perfect pitch

The problem with the color analogy is the generic terms used for color, and the fairly specific terms used for notes. Yes, the vast majority of people can recognize red or blue - but we call colors 'red' or 'blue' through a pretty large range of the spectrum.

Visible light ranges from wavelengths of about 400nm to 700nm, and we'd identify about 10% of that as 'red', and perhaps 20% as 'blue'. We might narrow things down a bit, and call colors 'fire engine red' or 'robins egg blue', but we're not really identifying anything very specific.

Contrast that with music - we hear in a range from about 20Hz to 20,000 Hz. The upper 10% of that, corresponding with 'reds', would be about a minor third... and the lower 20%, corresponding with 'blues', would be nearly eight octaves!

In other words, we have much more specific names for frequencies of sound than we do frequencies of light - and virtually everyone can identify a random sound as 'high' or 'low', just as we identify a random color as red or blue.

To put the analogy on more even terms, if you were shown a specific shade of red today, and a random shade of red tomorrow - could you tell if tomorrow's color was 'redder' or 'bluer' than today's? Probably not. And you'd need to be able to correctly identify about 93 different shades of 'blue' - from memory, without reference - for the sound/color analogy to truly hold up.

The problem with the color analogy is the generic terms used for color, and the fairly specific terms used for notes. Yes, the vast majority of people can recognize red or blue - but we call colors 'red' or 'blue' through a pretty large range of the spectrum.

The problem with all analogies is that they are, by definition, limited in their usefulness.

The colour/sound analogy was offered simply as an insight into the nature of perception regarding two radically different sensory stimuli that share the common physical attribute of wave frequency. At that level there is no problem. Take it any further, and you invite all sorts of problems - needlessly.

There is a quote about this from Budda

Comparisons and models like this should be seen as "a raft that is of use only to cross a river. As the raft is of no further use after the river is crossed, it should be discarded."

This is interesting. I normally wouldn't post two days later, but this is a great topic.

I have perfect pitch. I was born with it; my parents were musical people and I was exposed throughout my entire life. I associate notes with feelings - I remember when I used to sing the alphabet, I used to have different feelings from A to G. However, perfect pitch can be lost - really, all you are doing is making mental associations with certain pitches. Our piano in the house is a little flat, and since I'm used to hearing it so much, my pitch is a little flat as well. Furthermore, guitars are never quite in tune with themselves, so when I first started playing I really would cringe all the time. In fact, it made me pretty mad. Now, I'm used to it, but it's been quite the sacrifice.

Perfect pitch can be learned, and it can be lost.

As for the whole solo thing - I really don't think anybody really thinks in note names. I've tried; it's not natural. It's good to know what you're playing, as it really helps with theory and notation, but nah - it's like thinking in words; most people don't do it. However, I can recognize every note that's being played. I suppose it's on a subconscious level. I have to think about it to put it in notation or something, but I can automatically sing back a solo or something that I've heard (and I sound like a complete idiot doing so; try singing the solo to Aces High and see how well YOU fare! :D It's hard to capture tone nuances.) without thinking about it, and I'll know the notes.

At the moment I'm trying to refine my pitch; it used to be seriously perfect but now it's off. Basically, I have an acceptable range for a note. instead of a true pinpoint.

I dunno, I just thought I'd say something.

Edit: Thought about something else...someone mentioned relative pitch when listening to music. I realize that although i intrinsically know scales, I only really think about them when playing the guitar because guitar isn't second nature for me. I only really use relative pitch when I'm playing, but if I'm messing around with a composition in my head or on the computer, I don't have to worry about where the notes are in relation to other notes.

To put the analogy on more even terms, if you were shown a specific shade of red today, and a random shade of red tomorrow - could you tell if tomorrow's color was 'redder' or 'bluer' than today's? Probably not. And you'd need to be able to correctly identify about 93 different shades of 'blue' - from memory, without reference - for the sound/color analogy to truly hold up.You and I might not be able to, but you can safely bet there are people who can. Check with artists, decorators, fashion designers, paint makers...

There's some interesting research that says most men can only distinguish about 8 shades of red. I know I can do a lot better than that!

really, all you are doing is making mental associations with certain pitches

thanks thats what I figured.

I LOVE MY MUM! i have a small willy. it's positively miniscule.

So maybe if you take enough acid..

Perfect Pitch? That's when you throw a trombone into the rubbish bin without it hitting the sides. :lol: :lol: