Perfect Pitch

[franzliszt2]

yeh I agree it is developed, but I believe you are born with that abilty to develop it. I suppose we've been born with some sort of talent for playing piano,and years of work have been spent developing it. Not everyone who plays piano gets to any great standered, and I believe thats because people are born with different abilties. I think perfect pitch is just a natural abilty. Like colour, you are born wioth the abilty to recogise a colour, which is developed oevr time. Buta colour blind person will never develop the abilty to recognise the colours properly. Thats how my aural teacher explained it to me.

[franzliszt2]

Chess,  I am actually an officially rated chess player. I do it as relaxation from piano.


And I have no education? yeh sure.

How am I bragging?

Your right, I don't no the ddep theory behind 440, but I can hear when it is, as 440 is in tune for me, since I've been surrounded by music tuned to 440. I can then hear if things are sharp or flat, and thats how I get 441, 442 etc.. So why are you so concerned about this? I can drive a car, but couldn't tell you about the mechanics

[prometheus]

You are already changing your position because you realised you cannot hold your current opinion.

But now your position is one that is in contradiction with every argument you made before. First you 'knew' because this is how you did it. Now you 'believe' that people that learn absolute pitch need to have a genetic basis to be able to do so.

What is observed is totally differerent. If you observe someone who learns something you will not be able to observe a genetic basis or not. The only reason to find out is genetic testing.

The deeper point behind your argument is that you are 'special' and other people are not. While I may even have more genetic basis for perfect pitch. I grew up without music so I was not stimulated during the suspected 'critical age' for absolute pitch.

[franzliszt2]

I don't no how people have perfect pitch. I never said I did. And who does o? Nobody does for sure.

I'm not saying I'm special. So far we have discovered Schoenberg3, me and elevate have perfect pitch. So I am not alone here.

There is clearly some similarities betwwen the cases. I explained about how I started developing my theory, and my ears started to link up keys to sound, I didn't try to lear that, it just happened.

I am not changing my position, I'm trying to compramise, trying desperatly to understand you, but you are just ignorant.

I will say it agian, I do not no why I have perfect pitch. I just do.

[prometheus]

Chess,  I am actually an officially rated chess player. I do it as relaxation from piano.

I remember your rating. That's the whole reason I brought it up.

And I have no education? yeh sure.

You mean you are also a child prodigy entering university at age 14?

How am I bragging?

A little bit self-reflexion would be in order.

Your right, I don't no the deep theory behind 440, but I can hear when it is, as 440 is in tune for me, since I've been surrounded by music tuned to 440. I can then hear if things are sharp or flat, and thats how I get 441, 442 etc.

If A is sharp it means that the note is 450. If a note is 441 it will just be 'in tune' eventhough it is not perfectly in tune. Also, frequency can just as well be 440.50384 etc. If you get near 443 you can hear a difference. It's 8 cents and can be heard clearly.

So why are you so concerned about this? I can drive a car, but couldn't tell you about the mechanics

Because you make absurd claims. Both about your ability as your argument that absolute pitch is inborn, which you have now retreated.

[nortti]

I still hold that it is indeed learnable, and that you indeed had to have learned it. (logic dictates this)

Did you use any other 'proof' than that about arbitrary scales and stuff? (because that says nothing about the thing we're interested in)

Franzliszt, I developed it, but that's different from being born with it. I had the ability to develop it and that's it.

Before you developed it, did you usually remember the sound of pieces in the correct key?

[franzliszt2]

My internet chess acount was different, I got banned haha. I play chess in clubs, it's much better.

When did I say I was a prodigy? Please can someone tell me? I have been educated, obviously since the age of 4. I am now at uni doing music yes, but I was educated before that at junior schools, for under 18's.

Stop firing theory at me, I really don't care, I'll read a book about it, rather than some guy on the internet who clearly knows nothing.

You no, your a crap debate, at least schoenberg3 is fun to debate with, he's actually musical unlike you. And if you turn out to be musical I'll drop out of uni as I'm ashamed to be a musician if your called one

[nortti]

You failed. You just started bragging. Next time you see someone ask a question about music please shut up and leave it to me or soemone else who actually knows something instead of just having an inflated ego because of some 'magical ability'.

...

I don't listen to a 18 year old with no education, an attitude and a blown up ego because I can't learn anything from those kinds of people.

Something's smelling pretty nasty here

[franzliszt2]

Let him get nasty, I don't care. He'll always be a loser

[super666lucifer]

prometheus

*sneezes*
Sorry, I'm allergic to stupid people

[prometheus]

With education I mean someone with a degree.


But you are right. You won't learn anything from me. You need to read books and studies.


As for me being a musician. I don't see how a debate can be 'musical' or not. I am a composer. And since I don't want to destroy your career I won't try to prove this to you. It's irrelevant anyway. The people that know most about this subject aren't musicians. The fact that I may not be a musician is meaningless.

As for it not being fun to be in a debate with me. Well, maybe that's your own fault. I guess it is not fun trying to defend an unholdable position, taking it back and then launching into a huge ad hominem.

[elevateme]

why does education necessarily have to be someone with a degree?

listen, prometheus, i've already told you it's impossible for you to understand because you don't have perfect pitch.

"You mean you are also a child prodigy entering university at age 14?"

^^ what was all that about?? ^^

and he's right, the link doesnt work. It comes up with this window, plays one of the windows sound effects, and then won't close.

I don't listen to a 18 year old with no education, an attitude and a blown up ego because I can't learn anything from those kinds of people.

well, clearly you do, because you're still here. I really don't understand why you can't just accept that we can tell the difference between 440 and 441.

As for me being a musician. I don't see how a debate can be 'musical' or not. I am a composer. And since I don't want to destroy your career I won't try to prove this to you. It's irrelevant anyway. The people that know most about this subject aren't musicians. The fact that I may not be a musician is meaningless.

The people that know most about this subject most certainly are musicians. If I'm right, scientists say it is impossible to tell the difference between 440 & 441? (sorry if that's wrong, like franzliszt2 i don't know all the theories.) However, decent musicians know that it is perfectly possible.

[leucippus]

AND FOR THE RECORD...IT'S NOT RECOGNISING PITCHES!!!!!! THATS ONLY A PART OF IT! AND IT'S NOT THE EARDRUM, ITS THE BRAIN. YOU NO, THAT THING THAT IS INBETWEEN THE EAR.

Well you're obviously just arguing semantics then.

I'm using the term "perfect pitch" to mean precisely what the dictionary says:

Perfect Pitch - The ability to identify or sing any tone heard.

Any abilities that you might have beyond that are totally irrelevant to the question asked by the author of this thread.  It was a pragmatic question about whether or not it is possible to learn "perfect pitch" (as defined by the dictionary I would assume)

My answer to that question is "Yes, it is possible to learn to identify and sing any tone you can hear"

You are obviously getting upset using all caps and exclamation points.  If you wish to use the term "perfect pitch" as a label for extraordinary skills that you may have developed during your childhood that's fine with me.  It was never my intention to belittle your label.  I was simply trying to respond to the pragmatic question asked by the author of the thread.

May you all have a great life! 

I have no desire to argue semantics.

[super666lucifer]

OH MY GOD!!!

WANKER ALERT

[franzliszt2]

Perfect pitch is so much more than recognising notes. In simple thats is what it is, but it is recognising notes instantly. You cannot practice recognising a note as fast as a person with perfect pitch. Most people I no who have memorised pitches have some sort of reference. For example..D...Rach 3, C...Chopin 4th ballade. Even though he can do it super fast, he is not as fast as people with perfect pitch.

So logically speaking, the perfect pitch definition you have is correct, you misunderstand it. Becasue in knowing all the notes, you can do chords. And this can happen instantly, and if I hear 6 notes very fast I can name all 6, because each one is an instant recognition, whereas people who have "learnt" it, will only maybe get the 1st and last.

 https://www.dfan.org/pitch.html

there is some evidnece.

Now before you say blah blah people learn it he says, read it carefully, they don't do is sub consiously. Therfore it is not as fast. Read the pitch perception bit

https://www.livescience.com/mysteries/060915_perfect_pitch.html

I think my evidence is all there.


https://www.jackgrassel.com/pages/perfect_pitch.html

Please read the last link, it has a cool stroy about 338

Your a composer? You obviously don't compose music for musicians if you've never met someone with perfect pitch, I think it's quite easy to find someone with it in musical circles. Spiol my career? And how do peopel no more about musicians than perfect pitch? There are people who are not musicians who have it you no. Ultimatly peopole like you who claim to no all about it, are the failures, you spend your time analysing the abilities of others because you have none yourselves. Who is more famous, Richter, who the critics who wrote about him? Richter! Of course, who will ever care about the critict who blabbers on about is performance, and what he missed from it. No one, becuase they are losers.  I'd rather have the ability than understand it, yet the strange thing is I do understand it in more ways than you.

[mephisto]

franzliszt it is spelled:know not no.

[elevateme]

i thought we'd already agreed that this argument is not about grammar or spelling

[leucippus]

I think my evidence is all there.

Perhaps it is, for what you are attempting to argue.  And maybe not, depending on precisely what it is you are arguing.  

In any case, that wasn't the question of the thread.  The question of the thread was obviously a pragmatic question about whether a person can learn to recognize pitches and keys of music.  After all, that's all that is being claimed in the article linked to in the opening post.

My answer to that question is "Yes, it can be learned".

Your argument has deteriorated from claiming that it can't be learned at all, to now claiming that it simply can't be learned as well by an adult as it can by someone who learned it as a child during their developmental years.

I don't think anyone will argue with that.  I certainly won't.  Humans always learn things better during their developmental years, and things they learn during that time do indeed become instinctual to them.  I won't argue with that.

But that wasn't the original question.  So you are arguing something totally beyond the original topic of this thread.  Something that I'm seriously not even interested in.  I think it's obvious that a new born baby is not going to be able to name pitches, any more than he or she will be able to name the letters of the alphabet.  Both of those abilities are going to be learned.  Most people learn to name the letters of the alphabet (then they do it as an adult in a way that feel instinctual).

Most people don't bother learning to name pitches in their early youth.  Those that do feel that it is "instinctual" when they become adults.  I have no doubt at all that you feel that what you can do is perfectly instinctual.  But I still hold that you necessarily learned it as you were growing up.

I'm really not interested in arguing that point though.  You are free to believe whatever you like.  I really don't care what you believe.  It ultimately has nothing to do with the pragmatic aspect of the question asked by the author of this thread as it applies to music.

[prometheus]

Franzliszt2, I am glad I was able to convince you absolute pitch is learned and that you stopped the personal attacks.

[mephisto]

i thought we'd already agreed that this argument is not about grammar or spelling

Of course, that`s why I didn`t comment on anythng else.

[super666lucifer]

no offence prometheus but as far as i remember you didnt change franzliszt2s mind at all

[franzliszt2]

You have not changed my mind you simple minded blob. You imagine things man. Ok, this is my last post on this topic, I'm not wasting time with this guy. People with perfect pitch will understand me, but plebs like him just won't.

As for my grammer I am fully aware I am not typing correctly, as I am on a piano forum, if I wanted to type an essay I'd take more time.

As for the silly guy lechipuss or whatever, you didn't and still don't no what perfect pitch is, so how can I answer the question if peopel don't even understand the meaning of the question. It is you who won't accept what I believe, you have no idea about perfect pitch, beacuse A..You don't have it, B, you've never nmet anyone with it, and C..You are stupid. You's keep telling me I'm saying thimgs, when I just don't, so debating with you is impossible.

Ok, ciao, I can't be boshed with you's, so happy hearing with those ears you have that can't tell 440 from 442, and you can sit and spend hours learning what you call perfect pitch. At the end of the day, I have it, you don't, so shut up.
 

[pianistimo]

wow.  a lot happens in a short time.  men.  egos.  women would never fight over this type of stuff. 

now...i have a question.  when is PP (as you call it) usually first diagnosed?  i am curious because my middle daughter was singing to herself in her crib at 3 months.  this might just seem - ok.  she likes to sing.  but, soon afterwards - i realized she was matching pitches, too.  also, my last daughter matches pitches - although hers was markedly later (and she sang off pitch for a little while) and possibly a repetition of the oldest daughter singing a lot.  but, my son is somewhat uninterested in singing and probably wouldn't be as interested in developing his pitch or simply didn't have the 'ear.' 

here's the question... 

actually three questions:

1. is perfect pitch (if inborn) noticed by a tendency to sing or play an instrument at an early age?
2.  is perfect pitch (if developed or learned) a capability that comes easier with time - or that the child has perfect pitch from the very beginning (which would indicate inborn?)
3. can you have perfect pitch without having been interested in the subject as a child?  which would also prove the inborn side (to me).

[pianistimo]

i am agreed about varying levels of proficiency of perfect pitch.  basically - a piano that is 'well-tempered' is out of tune already.  i mean - perfect pitch is normally based on pythagorean's system and not the equal 440 - and then next octave 880.  to squeeze everything into seven notes equally kinda messed up the system.

but, for our purposes.  the pitches for 'perfect pitch' people would be matching the approximations on the 'well-tempered' piano and knowing when one is play an A or a D.  i'm not that much more impressed by the A# or A flat.  they are sort of like passing tones to me.  did you know that on the violin in the classical era - they would lean toward the sharps going up a scale passage - and lean down (toward flats) as they went down.  just an interesting tidbit.  musicality isn't perfection - but we can certainly be impressed by perfect pitch because those people are the ones that can transcribe pieces off of the radio and remember things that most people can't.

[andyd]

Not to be devils advocate here, but some things are a gift.  Child prodigies don't have to learn.  Idiot-Savant syndrome is another interesting point to consider.  Was there a programme on recently in the UK about a young boy who can play the piano but can do very little else?

Take memory as an example.  We all have it, we can improve it with practice, but some have exceptional memory facility given to them as a mental/physical gift.
Wasn't it Beethoven who heard a symphony, went home, and wrote the whole thing out?

Andy

 

[quasimodo]

Take that, pitch!

[franzliszt2]

Perfect pitch can be noticed, if you play a note on the piano, and ask the child to play it back to you. However, I don't understand how to get a child to understand that.

It has to be developed, I mean it just has to be. No parent sits and has perfect pitch lessons with a child. No one I've met with perfect pitch was taught it, or attempted to learn it.

There are lots of people who have it, and are not musicians at all. Which again is evidence to suggest inborn.

The thing to remember is, that the child will not know any different, they assume its totally normal to hear that way.  They won't ever raise the subject, they'll only realise when they have music lessons with people who don't have it that they are different. My freind's dad spotted it in a car, when he was 8, he was in the car, and the radio was on. He asked his dad..."Is that in G major?", and it was. His dad then realised he had perfect pitch, and was never taught it. He only knew a few keys..C major, G, simple ones that are in kids piano books, but once he was introduced to the opthers he could recognise them all. Obviously he could recognise all notes.

I agree with andyd about the memory, thats a great point.

[prometheus]

I thought you already made your last post.

[franzliszt2]

I'll post to people who I want to, just not you becasue you are an ignorant humnan being.

[leucippus]

As for the silly guy lechipuss or whatever, you didn't and still don't no what perfect pitch is, so how can I answer the question if peopel don't even understand the meaning of the question.

A..You don't have it,
B, you've never nmet anyone with it, and
C..You are stupid.

Well, now that you're clearly slinging mud I'd like to point out the fact that you are the one with your head up your butt.

I have been discussing the meaning of "perfect pitch" within the context of the question asked by the author of this thread.  I am talking about the ability to recognize pitchs by name.  Just as the ad that was pointed to in the opening post claims. 

I am not the least bit concerned with any labels anyone wants to put on themselves because of any particular talents they might have (especially when they are claiming that those talents go FAR BEYOND merely recgonizing pitches).

Obviously you are being quite defensive about a title that you personally lay claim to.  Fine.  Be an egotistical pig for all I care and go around calling other people stupid if you want to.  You are obviously the one with an ego problem.  Can't you see the pragmatic context that the original author was asking the question?

Moreover, you keep saying that I don't have "perfect pitch" by your description of it, but how would you know? I'm not even sure I don't have it myself (by your description of it!).   Obviously I can't name the pitches.  So by the dictionary definition I don't have "perfect pitch" because by the dictionary defintion that's the SOLE requirement of having perfect pitch.  If a person can name the pitches that they hear that's all that's required to claim to have "perfect pitch" according to the dictionary definition.

Now I never bothered to even try to put names to pitches for most of my life.  But I have alway been very sensitive to pitches.  I can tell instanly when I hit a wrong note on the piano.  I can tell instantly if I'm off a little bit on a note when playing the violin. I took that "perfect pitch" test that someone linked to and got 26 out of 26 right (EASILY!).  In fact, I felt the test was so easy I can't imagine anyone not getting 26 out of 26 right.  I think I have an EXCELLENT abilty to hear and differentiate tones.  So by YOUR DEFINITION I very well may have "perfect pitch" and just not even know it.

In fact, by your defintion many people may have "perfect pitch" and not even know it.  Technically, by the way you are describing "perfect pitch" it has nothing at all to do with an ability to actually name the pitches, but rather it's all about just recognizing them.

After having read most of your aruguments it just sounds to me like you are confusing "perfect pitch" with most people's normal ability to hear.  You make it sound like anyone who doesn't have "perfect pitch" must be tone deaf.  You also seem to be extremely egotistically threatened by the thought of someone claiming to be able to possibly learn what you think of as being a "special innate talent".

So since we've resorted to a mud-slinging contest I think you are the one who is stupid because you have failed to realize the pragmatic nature of the question being asked by the author of the thread.  All you have done is come in here screaming about how no one can learn "perfect pitch" and about how everyone is obviously tone-deaf except you!

I think you need a reality check.

[leucippus]

These's another thing I need to say about this. 

Franzliszt has claimed that he can name the pitch of an engine running.  Well, I never learned to name pitches.  In fact, wouldn't think of an engine running as a single absolute pitch anyway.  When I hear an engine running I hear a multitude of sounds, not just a single pitch that could be named.

In any case, I most certainly can recognize the sound of an engine running quite accurately.   There have often been times when I've started my car or truck and immediately said, "Oh something's wrong, it doesn't sound right".

And I'm talking about a very subtle change in the sound of the engine running.  Everyone else who is with me is saying, "What?  We don't hear anything unusual".   That's because there's nothing unusual to hear.  In other words, the engine isn't knocking or clanging or anything like that.  It's simply sounds different from the way it normally sounds. 

So I'm totally able to hear and discern the very things that Franzliszt claims to be able to hear.  The ONLY DIFFERENCE is that I can't say, "Oh that engine is running at an Ab or a D#"

In other words, the ONLY DIFFERENCE between me and Franzliszt is that he has learned to put names on all the sounds he hears.  That doesn't mean that other people can't hear or detect them.  They just never learned to name them.

That's it.  That's the only difference.  Being able to put a name on the pitches is the only criteria for being able to say that you have "perfect pitch".  If you can hear and detect everything that Franzliszt can hear and detect, but you can't put names to the pitches you hear.  They you can't claim to have "perfect pitch".

Yet, in reality you hear and discern EVERYTHING that Franzliszt hears and discerns.

Fransliszt seems to be implying that if you can't name they pitches then you must not be able to hear and discern them.

That's total nonsense. A LOT of people can hear and discern pitches that they can't name.  In fact, most people can't name them because they never bothered to learn to name them.

So if you go by the dictionary definition of "perfect pitch" then only those who can name the tones can claim to have "perfect pitch".

But if you go by Franzliszt's definition that it's "so much more than that", then probably 99.9% of the population have"perfect pitch" by his definition!

[prometheus]

I'll post to people who I want to, just not you becasue you are an ignorant humnan being.

Last time I was a loser because I knew too much. Things you claimed were irrelevant to you.

[leucippus]

I just went out and sat in my truck and listened to the engine running.  Just sitting listening to all the sounds that I could hear coming from the engine.  If I could put a name on the pitches I could name a whole symphony of pitches coming from that engine.

It obviously has a low-pitch rumble.  Maybe that would a low-octave E or something.  I can hear it, but I can't name it.  So I came in the house and found it on the piano.  It's a low octave F (the first F below the bass cleff).  That's what my engine runs at.  I wasn't that far off guessing that it was an E note.

But there are a multitude of other pitches coming from the engine as well.  I didn't bother matching them all up to notes on the piano but I can distinctly hear at least 5 different constant pitches coming from the engine.  Also hear some very high-pitched squeals, hisses, and other metallic scraping sounds that I would be hard pressed to match up with any musical tones that I'm aware of.

The engine is a whole symphony of sounds.  I hear them all.  I can discern them all.  And I even came in and found the low-pitched rumble note on my piano.

So do I have "perfect pitch"?   Or am I disqualified simply because I can't name them off the top of my head.

I have always had a really good sense of relative pitch.  I can't sing good because I never trained my vocal cords well enough to be able to produce the pitches I'd like.  When I do try to sing I can instantly hear that I'm way off pitch.  It's not like I'm singing a pitch thinking it's the right one.  I can hear it's wrong.  I just don't have enough control over my vocal cords to automatically produce the correct pitches quick enough to sing.  I can eventually reproduce any single tone I want, but it may take me a few tries to get it right.  Not because I can't recognized the correct pitches.  But simply because I have never trained my vocal cords to do this quickly.  I think training vocal cords is not really all that much different than learning to play any instrument correctly.  Vocal cords are really just natural wind instruments.

By the way, are all people who claim to have "perfect pitch" good singers?   

Are you a good singer Franzliszt?

[franzliszt2]

I am an awful singer, but I can sing in tune. Ask elevateme about my singing, he was in my aural class for 2 years.

You don't realsie anything about perfect pitch, an engine does have pitch, the fact is you do not have perfect pitch, becasue if you did I wouldn't be having this discussion with you.

Anyway, having read your past postsm, I suspect you have had no musical training on a high level, so how can you argue a point with me? We are from totally different environments. I'm surrounded by musicians all day everyday, and have been for years, so I think matters like perfect pitch are well understood to me in the practical sense, perheaps not the theoretical.

[prometheus]

Why don't you try to imitate these natural unmusical sounds? Depending on the type of sound it is sometimes possible to imitate them using one pitch.

The problem is that these pitches are not always close to one of the pitches on the piano. So while some claim that they can identify them as A or C them mean the souds are 'coloured' like A or C. To this means they can't recognise a 'colour difference' of 440 Hz or 441 Hz. They mean they can hear a difference through relative pitch between 440 and 445 Hz.

Personally I automatically imatate many sounds I hear. When I hear an ambulance I imitate that as if it were music. When I hear a car starting I do the same.

[elevateme]

So do I have "perfect pitch"? Or am I disqualified simply because I can't name them off the top of my head.

you're not disqualified, but you certainly dont have perfect pitch. otherwise you'd be able to name the note. i thought that was the most basic definition ?

But if you go by Franzliszt's definition that it's "so much more than that", then probably 99.9% of the population have"perfect pitch" by his definition!

come on. thats so immature. you KNOW he doesnt mean everyone that can tell the difference between two different notes has perfect pitch. if you want to take part in this dicussion, grow up. otherwise, get lost

[oceansoul]

Greetings.
Omg. I just don't know how can someone who has that "perfect pitch" ability have a so limited brain to some facts. Would you like to know about psychic abilities such as pyrokinesis, telekinesis. Would you like to know about astral projection? Would someone with the ability to do an astral projection be special? Do you want me to teach your darwinian theories? We all have the same potential, man. I have brown eyes, but my children can be green-eyed as my father. Wow. That's difficult to understand, isn't it? Is it also hard to find a relationship between the subject you're talking about and the subjects I mentioned? I'm sure you are a very intelligent and interesting person, because you have that ability, but any human being has the potential to do what you do. They just need to "awaken" it. We have all been born with the abilities to do anything like psychometry, dreams recalling, lucid dreaming, astral projection, psychic identification, energy manipulation, all of them related to the brain and energetic body abilities. Why one has the ability to do it and the other has not? Because he hasn't developed it yet, maybe he hasn't developed it when he was able to do it, maybe he has other problems, other interests. You develop your interests. Ok, you didn't want to learn it. You did it. Did you learn english as I did? I didn't want it. I had to adapt, because of my interests. lol
We all have the ability to do it. We all have been born with that potential. I didn't develop it. I don't know if I will. I don't know if I'm too old to develop it. I'm probably not too old, but even if I can't do it, I have the potential. That is in me. I would be interested in developing it, in fact. I do not mean you're not a special person. That ability is fantastic. But if you are far better than us, that is ridiculous. And about some tone being perfect, the fact is that you make reality. Reality doesn't exist if you don't exist. What you think is perfect has ridiculously been put into your mind when you were a child. I'm not saying that you are ridiculous. Imagine that every sound there is had a different name. I don't know much about it, but I don't need to know much about it to tell you exactly what I mean. If there was no C, Cm, D, Dm, and all that kind of notes, and instead of it there was a different name for each of them, like all of the frequencies of sounds in the spectre had a name. Which ones would be the perfect ones? None. They'd all have it's frequency, and it's name. There would be no perfection. Nature stands for no perfection. Perfection is men-made. Reality is men-made. Philosophy, psychology.

Goodbye for now,
      OceanSoul.

[prometheus]

Wow, since you started about psychic abilities and mentioned darwinism. How do they fit in with Darwinism?

I mean, how would they develop if most people don't 'awaken' them automatically?

[leucippus]

you're not disqualified, but you certainly dont have perfect pitch. otherwise you'd be able to name the note. i thought that was the most basic definition ?

Well, that's all I've been saying all along! 

Franzliszt is the one who wants to make it out to be so much more than that. Not me!

[elevateme]

!!!it was him, he started it!!! get a life

[elevateme]

oh, and by the way, lucid dreaming is mint. learn it

[leucippus]

Anyway, having read your past postsm, I suspect you have had no musical training on a high level, so how can you argue a point with me? We are from totally different environments. I'm surrounded by musicians all day everyday, and have been for years, so I think matters like perfect pitch are well understood to me in the practical sense, perheaps not the theoretical.

Exactly!

I'm trying to answer the pragmatic quesiton that the author of the thread asked.

You are attempting to argue some lofty ideals that a specific society of people would like to associate with the term "perfect pitch"

Like I said before.  Get a reality check.  That wasn't the original intent of the question.

The question is, "Can people learn to identify absolute pitches?"

The answer is yes, violinists and many other musicians learn to do this all the time!

It's a pragmatic question?  Not a philosophical one about what some particular society would like "perfect pitch" to mean.

[pianowolfi]

I think the ultimate test if you have perfect pitch (inborn type): listen to an a capella choir rehearsal. Often in these rehearsals the whole choir will sink in pitch and the conductor needs to compare either with a piano or with a tuning fork to bring them back to the original pitch. If you are able to notice the sinking without needing to consult a piano or tuning fork you might have perfect pitch. People with perfect pitch react to a sinking choir with flurry. They are also about to screem loudly that the choir was sinking because to them it sounds intuitively wrong. Of course a good choir conductor will more or less be able to hear that without perfect pitch out of his trained ear and experience. But the learned "perfect pitch" lacks of intuitiveness and directness.

[Floristan]

My sister has perfect pitch; I don't.  She can name tones.  She can put tone names to things like car engines (if the engine is producing multiple tones, she'll name them all).  She'll say stuff like, "The sound of that car's tire is an Eb, but its a little flat."  She's never not been able to do this.  Sure, she had to learn the names of the notes, but once she did, there was nothing more to learn.  She does it instantly, without thinking.  She can hear an a capella choir going flat and it bugs the heck out of her.  In her case, her perfect pitch allows her to play by ear easily.  She learns music by listening to recordings rather than reading the music.  Her sight reading is atrocious.  She has an instinctive understanding of keys, chords, progressions, etc.  Stuff the rest of us learn in a theory class.  A lot of it just comes to her, and she has learned to name things after the fact.  Having known my sister all my life I've got to say, it's not learned; it's inborn.

As to that pitch test with the 26 tunes -- that's not about perfect pitch.  That's about tone memory.  A lot of us have perfect tone memory.  I do.  I got all 26 right.  But I couldn't tell you the name of the pitches played, just which ones were wrong.  Entirely different ability.

[pianowolfi]

My sister has perfect pitch; I don't.  She can name tones.  She can put tone names to things like car engines (if the engine is producing multiple tones, she'll name them all).  She'll say stuff like, "The sound of that car's tire is an Eb, but its a little flat."  She's never not been able to do this.  Sure, she had to learn the names of the notes, but once she did, there was nothing more to learn.  She does it instantly, without thinking.  She can hear an a capella choir going flat and it bugs the heck out of her.  In her case, her perfect pitch allows her to play by ear easily.  She learns music by listening to recordings rather than reading the music.  Her sight reading is atrocious.  She has an instinctive understanding of keys, chords, progressions, etc.  Stuff the rest of us learn in a theory class.  A lot of it just comes to her, and she has learned to name things after the fact.  Having known my sister all my life I've got to say, it's not learned; it's inborn.

As to that pitch test with the 26 tunes -- that's not about perfect pitch.  That's about tone memory.  A lot of us have perfect tone memory.  I do.  I got all 26 right.  But I couldn't tell you the name of the pitches played, just which ones were wrong.  Entirely different ability.

Exactly.

[kilini]

Perfect pitch is not that wonderful. I broke 4 strings on my guitar when I tuned it by ear, because I didn't realize the tones were supposed to be an octave below the ones I was used to hearing i.e. middle c. Moral of the story? use an electronic tuner when you tune a guitar for the first time.

[ted]

From a brief search on the web I tend to think that the issue is extremely complicated and may even be related to brain structure. Some experts say that both brain structure and exposure to certain sounds in childhood are necessary.

However, from my experience over the years, it is a discrete ability in the sense that there don't appear to be degrees of it. With many musical abilities, there exists a continuous range of perception but absolute pitch is either there or not there. To take an analogy it's rather like the people who can perform stupendous calculations mentally. I knew one or two, and they seem to have had much the same exposure and practice as the rest of us, yet there exists a quantum difference in the way their brains operate in one particular aspect. Moreover, however hard they have tried to communicate how they do it, they cannot.

But we don't think it surprising when somebody can stretch a thirteenth do we ? We just accept that some can and some can't. The only difference is that one property is mental and one physical, which is more obvious.

So despite having no evidence whatsoever, I would use inductive reasoning from the fact that I have never seen anybody acquire absolute pitch in adulthood, to think that it is a discrete ability, like prodigious calculation and handspan, which is either present or absent. I cannot argue logically that this is so, but the absence of large numbers (or even small numbers) of counter-examples lead me to strongly believe it is.

As to the personal, psychological view, I do not possess even ordinary musical ability, never mind the more special abilities.  In practical terms I am probably a big musical dud. Fat lot of good worrying about what other people can do, I just get on and enjoy whatever I am capable of.

 
  

[prometheus]

Kilini, that's just stupid


Absolute pitch is not discrete. There are many levels. Some people only have it for one instrument, a limited octave, only single notes, only musical notes, etc.

[ted]

Prometheus:

Okay, I'll take your word for that. I probably haven't met sufficiently many musicans to comment knowledgeably.

[prometheus]

Yes, but before franzliszt2 comes, he uses the word 'perfect pitch', which is not an accurate term. He talks about 'perfect absolute pitch'.