Listening to music can be harmful for eartraining

[countrymath]

I've been reading and searching a lot about perfect pitch, and I have some doubts about it.

I'm sure that it is a learnable skill. Most people that has perfect pitch learned it when still young...because when we are young, we don't "know" anything. I mean, the first things we learn get stuck on our mind in a way that we can't forget. I think it works the same with Perfect pitch. When we are young and learn pieces paying atention to the sounds, we automatically memorize these notes and sounds, cause our mind is fresh and its easy to learn anything. I started playing saxophone at the age of 8, but i didn't like it too much, and I practiced it only 1 day at week. I stoped playing it when i was 12. I'm 18 now and i still have my saxophone. Some months ago, I took it to do a clean and I discovered that I still know how to play it, and i printed some sheet to practice it again. Then, I stoped after 2 months of practice. Today, i took it again and tried to play something. Incredibly, I forgot how to play the songs that I learned some months ago, but I still can play what I played 10 years ago.

What I'm trying to say, is that if we keep listening to notes without knowing their names, we will never develop perfect pitch. I read on a website that to acquire PP, we need to learn the pitches of every sound we hear daily, like door ring, cellhphone ring, cat meows (mine's in Ab  ), microwave ring, etc...

I think that we need to reamake our hearing regime...and only hear the music we are learning, or will learn...

[stevebob]

What I'm trying to say, is that if we keep listening to notes without knowing their names, we will never develop perfect pitch.

I'm not aware of any conclusive evidence that absolute pitch can be learned, and I've never encountered persuasive evidence that it would be valuable in any event.  Marketers have tried to turn absolute pitch into a must-have product because money can be made by selling training methods and courses based on specious claims.

It seems comparable to wishing to "develop" different eye color or handedness as a solution to a nonexistent problem.

[ongaku_oniko]

I respectfully disagree.

I don't know if you have perfect pitch or not, but those who have perfect pitch will never understand those who don't, and vise versa, unless we have someone who has learned perfect pitch, you can't say it doesn't have any use.

For me, perfect pitch isn't about playing the music better. For me, the biggest lure that perfect pitch has, the reason I want it so much isn't that I think it'll somehow help me play more musically;

It's that I feel that there is something "missing" without perfect pitch.

Think about a person who is colorblind. Can he survive in the world? Sure. But the fact is, by not being able to see colors, you really are missing out on so much of the world's beauty. You can't appreciate beautiful scenery like a person who isn't color blind.

Similarly, it is my belief that people with perfect pitch inherently "see" something different in music than people who don't.

I want perfect pitch because I want to be able to enjoy music fully for what it is, not just a part of it.

Just because perfect pitch doesn't help people play music better, doesn't mean it isn't useful

[stevebob]

My point was that people tend to want things they don't (or can't) have, even to the point of imputing unknown or imagined benefits to those things.

The ultimate marketer's dream must be a package that combines perfect pitch (a much better term than that dull "absolute" pitch, by the way, because nothing, literally nothing, beats perfection!) with synesthesia.  Hey, if you aren't smelling and tasting what you see and hear, you're just not living life to the fullest. 

[ongaku_oniko]

It may not be real, but to me, it certainly makes sense, when I compare it to seeing colour.
And I'm not buying anything to try to train perfect pitch, so it's not like I've fallen under marketer's spell.

In fact, I don't even bother to listen to what they think the benefits are, as well as whether their methods will work or not.

I just want to develop perfect pitch if possible, my own way.

[ted]

Purely personally, I would be more worried about ear training interfering with my listening experience. The last thing I want to do is listen to everything analytically. Somebody lent me one of those ear training programs - mostly melody and chord recognition and so on - and I used it every day for many weeks. What happened was that I became very good at the program but the exercise had not the slightest relevance to my playing, improvisation, composition or listening.

[maykapar1]

I want perfect pitch because I want to be able to enjoy music fully for what it is, not just a part of it.

How exactly does having perfect pitch allow one to be able to enjoy music more fully?  I don't have perfect pitch, but I feel that I would not derive any more enjoyment by being able to name the notes being played as I was listening to a piece of music.  I certainly don't feel that I am being short-changed in my listening experience by not having perfect pitch.  Does the music not sound the same whether you have perfect pitch or not?     

Also, I have read that perfect pitch declines as one gets older, due to age-related changes in the structure of the inner ear.  My teacher has confirmed that this is true for her.

[invictious]

I respectfully disagree.

I don't know if you have perfect pitch or not, but those who have perfect pitch will never understand those who don't, and vise versa, unless we have someone who has learned perfect pitch, you can't say it doesn't have any use.

For me, perfect pitch isn't about playing the music better. For me, the biggest lure that perfect pitch has, the reason I want it so much isn't that I think it'll somehow help me play more musically;

It's that I feel that there is something "missing" without perfect pitch.

Think about a person who is colorblind. Can he survive in the world? Sure. But the fact is, by not being able to see colors, you really are missing out on so much of the world's beauty. You can't appreciate beautiful scenery like a person who isn't color blind.

Similarly, it is my belief that people with perfect pitch inherently "see" something different in music than people who don't.

I want perfect pitch because I want to be able to enjoy music fully for what it is, not just a part of it.

Just because perfect pitch doesn't help people play music better, doesn't mean it isn't useful

I agree with maykapar1. I do not believe that having perfect pitch will allow one to "enjoy music fully." I know plenty of people who do not have perfect pitch, and some of them even enjoy the music more than I do. In fact, some of them are even more detailed listeners than I, catching out minute details. I think that having perfect pitch, if anything, reduces the enjoyment of music, for the fact that you would be wincing at every note that is even just slightly off tune.

So what if you can hear that the composer resolves the suspended dissonance by means of an arpeggiation of the tonic triad towards the end of the exposition in the overture? Or the fact that during the recapitulation, the chromatic second theme of the first subject group starts in the relative major and modulates through G minor? So?

As I gather from your forum posts about you wanting to develop perfect pitch, I think there are foundational problems in you noting that a person with perfect pitch will never understand those who do not have perfect pitch. I do say this respectfully, and I do not intend to insinuate any elitism, but you do not have perfect pitch. It seems that it is not suitable for you to make that comment.

I am sure one does not need perfect pitch to appreciate Beethoven's genius in his Ninth Symphony. If you follow the conductor's score while listening to it, it provides for a magical experience. Of course, I am also of opinion that one does not need perfect pitch to even enjoy music at all. I know people with perfect pitch that think Prokofiev's Toccata Op.11 is just a bunch of random notes, and all they do is complain about how some of the instruments are off tune, even just by the slightest. On the other hand, I know people who are next to tone deaf and yet they still enjoy Stravinsky's Firebird Ballet very much.

In short, I do not think that there is any correlation between having perfect pitch and enjoying music fully for what it is.

[countrymath]

And what about the topic's title? Anyone agree?

[stevebob]

And what about the topic's title? Anyone agree?

You're using the term "eartraining" as synonymous with the hypothetical cultivation of absolute pitch.  I don't believe such a goal is achievable, so I would disagree that "listen[ing] to music is harmful" for any other one.

[countrymath]

You're using the term "eartraining" as synonymous with the hypothetical cultivation of absolute pitch.  I don't believe such a goal is achievable, so I would disagree that "listen[ing] to music is harmful" for any other one.

Thanks for the correction

[ongaku_oniko]

I agree with maykapar1. I do not believe that having perfect pitch will allow one to "enjoy music fully." I know plenty of people who do not have perfect pitch, and some of them even enjoy the music more than I do. In fact, some of them are even more detailed listeners than I, catching out minute details. I think that having perfect pitch, if anything, reduces the enjoyment of music, for the fact that you would be wincing at every note that is even just slightly off tune.

So what if you can hear that the composer resolves the suspended dissonance by means of an arpeggiation of the tonic triad towards the end of the exposition in the overture? Or the fact that during the recapitulation, the chromatic second theme of the first subject group starts in the relative major and modulates through G minor? So?

As I gather from your forum posts about you wanting to develop perfect pitch, I think there are foundational problems in you noting that a person with perfect pitch will never understand those who do not have perfect pitch. I do say this respectfully, and I do not intend to insinuate any elitism, but you do not have perfect pitch. It seems that it is not suitable for you to make that comment.

I am sure one does not need perfect pitch to appreciate Beethoven's genius in his Ninth Symphony. If you follow the conductor's score while listening to it, it provides for a magical experience. Of course, I am also of opinion that one does not need perfect pitch to even enjoy music at all. I know people with perfect pitch that think Prokofiev's Toccata Op.11 is just a bunch of random notes, and all they do is complain about how some of the instruments are off tune, even just by the slightest. On the other hand, I know people who are next to tone deaf and yet they still enjoy Stravinsky's Firebird Ballet very much.

In short, I do not think that there is any correlation between having perfect pitch and enjoying music fully for what it is.

You don't need to hide your attacks, if you want to attack me, go ahead.

paragraph 1:

Logical fallacy. Just because people enjoy music more than you do doesn't mean they can't enjoy it more with perfect pitch. A color blind person might notice details in a painting that I didn't, but that doesn't mean they aren't missing out because they can't see colors. They would appreciate the art even more if they wre not colorblind.

Paragraph 2:
So what if someone has 1,000,000,000USD, a really hot wife and amazing children? So?

Paragraph 3:
Attack me all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that your argument is flawed. I don't need to have perfect pitch to know this; a person born rich will never understand the life of a person who was born poor. They may be able to sympathize and know that it wa a harsh life, but they will never truly understand it, just as a poor person cannot understand a rich person.  Unless a person learned perfect pitch, those who have perfect pitch necessarily does not know what people without perfect pitch hear.

Paragraph 4:
The fallacy of this is addressed in the beginning; just because they enjoy it doesn' tmean they can't enjoy it more with perfect pitch.

In short, you've presented nothing but logical fallacies and thinly veiled attacks.

[invictious]

You are taking this too personally. I was merely attacking the arguments you made, and make an argument ad hominem, with the exception of the fact that  ith due respect, you do not have perfect pitch. You are basing all your arguments on assumptions that perfect pitch is some magical ability that will make one a better musician.

You are misconstruing my sentences. I said that there is no correlation between enjoyment of music and perfect pitch. Besides,you are using the 'oh you cannot prove that it does not exist' argument, especially as you say "Just because people enjoy music more than you do doesn't mean they can't enjoy it more with perfect pitch." Just because people enjoy music more than I does not mean many things. Just because one person is blind does not mean he cannot appreciate a sculpture. Just because a person cannot speak English does not mean he cannot sing beautifully.

If you are so good at logical fallacies, then you should realise that arguing by analogy, especially comparing not having perfect pitch to being colour blind, has fundamental differences.

My point in the second paragraph is that being able to hear the details in the music and the chordal relationships or whatever you think a person hears in a piece of music with perfect pitch does not necessarily allow one to enjoy "music to the fullest."

I think you are also confusing the difference between 'knowing' and 'believing'. Once again, being a rich person is different from having perfect pitch, or from your analogy, being colour blind.

If you are personally offended because I came across as patronising you for not having perfect pitch, then I apologise. I was merely making the statement that having perfect pitch does not really mean much. I merely made the statement that because you do not have perfect pitch, then you should not be the one making the statement about what perfect pitch allows you to do. The point is, you do not know what it is like to have perfect pitch, so the arguments about "Just because people enjoy music more than you do doesn't mean they can't enjoy it more with perfect pitch" remains a speculation. As I tell you, perfect pitch, if anything, reduces the enjoyment of music.

[ongaku_oniko]

Similarly, it is my belief that people with perfect pitch inherently "see" something different in music than people who don't.

Get that into your head. You're arguing that I can't prove that perfect pitch will bring enjoyment to listening to music; I know this. I never pretended that I could.

And I went out of my way to say that even if perfect pitch doesn't help improve your ability to play music

You are basing all your arguments on assumptions that perfect pitch is some magical ability that will make one a better musician.

Yet I get this. Can you please reread what I wrote? I'd argue against the rest of your "argument", except I don't want to waste my time doing that, because you clearly did not understand what I was trying to say.

Let my attempt to explain what I'm trying to say more clearly:

1. People who have perfect pitch do not know what people who don't have hear, just as people who don't have perfect pitch do not know what people who do hear; it's common sense.

2. I BELIEVE that people who have perfect pitch hears music differently; I could be wrong, but this is my belief.

3. Thus, being the curious person that I am, I want to have perfect pitch to be able to understand what people with perfect pitch hear, and how they can identify pitches.

EDIT:

In essense, what I'm really trying to say is

The point is, you do not know what it is like to have perfect pitch, so the arguments about "Just because people enjoy music more than you do doesn't mean they can't enjoy it more with perfect pitch" remains a speculation. As I tell you, perfect pitch, if anything, reduces the enjoyment of music.

This is exactly where you're wrong. While that perfect pitch might change one's perspective on music is a speculation, that perfect pitch does not is as much of a speculation. You're assuming that because you have perfect pitch, you know what it's like to be without perfect pitch; you're assuming that it doesn't change your perspective on music; but that's an assumption. It is not I who is confusing beliefs with facts; it is you.

[nanabush]

It's overrated!

When doing sight singing, if it's written in Bb major, it's wired in my brain in that key: if the range is too high, it's virtually impossible for me to sing it down a major third or whatever.  As soon as there's a jump of a 6th or 7th, I kind of auto correct it to the note I see written down.

I definitely didn't 'learn' perfect pitch like some people say.  I remember when I was really young (7 or , if I heard a piece in G# minor or Eb minor, it sounded exotic because it wasn't a key I had ever played anything in before.  At the time, I didn't know what 'key signatures' were, and had probably just started music, but I distinctly remember hearing Chopin's F# major Nocturne and replaying the first 30 seconds because it sounded different than the "happy C major" type stuff we'd listen to and sing in early elementary school.  Really strange; I still kind of get butterflies when a piece modulates into a key with lots of sharps and flats.

On the bright side, dictation is a breeze 

Does anyone else with perfect pitch have a preference for certain keys?  I would honestly not be satisfied hearing Chopin's F# major Nocturne in C major.

Also, people who say 'you can learn perfect pitch' are the people who have the 30 dollar book that they wrote on how to learn it.

[omar_roy]

I respectfully disagree.

I don't know if you have perfect pitch or not, but those who have perfect pitch will never understand those who don't, and vise versa, unless we have someone who has learned perfect pitch, you can't say it doesn't have any use.

For me, perfect pitch isn't about playing the music better. For me, the biggest lure that perfect pitch has, the reason I want it so much isn't that I think it'll somehow help me play more musically;

It's that I feel that there is something "missing" without perfect pitch.

Think about a person who is colorblind. Can he survive in the world? Sure. But the fact is, by not being able to see colors, you really are missing out on so much of the world's beauty. You can't appreciate beautiful scenery like a person who isn't color blind.

Similarly, it is my belief that people with perfect pitch inherently "see" something different in music than people who don't.

I want perfect pitch because I want to be able to enjoy music fully for what it is, not just a part of it.

Just because perfect pitch doesn't help people play music better, doesn't mean it isn't useful

This has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.

I've met some pretty terrible musicians who have perfect pitch and some amazing musicians who don't.  Perfect pitch doesn't give you any sort of magical ability to be a better musician.  Look at Sviatoslav Richter.  If you watch the documentary on him "The Enigma," you'll see that his perfect pitch actually became a detriment to him towards the end of his career, because it had "shifted" leading to his habit of performing with the score.

Martha Argerich doesn't have perfect pitch, and she is, undoubtedly, one of the finest pianists alive.

[ongaku_oniko]

This has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.

I've met some pretty terrible musicians who have perfect pitch and some amazing musicians who don't.  Perfect pitch doesn't give you any sort of magical ability to be a better musician.  Look at Sviatoslav Richter.  If you watch the documentary on him "The Enigma," you'll see that his perfect pitch actually became a detriment to him towards the end of his career, because it had "shifted" leading to his habit of performing with the score.

Martha Argerich doesn't have perfect pitch, and she is, undoubtedly, one of the finest pianists alive.

This has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum. After I've explained again and again that I am not trying to say that people with perfect pitch are somehow better musicians, idiots still try to interpret it that way. Now stop trolling.

[stevebob]

Nobody is an idiot here.

You've explained again and again that you wish you had an endowment that you weren't born with.  It's a common concern, but it seems more sensible to accept with equanimity the hand we're dealt in life.

A tenet of Buddhism is that desire is the root of suffering.  Or consider the "serenity prayer," which seems to have the same message.

[sashaco]

Ongaku,  What suggests to you that perfect pitch would be like seeing colour?  We have no way to know whether all people see all colours the same way- we do know that we can differentiate between shades on the spectrum.  In music it's the difference between the pitches that matters, not absolute values.  Different orchestras and different eras have set pitches at different frequencies.  Have you spoken to someone with perfect pitch who finds a vast difference in meaning to a piece played with an A 447 vs an A 445?   Certainly pieces played or sung a third or fourth away from the original key will have a somewhat different character, but you don't need absolute pitch to appreciate this.

I have to agree with those who suggest you're yearning for a phantasm.

Cheers, Sasha

[orangesodaking]

I don't feel that listening to music is harmful for eartraining. I don't have absolute pitch, but my pitch/interval/harmonic recognition is good enough to fool most people. Listening to music hasn't messed with my recognition abilities so far! I often times even try to figure out chord progressions, theory, voice leading, and other theory/composition techniques used throughout the music, just for fun.

As to the original poster, I recommend studying music theory. I don't know your age, but what helps me is that I am a music major college student currently in theory classes (aural skills is also built into theory).

If you want to attain absolute pitch; I don't know if that is even attainable, and it doesn't matter to me, because I'm doing well enough as it is. I am not convinced that absolute pitch gives one any advantage that matters over one that doesn't. The most I can think of at the moment as that you don't have to carry around a tuning fork in your pocket.

[countrymath]

I don't feel that listening to music is harmful for eartraining. I don't have absolute pitch, but my pitch/interval/harmonic recognition is good enough to fool most people. Listening to music hasn't messed with my recognition abilities so far! I often times even try to figure out chord progressions, theory, voice leading, and other theory/composition techniques used throughout the music, just for fun.

As to the original poster, I recommend studying music theory. I don't know your age, but what helps me is that I am a music major college student currently in theory classes (aural skills is also built into theory).

If you want to attain absolute pitch; I don't know if that is even attainable, and it doesn't matter to me, because I'm doing well enough as it is. I am not convinced that absolute pitch gives one any advantage that matters over one that doesn't. The most I can think of at the moment as that you don't have to carry around a tuning fork in your pocket.

Thanks. I'm studing a lot of harmony and composition. Im 18 =p

Here in Brazil it's difficult to find a good music college. Prices are high and they're all on the big cities

[ongaku_oniko]

Look, I don't see why you people are so close-minded.

Sure, there is no evidence that perfect pitch does anything, so what? There's no evidence that it doesn't, either. I still stand, that people with perfect pitch don't understand people who never had pefect pitch, as such, it is quite possible that perfect pitch brings in something different to music FOR THE LISTENER (NOTE: I AM SAYING NOTHING ABOUT THE ABILITY TO PLAY MUSIC!!!!!!!!!!!).

Yes, we don't know if people see the same colors, but that's a philosophical thing that won't get us anywhere. Perfect pitch isn't about calling this note an A and that note a B; it about being able to recognize the differences in sound; after all, those labels we put on pitches are just that; labels. If I see red, I am able to recognize that it is red. When I hear a sound though, I can't recognize what sound it is.

I am led to believe that there is a difference, but as I've said, I know there's a high possibility that there isn't one. So what?

I'm not wasting my life and money trying to obtain perfect pitch; in fact, I haven't taken any steps to try to obtain perfect pitch, except maybe play the C major scale once in a while. What's wrong with that? There's nothing wrog with having a goal in life... I'm not lusting after it and it's not like I'm doing everything I can to tr to get it; if perfect pitch was like color blindness, then obviously it would be impossible to learn it.

I just don't see why you people have to be so stubborn in believeing otherwise; if you want to believe that perfect pitch does nothing useful, go ahead, don't attack my beliefs.

[stevebob]

Look, I don't see why you people are so close-minded.

[...]

I just don't see why you people have to be so stubborn in believeing otherwise; if you want to believe that perfect pitch does nothing useful, go ahead, don't attack my beliefs.

I think you should question the value and purpose of your own participation in this forum.  It can't be fun to feel like you're always under "attack" or to have to endure what you perceive as the "logical fallacies" of other members.

I believe most people are here to learn, to teach and to share.  In some forums, there's even a shared sense of community and camaraderie.  Of course, I would never claim that such a positive environment exists here; it really couldn't unless congeniality and collegiality were valued more than combat and confrontation.

Taking every difference of opinion as a personal slight isn't an effective strategy for being part of a conversation.  The way things are going in your brief yet conspicuous time here, I predict that you'll eventually be completely ignored.

If you think that this, too, is an "attack," or patronizing, or ad hominem, or you wish to exploit the "logical fallacies" in my statements (as is your wont), all I can do is assure you that I'm trying to be constructive and offer help; there is plenty more that could be said if I were unconcerned with restraint or politeness.

[landru]

I have no dog in this fight, as I don't have perfect or relative pitch in any form. But I do dabble in improvisation and one of the tenets of learning to improvise is listening and analyzing other improvisations. Being able to instantly hear what key the piece is in, and the interval relationships going on in the improvisation that are in the key or in tension with the key would be a tremendous help in coming up with better improvisations.

I have to believe that Gabriela Montero has perfect pitch to come up with the amazing stuff she does.

[ongaku_oniko]

I think you should question the value and purpose of your own participation in this forum.  It can't be fun to feel like you're always under "attack" or to have to endure what you perceive as the "logical fallacies" of other members.

I believe most people are here to learn, to teach and to share.  In some forums, there's even a shared sense of community and camaraderie.  Of course, I would never claim that such a positive environment exists here; it really couldn't unless congeniality and collegiality were valued more than combat and confrontation.

Taking every difference of opinion as a personal slight isn't an effective strategy for being part of a conversation.  The way things are going in your brief yet conspicuous time here, I predict that you'll eventually be completely ignored.

If you think that this, too, is an "attack," or patronizing, or ad hominem, or you wish to exploit the "logical fallacies" in my statements (as is your wont), all I can do is assure you that I'm trying to be constructive and offer help; there is plenty more that could be said if I were unconcerned with restraint or politeness.

Most certainly I can understand that people have different opinions; I have nothing against that, although I do admit I have a strong urge to try to change their opinions;

And I must say what you said here is probably correct, and that I have much to improve in this regard; I am no good at interacting with people.

That said, I am sure that they could've presented their beliefs without

Also, people who say 'you can learn perfect pitch' are the people who have the 30 dollar book that they wrote on how to learn it.

This has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.

I have to agree with those who suggest you're yearning for a phantasm.

I rarely (at least try not to) attack other beliefs, in that I never directly say "You are wrong". If you read my arguments, I think most of the time I'm always in the defensive, trying to defend my own beliefs, yet others simply just say "you are wrong", "you're just fantasizing for something you don't have", it's frustrating. If they offer true evidence that perfect pitch has no benefit, then I have to thank them. But simply saying that all people who thinks learning perfect pitch is possible are people who sell stuff is, I think not a very nice thing to say. Neither are the other comments, ESPECIALLY when omar's comment wasn't even arguing against my point; in the very post he quoted, I mentioned that I wasn't talking about better musicianship.

[kelly_kelly]

Look, I don't see why you people are so close-minded.

Sure, there is no evidence that perfect pitch does anything, so what? There's no evidence that it doesn't, either. I still stand, that people with perfect pitch don't understand people who never had pefect pitch, as such, it is quite possible that perfect pitch brings in something different to music FOR THE LISTENER (NOTE: I AM SAYING NOTHING ABOUT THE ABILITY TO PLAY MUSIC!!!!!!!!!!!).

Yes, we don't know if people see the same colors, but that's a philosophical thing that won't get us anywhere. Perfect pitch isn't about calling this note an A and that note a B; it about being able to recognize the differences in sound; after all, those labels we put on pitches are just that; labels. If I see red, I am able to recognize that it is red. When I hear a sound though, I can't recognize what sound it is.

I am led to believe that there is a difference, but as I've said, I know there's a high possibility that there isn't one. So what?

I'm not wasting my life and money trying to obtain perfect pitch; in fact, I haven't taken any steps to try to obtain perfect pitch, except maybe play the C major scale once in a while. What's wrong with that? There's nothing wrog with having a goal in life... I'm not lusting after it and it's not like I'm doing everything I can to tr to get it; if perfect pitch was like color blindness, then obviously it would be impossible to learn it.

I just don't see why you people have to be so stubborn in believeing otherwise; if you want to believe that perfect pitch does nothing useful, go ahead, don't attack my beliefs.

I don't think your analogy makes sense. When you listen to music, you can hear the difference between pitches, correct? All people with perfect pitch have over you is the ability to name them. A color-blind person cannot distinguish between colors - it's not that they can't name them, but that different colors look the same. Color blindness in sight is like being tone deaf (i.e. not being able to recognize differences in pitch) in hearing. It's much worse than having only relative pitch rather than perfect pitch.

[ongaku_oniko]

You could be right. I don't know much about color blindedness, but I always assumed that people who are colourblind can still see the differences between colors, but all they see is shades of black and white and gray.

I thought this because if they couldn't see the differences between colors, then how can they tell apart an object from another?

But possibly I'm wrong. I was also thinking that when you see red, you don't need a reference color; you know it's red. Just as when you hear an A, you don't need a reference note; you know it's an A if you have perfect pitch. So that's why I thought it was a good comparison; but again, I could be wrong, I never discount such a big possibility.

So I guess the pitches sound different to people with perfect pitch. Well, I have no idea, I don't have perfect pitch so I can't imagine what it's like to have it, that's why I'm curious. It could turn out that there is absolutely no benefit whatsoever, but, well, that doesn't really make me not want it.

I just don't understand why wanting perfect pitch is such a bad thing that it was to be the dumbest thing in this forum, and only promoted by people who sell stuff.

[kelly_kelly]

You could be right. I don't know much about color blindedness, but I always assumed that people who are colourblind can still see the differences between colors, but all they see is shades of black and white and gray.

I thought this because if they couldn't see the differences between colors, then how can they tell apart an object from another?

But possibly I'm wrong. I was also thinking that when you see red, you don't need a reference color; you know it's red. Just as when you hear an A, you don't need a reference note; you know it's an A if you have perfect pitch. So that's why I thought it was a good comparison; but again, I could be wrong, I never discount such a big possibility.

So I guess the pitches sound different to people with perfect pitch. Well, I have no idea, I don't have perfect pitch so I can't imagine what it's like to have it, that's why I'm curious. It could turn out that there is absolutely no benefit whatsoever, but, well, that doesn't really make me not want it.

I just don't understand why wanting perfect pitch is such a bad thing that it was to be the dumbest thing in this forum, and only promoted by people who sell stuff.

I don't really know any better than you, but my impression is that what allows color-blind people to differentiate between objects, etc. is the difference in INTENSITY of color. So they see different "shades" of grey. It seems natural to me to compare that to being able to differentiate between different intensities of sound - namely differences in volume, which tone deaf people can hear.

I think the reason that people are judging you for wanting perfect pitch is because it seems that there's significant evidence that it cannot be learned (or is very difficult to learn) and little evidence that it is actually desirable. So it seems like a potentially large drain on resources with low payoff... but at the end of the day, it's your time

[djealnla]

Those of you interested in having perfect pitch, you may want to check out something about "relative pitch", which you can acquire even at an advanced age:

https://www.perfectpitch.com/perfectrelative.htm

[uthacalthing]

The way I understand it, absolute pitch is the instant recognition of pitches, relative pitch is the instant recognition of intervals or scale degrees. In that, it would seem to me that neither is more “perfect” than the other. Is it more useful to hear at once that the sound you hear is a C#, and then count the number of half-steps to the tonic note, or that it’s the natural third (mediant) of a key which may be A or Bb (but most likely not Eb)? I’m not sure. It’s fascinating that people seem to conceptualize sound differently though.

I can understand your intellectual curiosity of knowing what absolute pitchers experience when they hear a sound. I don’t think the colour analogy is the right one though. The way I see it it's more like, a right-handed person learning to play tennis with his left hand.

[invictious]

There is difference between close-mindedness, stubbornness, and persistence on own belief.

As it has been pointed out over and over again, it is unlikely that it actually can be learned and the usefulness is limited, especially if your goal is to "enjoy music fully for what it is." I have always loved the oboe, but after trying transposing instruments and watching how quickly others without perfect pitch picked it up, I knew I would not be able to get used to seeing one note on the score and hear another note being played.

I mean of course, you were the one who said that after hearing Fur Elise transposed to A minor, you feel like that your heart "want to cry out tears" and coming to some sort of epiphany, finally "appreciating" music due to a simple transposition of a piano piece..

Then again,

idiots still try to interpret it that way. Now stop trolling.

[ongaku_oniko]

1. Okay.

2. Also okay. Just because it's unlikely though, doesn't mean we shouldn't try, right? It's unlikely I'll ever play even 1/1000th as good as Li yundi, so does that mean I should't play the piano at all? It's unlikely I'll earn even 1/10000th as much as bill gates did, does that mean I should not work at all?

I still don't see why it's such a bad thing, given that yes, I can totally understand what kelly said, but I have also explained that I'm not wasting my life over this, and I'm not even gonna spend 1 cent on it.

3. Then again, I've also explained that it was an attempt at humourous writing.

4. Notice, that the quote wasn't towards you; or anyone else in this thread, except omar.

I can understand your intellectual curiosity of knowing what absolute pitchers experience when they hear a sound. I don’t think the colour analogy is the right one though. The way I see it it's more like, a right-handed person learning to play tennis with his left hand.

Thank you. This is exactly what it is. I've said a long time ago that I'm not good at expressing myself; this is the essence of it. "The intellectual curiosity of knowing what absolute pitchers experience". It may be different, it may be the same. I want to know which it is.

Now, to the rest of what you said, I'm not sure it's like that. Learning to use both hands is not something near impossible; it's not even hard; it's simply a habit developed as you grow. My granfather can use both hands, simply because he damaged his right hand during his 40s because he worked too hard doing calligraphy work (he is a really hard worker), so instead of stopping, he switched to his left hand. His right hand eventually healed, and now he can use both.

I use the colour analogy, because of the points I've made before, and also because people with perfect pitch seem to describe it like recognizing a colour.

And furthermore, both are a form of wave; and how humans interpret the waves. There has been many studies on the correlation between sound and light; they may be less different than we think.

[nanabush]

For me, the colour analogy is kind of close - for someone who associates F major with 'red', maybe they are associating the feeling from F major with the feeling from seeing red.  That's more how it works for me.  I'd probably have a similar reaction listening to a piece in G# minor as I would seeing a painting in dark green.  I don't SEE dark green when G# is played though, but I hear this quality in that key that reminds me of a quality I might see in a dark green... lol!

For me, hearing a C and a Bb is as different as hearing a man's voice followed by a women's voice.  I will get bothered hearing anything transcribed to an 'easier' key  , like the 1st movement of the Moonlight Sonata played in d minor. <<shudder>>

[Derek]

I don't see how perfect pitch could be useful except for itself. In other words, if I hear a piece and enjoy it, and then I learn perfect pitch and hear the same piece, I will hear it and enjoy it but also say ah, there's a G# above middle C! Why on earth would that help?

Is there something "deeper" about perfect pitch that goes beyond being able to label the note you're hearing or reproduce one at will? If not, I think it is easy to see it is a conscious, mechanical skill and doesn't have much to do with enjoying or creating music.

m1469 sometimes uses the term perfect pitch about creating music, but I think she means something else, I think she means being able to follow your musical will such that your fingers do not defy you. Well, I think that's just experience, but sometimes rebellious fingers know more than we do. 

[landorrano]

The word "color-blind" is misleading, for it is not true that "color-blind" people see everything in black and white.  There are colors that they perceive normally, others not, and their general perception is not so debilitating as the word would have one think.  It is not, so to speak, black and white. 

Daltonism is the word used in certain languages.

[floydcramerfan]

Regarding the title of this thread, how could listening to music be harmful to ear training?  Country, you told me in another post that you play country piano.  If you want to do this, you need to play by ear.  If you follow the score exactly in playing country it's not going to sound cool at all.  You really need to be able to hear chord progressions and listen to it to get an idea of how they play.  If country musicians use anything written down at all, it's a chord chart, but most of the people I have played with just hear it.

I also think it would be cool to have perfect pitch.  I do have relative pitch and sometimes I can tell what key someone is playing in, but I have to think about it.  The way I do it is that I associate keys with a song that is in that key.  When I was in college, my theory 2 teacher made us memorize where A 440 was, so the way I did it was to capture a mental recording of my favorite piece of music in the world, "Last Date" by my hero Floyd Cramer.  It's in C, but the first note is an A, so therefore I can find A pretty quickly.  If you want to develop perfect pitch, maybe you should try that method.  Also, I'm not sure if it still exists, but when I was going through a phase where I wanted perfect pitch so bad I could spit, I did some googling and found this flash game where you can quiz yourself.  It will play notes and you have to click the note you think it is.  It doesn't cost anything to play it.  I did pretty good with it, but I was slow because I had to think about it.