1. It is well known that your ears are much fresher in the morning. Take some very high quality tracks with high quality earphones. Listen when you just wake up, a few hours after you wake up, then listen at night. You will notice more things earlier in the day.
Not sure why you quoted me other than to show I had been proven wrong. For what it's worth, I do notice that my ears are more sensitive in the morning, but there's no difference in sound or tempo, just volume. That seems pretty sensible. The change in noticeable tempo, though, is pretty oddball.
Ever see the episode from " Star Trek The Next Generation " Where the android Data is watching a tea kettle boil? In the episode ( while making an inquiry about the phrase " A watched pot never boils " ) he says " No matter how many times I watch it the time it takes to come to a boil is the same ". So Comander Riker who's happens by says " Turn off your internal chronometer. People don't have them. " Data does that and is so preoccupied with what Riker is saying that he misses the time inbetween when the pot comes to a boil. Much his chagrin. When your mind is preoccupied time seems to go faster. So it's all a matter of how focused you are.
Not sure why you quoted me other than to show I had been proven wrong. For what it's worth, I do notice that my ears are more sensitive in the morning, but there's no difference in sound or tempo, just volume. That seems pretty sensible. The change in noticeable tempo, though, is pretty oddball.
Yeah I didn't do the quoting thing properly. Anyways, ah... not to say that you are wrong, just that for some people music is a very perceptual thing. In your case, your feeling of music is fairly stable. Maybe perceptually you have a more "ordered" sense of things.
More "artistic" people observe the world very differently. You have to do that in creating many forms of art, "reinterpreting" the world.
It's a Matrix kinda thing. What do you think you know you don't know?
That's fascinating [/spock]. I'd never heard of that, and I know I've never experienced anything like that.
What surprises me is that it is so noticeable to you, as if it was objectively changing, even to the extent that you can put a percentage change on it. With most illusions of that kind, people adjust and don't notice anything. For example, when someone walks away from you, they get smaller on the retina but you adjust and don't really notice someone "getting smaller." In order to get the illusion to occur, there has to be some trick to change the context.
I'd imagine something similar happens with this - most people don't experience subjective changes in tempo because, well, obviously it's not changing, and so we don't let ourselves notice it even if we may feel it at some level. But it sounds like you are somehow able to put that aside and actually experience the change.
YES. I know totally what you mean. You see, just like vision, but more so, hearing is one of the senses that is very, very subjective. You don't realise it until, you hear different sounds at different times of the day and with different feelings. Here's a few points. I spent an intense year around 2003-2004 trying to produce dance music in the genre of "uplifting dutch trance" (no it's not a mixtape of a trip to amsterdam)... http://forums.di.fm/showthread.php?t=55556
1. It is well known that your ears are much fresher in the morning. Take some very high quality tracks with high quality earphones. Listen when you just wake up, a few hours after you wake up, then listen at night. You will notice more things earlier in the day.
I don't know about that. In fact, I'm pretty sure it depends on the person.
Quote:
2a. Music tempo is really a very abstract concept.
No, it's really not. It's expressed in BPM. However, rhythms and tempos vary substantially, which helps with expressive elements.
Quote:
That's why big symphonies have a conductor.
No, it's not. The conductor does a lot more than keep time, at least in rehearsal. And actually, large professional symphonies could easily play near the same level without the conductor.
Quote:
When learning classical piano, yeah, you have a metronome, but during performances or when impressing your family, you don't use the metronome, and somehow the human mind tries to "keep" a tempo of the notes.
You use a metronome for several reasons, not just to keep tempo. It's an amazingly productive rehearsal tool. It makes for more productive and efficient practice. And yes, you can train yourself to a degree.
Quote:
2b. A good example is the "beats per minute" a modern DJ uses. Even from vinyl to digital there's always been one main weapon in a good club DJ's arsenal: the RPM (or more relevant, the BPM[Beats Per Minute])... A song is created at a specific tempo (which can vary within a song), yet the DJ is at liberty to play it at whatever tempo he desires, within the range provided to him by his equipment. Roughly for dance music this is 120bpm to 140+bpm, with "hardcore" or "gabba" (not sure about the specifics because I'm not into these genres) running much higher, giving you the feeling like your head is going to explode. Of course, the DJ has to "tune" the BPM to the mood of the crowd. If they're pretty docile, you'd want to warm them up with some smooth but encouraging low-BPM stuff, then gradually increase it. If the crowd is already pretty jazzed you'd want to go in fairly jazzed up.
I don't know where you got this from. Has it occurred to you that dance music tends to be at these tempos, just like marches are often 120 beats per minute? Also, the DJ would need equipment allowing him to increase the speed without changing the pitch. As far as I know, that can't be done with analog equipment...at least not easily.
Quote:
3a. Same with pitch. This is why many bands, symphonies, etc. spend hours, days, preparing at a venue and before each performance. Tuning is very important. Maybe some of you do know, but I only discovered, Linkin Park plays "out of tune" to some degree a lot of the time: http://www.guitarforbeginners.com/fo...drop-d-tuning/
Sort of. Tuning can be affected by the physical environment (heat and humidity are prime factors), but it's not necessarily why many groups spend hours and days at a venue. It has more to do with getting used to the acoustics of the overall space. For classical music, it's more about balance and blend then tuning.
Quote:
3b. Some of you may know this, but do you realise that there are many "notes" between the 12 semitones? It's called tuning by cents: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cent_%28music%29) ... Many bands and producers create different "signature sound and feels" by slightly tuning their pitch lower or higher, meaning they never play exactly an A Minor, for example, it would be tuned somewhere in-between an A Minor and A Major... From a piano theory point of view, guitar-wise I'm not sure if I understand this properly yet, see point 3a above.
And many orchestras do not tune to A-440. Actually though, our Western tuning system is always mathematically out of tune...especially for keyboard instruments. [/quote]
4. Humans instinctively have some sense of the "mathematics in art". ... However this is dependent on perception, which varies from individual and even varies within an individual. For example, http://www.5cense.com/Edge_Delay.htm
5. Scientifically, it comes down to the brain/ mind. One of the important frontiers of knowledge. IMHO.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I didn't do the quoting thing properly. Anyways, ah... not to say that you are wrong, just that for some people music is a very perceptual thing. In your case, your feeling of music is fairly stable. Maybe perceptually you have a more "ordered" sense of things. ... More "artistic" people observe the world very differently. You have to do that in creating many forms of art, "reinterpreting" the world.
Artistic ability is a still quite a mystery. All this resolves is that I have a good sense of time. For what it's worth, I'm also never late.
Artistic ability is a still quite a mystery. All this resolves is that I have a good sense of time. For what it's worth, I'm also never late.
Yeah it doesn't mean your not "artistic". You are probably creative in many different ways, not in your sense of "playing" with time, perhaps.
That's why I've always admired the Bay Area. For some reason, a hella lot of people that are very left-brain-right-brain balanced. Interactive media, for example, is created a lot by left-brain-right-brain people, as opposed to, painting, which would be more right-brained.
When listening to it, there are definitely certain parts of the song where the tempo feels faster and also slower, I wonder if this relates directly to certain parts where the BPM is specifically dropped lower or pushed higher. Or is it just the sound elements which give a feel of "cooling down" and "ramping up"...?
Maybe, overall, because when I was in primary school I did the whole parents-make-you-do-classical-piano-lessions. Also I studied a bit of this - maybe it gave me an interesting sense of rhythm in my early years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatanatyam
So my sense of tempo in music is more like, yes, there are time signatures and metronomes and stuff, but tempo is something that you set as you play the piano. Adagio for example, is only a rough "metronome" range, it is open to interpretation.
"...Before the metronome, words were the only way to describe the tempo of a composition. Yet after the metronome's invention, these words continued to be used, often additionally indicating the mood of the piece, thus blurring the traditional distinction between tempo and mood indicators. For example, presto and allegro both indicate a speedy execution (presto being faster), but allegro also connotes joy (from its original meaning in Italian). Presto, on the other hand, indicates speed as such (while possibly connoting virtuosity, a connotation it did not acquire until the late 18th century)...
Additional Italian words also indicate tempo and mood. For example, the "agitato" in the Allegro agitato of the last movement of George Gershwin's piano concerto in F has both a tempo indication (undoubtedly faster than a usual Allegro) and a mood indication ("agitated")..."
The interesting thing about dance music is that tempo is very specific within several bars. Because there are many, many elements that, if not specific enough through the computer/device, everything starts to sound disjointed. Especially with a lot of delay, reverb, effects and so on. Of course shuffling plays a big part too. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuffle_note)
So when listening to electronic music, it is quite immersive and enthralling for me, because in a good track, there are "rigid" elements, then there are a lot of free-flowing parts.
I'm not a sound engineer, but I would imagine different strengths of frequencies can make music actually "feel" faster or slower.
...I don't know where you got this from. Has it occurred to you that dance music tends to be at these tempos, just like marches are often 120 beats per minute? Also, the DJ would need equipment allowing him to increase the speed without changing the pitch. As far as I know, that can't be done with analog equipment...at least not easily....
Thanks for your comments, I think you have a lot of advanced musical knowledge. I think you also highlight why I epic failed classical music. I just never "got it" fully, even though I studied some of it. I do, however, love dance music (uplifting dutch trance), and finally, I feel I "get" music. Heh.
On the DJ side, I would comment on this part:
In dance music now there is a lot of difference between adjusting BPM with or without pitch shifting. This is an entirely different cryptic world of gear and jargon, for example: http://www.dallasdancemusic.com/foru...vs-vestax.html
True, almost all modern DJ equipment allows both pitch-shifting and also tempo adjustments with pitch lock, which is now important for spinning "in key":
Nowadays, it's all about the flow of the music in "harmony" rather than just beat-matching. Of course, in the 90's the real pro DJs did all this with analog vinyl equipment and their ears/ feelings. Imagine, you'd have to blend two songs of different tempos, and adjusting the tempo also changed the pitch, which you also would have to blend. Truly amazing, and something that captivated me more than world-renowned symphony orchestras or choirs. Yes, I was in the choir. I sucked.
...You use a metronome for several reasons, not just to keep tempo. It's an amazingly productive rehearsal tool. It makes for more productive and efficient practice. And yes, you can train yourself to a degree...
I hated using a metronome, rehearsing, and practice. I hated my piano lessons. To be honest, it was torture for me as a kid. There were some minor (lol pun unintended) fun parts though.
I experience this very often to the point that it has become annoying. However I think I may have a theory.
The song in which this most occurs for me is "Bangarang" by Skrillex.
If I listen to it through speakers, usually it is lightning fast. (At least 20-30% faster). Pitch does not change, sounds fit equally as well as normal. However, if I listen to it through my producer headphones, it slows down greatly. If I listen to it through in-ear headphones, it's even slower. So, being the curious **** that I am, I started to experiment with it. I found that if I have my producer headphones over my ears, it is, again, slow. However if I put them around my neck, and crank the volume a bit, it gets faster. So I came to a conclusion that, the further away the speakers are from your ears, the faster the song goes, or appears to go.
But why is this?
Well, my theory is that sound waves become progressively faster when they have reflected off of more surfaces. And I think that if a sound is playing through a speaker, it's coming from many different surfaces into your ears all at the same time. If it's through headphones, then it is going straight into your ears. Making the sound appear to go by slower. This is just a theory, and may not apply to all people. But it has been made true in most cases I've experienced.
Glad to see I'm not the only one. Well, not with the time going faster part but I do experience the same thing, for example songs seem to slow down for me when I'm running and appear to be faster when I'm just passing the time. I'm curious about this, too because no one I asked has an answer.
Weird. I cant say I have ever experienced this, but I know sound effects me in other weird ways, like a person with a really soft voice makes me relax instantly. I read up on it and its all psychological. I bet its a similar thing with this.
But to actually answer your question, this happens to me all the time! I'm still trying to figure out whats going on " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /> but I'm sure its somewhat normal @appleoutsider
Comments
1. It is well known that your ears are much fresher in the morning. Take some very high quality tracks with high quality earphones. Listen when you just wake up, a few hours after you wake up, then listen at night. You will notice more things earlier in the day.
Not sure why you quoted me other than to show I had been proven wrong. For what it's worth, I do notice that my ears are more sensitive in the morning, but there's no difference in sound or tempo, just volume. That seems pretty sensible. The change in noticeable tempo, though, is pretty oddball.
.... You KNOW what that means, of course?
It means I'm gonna go see if I can make it happen.
C
Not sure why you quoted me other than to show I had been proven wrong. For what it's worth, I do notice that my ears are more sensitive in the morning, but there's no difference in sound or tempo, just volume. That seems pretty sensible. The change in noticeable tempo, though, is pretty oddball.
Yeah I didn't do the quoting thing properly. Anyways, ah... not to say that you are wrong, just that for some people music is a very perceptual thing. In your case, your feeling of music is fairly stable. Maybe perceptually you have a more "ordered" sense of things.
More "artistic" people observe the world very differently. You have to do that in creating many forms of art, "reinterpreting" the world.
It's a Matrix kinda thing. What do you think you know you don't know?
Well, I've got more than my share of neurological disorders, but I can't say I've ever noticed anything like that before.
.... You KNOW what that means, of course?
It means I'm gonna go see if I can make it happen.
C
Try applying a series of electrical shocks to your neckbolts and report back to us.
What surprises me is that it is so noticeable to you, as if it was objectively changing, even to the extent that you can put a percentage change on it. With most illusions of that kind, people adjust and don't notice anything. For example, when someone walks away from you, they get smaller on the retina but you adjust and don't really notice someone "getting smaller." In order to get the illusion to occur, there has to be some trick to change the context.
I'd imagine something similar happens with this - most people don't experience subjective changes in tempo because, well, obviously it's not changing, and so we don't let ourselves notice it even if we may feel it at some level. But it sounds like you are somehow able to put that aside and actually experience the change.
YES. I know totally what you mean. You see, just like vision, but more so, hearing is one of the senses that is very, very subjective. You don't realise it until, you hear different sounds at different times of the day and with different feelings. Here's a few points. I spent an intense year around 2003-2004 trying to produce dance music in the genre of "uplifting dutch trance" (no it's not a mixtape of a trip to amsterdam)... http://forums.di.fm/showthread.php?t=55556
1. It is well known that your ears are much fresher in the morning. Take some very high quality tracks with high quality earphones. Listen when you just wake up, a few hours after you wake up, then listen at night. You will notice more things earlier in the day.
I don't know about that. In fact, I'm pretty sure it depends on the person.
2a. Music tempo is really a very abstract concept.
No, it's really not. It's expressed in BPM. However, rhythms and tempos vary substantially, which helps with expressive elements.
That's why big symphonies have a conductor.
No, it's not. The conductor does a lot more than keep time, at least in rehearsal. And actually, large professional symphonies could easily play near the same level without the conductor.
When learning classical piano, yeah, you have a metronome, but during performances or when impressing your family, you don't use the metronome, and somehow the human mind tries to "keep" a tempo of the notes.
You use a metronome for several reasons, not just to keep tempo. It's an amazingly productive rehearsal tool. It makes for more productive and efficient practice. And yes, you can train yourself to a degree.
2b. A good example is the "beats per minute" a modern DJ uses. Even from vinyl to digital there's always been one main weapon in a good club DJ's arsenal: the RPM (or more relevant, the BPM[Beats Per Minute])... A song is created at a specific tempo (which can vary within a song), yet the DJ is at liberty to play it at whatever tempo he desires, within the range provided to him by his equipment. Roughly for dance music this is 120bpm to 140+bpm, with "hardcore" or "gabba" (not sure about the specifics because I'm not into these genres) running much higher, giving you the feeling like your head is going to explode. Of course, the DJ has to "tune" the BPM to the mood of the crowd. If they're pretty docile, you'd want to warm them up with some smooth but encouraging low-BPM stuff, then gradually increase it. If the crowd is already pretty jazzed you'd want to go in fairly jazzed up.
I don't know where you got this from. Has it occurred to you that dance music tends to be at these tempos, just like marches are often 120 beats per minute? Also, the DJ would need equipment allowing him to increase the speed without changing the pitch. As far as I know, that can't be done with analog equipment...at least not easily.
3a. Same with pitch. This is why many bands, symphonies, etc. spend hours, days, preparing at a venue and before each performance. Tuning is very important. Maybe some of you do know, but I only discovered, Linkin Park plays "out of tune" to some degree a lot of the time: http://www.guitarforbeginners.com/fo...drop-d-tuning/
Sort of. Tuning can be affected by the physical environment (heat and humidity are prime factors), but it's not necessarily why many groups spend hours and days at a venue. It has more to do with getting used to the acoustics of the overall space. For classical music, it's more about balance and blend then tuning.
3b. Some of you may know this, but do you realise that there are many "notes" between the 12 semitones? It's called tuning by cents: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cent_%28music%29) ... Many bands and producers create different "signature sound and feels" by slightly tuning their pitch lower or higher, meaning they never play exactly an A Minor, for example, it would be tuned somewhere in-between an A Minor and A Major... From a piano theory point of view, guitar-wise I'm not sure if I understand this properly yet, see point 3a above.
And many orchestras do not tune to A-440. Actually though, our Western tuning system is always mathematically out of tune...especially for keyboard instruments. [/quote]
4. Humans instinctively have some sense of the "mathematics in art". ... However this is dependent on perception, which varies from individual and even varies within an individual. For example, http://www.5cense.com/Edge_Delay.htm
5. Scientifically, it comes down to the brain/ mind. One of the important frontiers of knowledge. IMHO.[/QUOTE]
True.
Yeah I didn't do the quoting thing properly. Anyways, ah... not to say that you are wrong, just that for some people music is a very perceptual thing. In your case, your feeling of music is fairly stable. Maybe perceptually you have a more "ordered" sense of things. ... More "artistic" people observe the world very differently. You have to do that in creating many forms of art, "reinterpreting" the world.
Artistic ability is a still quite a mystery. All this resolves is that I have a good sense of time. For what it's worth, I'm also never late.
Artistic ability is a still quite a mystery. All this resolves is that I have a good sense of time. For what it's worth, I'm also never late.
Yeah it doesn't mean your not "artistic". You are probably creative in many different ways, not in your sense of "playing" with time, perhaps.
That's why I've always admired the Bay Area. For some reason, a hella lot of people that are very left-brain-right-brain balanced. Interactive media, for example, is created a lot by left-brain-right-brain people, as opposed to, painting, which would be more right-brained.
But like you say, it is still all a huge mystery.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=O-Xva2XqFZ4
When listening to it, there are definitely certain parts of the song where the tempo feels faster and also slower, I wonder if this relates directly to certain parts where the BPM is specifically dropped lower or pushed higher. Or is it just the sound elements which give a feel of "cooling down" and "ramping up"...?
Maybe, overall, because when I was in primary school I did the whole parents-make-you-do-classical-piano-lessions. Also I studied a bit of this - maybe it gave me an interesting sense of rhythm in my early years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatanatyam
So my sense of tempo in music is more like, yes, there are time signatures and metronomes and stuff, but tempo is something that you set as you play the piano. Adagio for example, is only a rough "metronome" range, it is open to interpretation.
Extract from Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempo (some of you probably know all this already)
"...Before the metronome, words were the only way to describe the tempo of a composition. Yet after the metronome's invention, these words continued to be used, often additionally indicating the mood of the piece, thus blurring the traditional distinction between tempo and mood indicators. For example, presto and allegro both indicate a speedy execution (presto being faster), but allegro also connotes joy (from its original meaning in Italian). Presto, on the other hand, indicates speed as such (while possibly connoting virtuosity, a connotation it did not acquire until the late 18th century)...
Additional Italian words also indicate tempo and mood. For example, the "agitato" in the Allegro agitato of the last movement of George Gershwin's piano concerto in F has both a tempo indication (undoubtedly faster than a usual Allegro) and a mood indication ("agitated")..."
The interesting thing about dance music is that tempo is very specific within several bars. Because there are many, many elements that, if not specific enough through the computer/device, everything starts to sound disjointed. Especially with a lot of delay, reverb, effects and so on. Of course shuffling plays a big part too. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuffle_note)
So when listening to electronic music, it is quite immersive and enthralling for me, because in a good track, there are "rigid" elements, then there are a lot of free-flowing parts.
I'm not a sound engineer, but I would imagine different strengths of frequencies can make music actually "feel" faster or slower.
...I don't know where you got this from. Has it occurred to you that dance music tends to be at these tempos, just like marches are often 120 beats per minute? Also, the DJ would need equipment allowing him to increase the speed without changing the pitch. As far as I know, that can't be done with analog equipment...at least not easily....
Thanks for your comments, I think you have a lot of advanced musical knowledge. I think you also highlight why I epic failed classical music. I just never "got it" fully, even though I studied some of it. I do, however, love dance music (uplifting dutch trance), and finally, I feel I "get" music. Heh.
On the DJ side, I would comment on this part:
In dance music now there is a lot of difference between adjusting BPM with or without pitch shifting. This is an entirely different cryptic world of gear and jargon, for example: http://www.dallasdancemusic.com/foru...vs-vestax.html
True, almost all modern DJ equipment allows both pitch-shifting and also tempo adjustments with pitch lock, which is now important for spinning "in key":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aUgQEkC9Qc ...The presenter may be a little "jarring" to the dance music crowd "taste" but she makes the point anyways.
Nowadays, it's all about the flow of the music in "harmony" rather than just beat-matching. Of course, in the 90's the real pro DJs did all this with analog vinyl equipment and their ears/ feelings. Imagine, you'd have to blend two songs of different tempos, and adjusting the tempo also changed the pitch, which you also would have to blend. Truly amazing, and something that captivated me more than world-renowned symphony orchestras or choirs. Yes, I was in the choir. I sucked.
...You use a metronome for several reasons, not just to keep tempo. It's an amazingly productive rehearsal tool. It makes for more productive and efficient practice. And yes, you can train yourself to a degree...
I hated using a metronome, rehearsing, and practice.
I experience this very often to the point that it has become annoying. However I think I may have a theory.
The song in which this most occurs for me is "Bangarang" by Skrillex.
If I listen to it through speakers, usually it is lightning fast. (At least 20-30% faster). Pitch does not change, sounds fit equally as well as normal. However, if I listen to it through my producer headphones, it slows down greatly. If I listen to it through in-ear headphones, it's even slower. So, being the curious **** that I am, I started to experiment with it. I found that if I have my producer headphones over my ears, it is, again, slow. However if I put them around my neck, and crank the volume a bit, it gets faster. So I came to a conclusion that, the further away the speakers are from your ears, the faster the song goes, or appears to go.
But why is this?
Well, my theory is that sound waves become progressively faster when they have reflected off of more surfaces. And I think that if a sound is playing through a speaker, it's coming from many different surfaces into your ears all at the same time. If it's through headphones, then it is going straight into your ears. Making the sound appear to go by slower. This is just a theory, and may not apply to all people. But it has been made true in most cases I've experienced.
Glad to see I'm not the only one. Well, not with the time going faster part but I do experience the same thing, for example songs seem to slow down for me when I'm running and appear to be faster when I'm just passing the time. I'm curious about this, too because no one I asked has an answer.
Haven't experience it but I think this is just psychological
Weird. I cant say I have ever experienced this, but I know sound effects me in other weird ways, like a person with a really soft voice makes me relax instantly. I read up on it and its all psychological. I bet its a similar thing with this.
The same, I also have never had this thing happen to me. Consider mentioning that to your doctor next time you visit him.
1. what.
2. that was not even correct
3. that was rude
4. l e a v e
But to actually answer your question, this happens to me all the time! I'm still trying to figure out whats going on
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /> but I'm sure its somewhat normal @appleoutsider