mcgurk effect applied to performance - appearance affects perceived sound?

[swagmaster420x]

So if you're performing your body language could significantly affect the perceived sound? If this is true, then should the performer also give a kinesthetic as well as auditory performance because the former affects how the latter perceived?

[faulty_damper]

This has been known in other cultures' performing arts for millennia and is currently being studied in the perceptions of western classical music performance.  There have been a couple of threads on that recent research, findings that show that the visual system takes precedence over auditory stimuli.  In other words, you are more convinced by a performance based on what you see, not what you hear.  If a pianist is showing passion, even if it sounds like sh*t, you'll believe what you see and not what you hear.

[awesom_o]

This is a very interesting question!

It can be looked at in a variety of ways, however, and I think it usually is.

Some people like to see the performer's facial expression reflect the music in some way, or they like to see the face of the performer 'interacting' with the music as it is being performed.

Other people find this type of engagement distracting, and would prefer to see a performer who does not do these types of things.

[Bob]

I think what you think of the performer effect the performance too to some extent.

[faulty_damper]

I think what you think of the performer effect the performance too to some extent.

This has been shown to be true in experiments, e.g. the child perception experiment where the interacting adult is told the child is either a) smart, or b) slow.  If the adult is told the child is smart, they speak much more intelligently toward the child.  If the adult is told the child is slow, they speak slower and with limited language.  In both cases, it's the same child but because of the idea of what to expect, they changed their behavior accordingly.  This phenomenon has been very well documented and plays a huge role in gender and racial stereotypes because people change their behaviors based on these assumptions.  So, if you hear Horowitz was a really great pianist, you go to one of his concerts and believe the hype, even though the performance was subpart by objective standards.  Thus, his elite status is overridden not by one's perceptions, but by the group norm for that perception.  E.g. the Asch experiments.

[dima_76557]

So if you're performing your body language could significantly affect the perceived sound? If this is true, then should the performer also give a kinesthetic as well as auditory performance because the former affects how the latter perceived?

Yes. As one might expect, beautiful choreography of the movements very much ENHANCES an otherwise beautiful performance. Contrary to what some pseudo-scientists want us to believe, though, beautiful choreography without a corresponding sound image will NEVER fool an experienced/trained audience unless the respondents are put in an extremely unnatural testing environment. Period.

[Bob]

And on the flipside -- Which version do you want to hear ("should" you hear) in music? What actually is or what should/could be? 


I heard someone I was expecting to be awesome (and they were) who's sound kept playing when they took their hands off the instrument.  Jaw dropping.  I knew it was impossible, but I also knew I'd heard it.  It was just the way the sound rang in that room.  It looked like they'd just done the impossible though.

[awesom_o]

I heard someone I was expecting to be awesome (and they were) who's sound kept playing when they took their hands off the instrument.  Jaw dropping.  I knew it was impossible, but I also knew I'd heard it.  It was just the way the sound rang in that room.  It looked like they'd just done the impossible though.

Maybe you just saw a pianist lip-synching!

[lelle]

And on the flipside -- Which version do you want to hear ("should" you hear) in music? What actually is or what should/could be? 


I heard someone I was expecting to be awesome (and they were) who's sound kept playing when they took their hands off the instrument.  Jaw dropping.  I knew it was impossible, but I also knew I'd heard it.  It was just the way the sound rang in that room.  It looked like they'd just done the impossible though.

Did he do it like this guy "playing" keyboard?

[Bob]

It was a wind instrument.  I saw the performer clearly take a breath, but I kept hearing the sound.  Resonance, reverb, ringing sound.  Solo, onstage.  No one else to help or accidentally hear.  There was an instant where my mind was going, "I know this guy's good, but that's impossible.... Magic?  Devil?... Was it from a speaker? No, definitely not. Oh, reverb...." 

Actually it could have been something with circular breathing too.  I know he can do that.  That would be a trick to offset the appearance of a breath, or only appear to breath from one side of the mouth to freak out the audience if they can only see one side. 

Stuff like that -- If you do a magic trick of some kind, you lull the audience into a different mindset.

[ashtonm]

Not something purists would like to admit, but it's true and significant.

The importance is accepted/evident when a vocalist is stiff as a board - but dogmatically disregarded in the piano domain.

From an anthropology standpoint, this phenomena has been known for awhile now.

Ashton

[hardy_practice]

The Mcgurk effect that most affects pianists is the illusion of pushing the key straight down.   Anatomically it's at an angle - how could it be otherwise?  It's worth being sensitive to the actual movement.