which serve as categories for ragas. Their 'suddha' corresponds with our major. That music is more influenced by the outside, in the first place music from the Mughal Courts experience since the Mohammedan invasion, and from Western music from colonization. The southerners were more stubborn.

You're likely to run into blurry areas more in the latter system.