[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [microsound] memory and melody



Hi Vadim,

i found this quotattion quite helpful:

"Neither example is intended to suggest that human song evolved directly from either songbirds or gibbons; neither of these taxa constitute our direct ancestors. Rather, such
findings suggest that human singing is not unique and that it may be biologically based, perhaps in the sense that the hominid capacity for song may have had some selective
advantage in the passing on of one's genes. This possibility aside, some workers view song as a stage in the evolution of language. Thus, Bruce Richman, writing in the
journal Contemporary Anthropology, notes that many researchers categorize human vocalization into two opposed systems, expressive sounds (e.g., sighing, crying,
laughing) and speech. Richman believes that a third type of vocalization lies between them -- singing. "Singing and speech seem very different; ... singing is more expressive
of emotions than speech." He further holds that the social functions of singing provide something that speaking does not do. "... group singing gives ... a strong, direct feeling
of social cohesion and solidarity." Finally, he proposes that singing "... served as an evolutionary transitional state between primate-like vocalizations and speech.(4)

What about human song, particularly in infants and children? The appearance and development of song in infants and children has been studied in some detail. (For very
informative broad reviews of musical development see Shuter-Dyson and Gabriel, 1981 and Hargreaves, 1986).(5) During the first year of life, song babbling is evident(6)
and recognizable spontaneous singing can be observed as early as six months of age.(7) Ries reported that spontaneous singing at seven months of age was quite
distinctive.(8) Researchers have identified a developmental sequence. Early singing consists largely of melodic-rhythmic patterns of contour (pattern of higher and lower
notes), without accuracy of pitch. Dowling reports that at approximately two years of age, songs usually consist of the repetition of a single brief melodic phrase, e.g.,
"Hoppy-hoppy run 'round the road". Complexity increases with age with the addition of more phrases. Recognition of the correct pitch may develop as early as the third year,
although singing the correct pitch is usually not present for several years.(9)

Welch has provided a good review of the development of child song, salient features of which are quoted here.(10) After babbling, in which infants often play with "...
glissandi and groups of musical pitches and phrases in a repetitive fashion ... words and fragments of song text ... become the focus of attention, followed by certain
rhythmic features and, subsequently, the pitch components." The basic learning hierarchy appears to be: "Words -> Rhythm -> Pitch" This develops further: "Pitch Contour
-> Individual Phrase Stability -> Overall Key Stability". "By the age of five to six years, young children's singing may have acquired many of the features of the significant
adult models."

That key features of adult song are present so early does not imply that songs of young childhood are miniature adult songs. Veldhuis studied the spontaneous singing of
four year olds in a free-choice activity period in preschool. She reported that the songs had very clear organizational patterns, unlike adult patterns; they generally had a
restricted range of pitch intervals but with distinct brief melodies. Veldhuis further explored the situations in which singing occurred. She found that the children's singing
was stimulated by objects, such as musical instruments, and by environmental sounds. Singing was found to often spread through "vocal contagion". Importantly, Veldhuis
noted that singing had clear social functions (e.g., communication and cooperation) at this age.(11)"
http://www.musica.uci.edu/mrn/V3I2F96.html#sing

That seems to indicate that the aiming for "pitch" comes rather lately. On the other hand, these children did not grow up in a cultural vacuum but probably responded to the music of their culture.

Dagmar

vadim sprikut wrote:

> Isn't a melody created thru elements of timbre, rhythm and amplitude?
>
> >>absolutely. but these elements can exist without melody. to re-reference the vladislav delay example (anima), it certainly has these elements but no real discernible melody. i dont have a sense that it has a hook, and i sure cant hum it.
>
> in pop music they call often call this the "hook".
>
> Repetition also helps.
>
> >>do you mean hearing the same song over and over again? if so, yeah; you hear enough of the same song repeatedly hammered into your head, youll probably retain that 'hook' element. it still begs the question of why though. i guess im more interested in the mechanism of why we retain melody moreso than the other elements. perhaps because its a gestalt phenomenon? once you break melody down into its constituent parts, it becomes difficult or impossible to retain these elements separately.
>
> v'
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site

------------------------------