Last week I attended a blues concert. It was called blues, but they rocked! Not the traditional ballad style, but high energy. At one point, during an instrumental, the audience clapped along with the music. The band included electric guitar and bass, acoustic bass, piano, drums, and trumpet. It was not a simple melody, the orchestration was complex, each instrument playing its own part. During this passage, I started wondering, how do the listeners so easily follow the beat? If you're a mathematican, you'd probably do DFT, and pick out the fundamental. I find it hard to imagine the brain does this. Is there any theory regarding what's happening, at the neural level? How does the ear filter the beat? It might be hard to separate this specific question from the whole huge puzzle of how the brain processes music. -- Rich
keeping the beat
Started by ●August 28, 2011
Reply by ●August 28, 20112011-08-28
On Aug 29, 8:38�am, RichD <r_delaney2...@yahoo.com> wrote:> Last week I attended a blues concert. �It was called > blues, but they rocked! �Not the traditional ballad style, > but high energy. > > At one point, during an instrumental, the audience clapped > along with the music. �The band included electric guitar > and bass, acoustic bass, piano, drums, and trumpet. > It was not a simple melody, the orchestration was complex, > each instrument playing its own part. > > During this passage, I started wondering, how do the > listeners so easily follow the beat? �If you're a > mathematican, you'd probably do DFT, and pick out > the fundamental. �I find it hard to imagine the brain > does this. > > Is there any theory regarding what's happening, at the > neural level? �How does the ear filter the beat? > > It might be hard to separate this specific question > from the whole huge puzzle of how the brain > processes music. > > -- > Richthey don't always. In fact pianists don't either, not in the mathematical sense anyway. If a pro plays Chopin to a Midi file it will not be perfectly aligned to the bar lines. Hardy
Reply by ●August 28, 20112011-08-28
RichD wrote:> Last week I attended a blues concert. It was called > blues, but they rocked! Not the traditional ballad style, > but high energy. > At one point, during an instrumental, the audience clapped > along with the music. The band included electric guitar > and bass, acoustic bass, piano, drums, and trumpet. > It was not a simple melody, the orchestration was complex, > each instrument playing its own part. > During this passage, I started wondering, how do the > listeners so easily follow the beat? If you're a > mathematican, you'd probably do DFT, and pick out > the fundamental. > I find it hard to imagine the brain > does this. > Is there any theory regarding what's happening, at the > neural level? How does the ear filter the beat?Detecting the beat is a trivial DSP task. It has nothing to do with DFT or the fundamental frequency.> It might be hard to separate this specific question > from the whole huge puzzle of how the brain > processes music.No need for brains, a mere PIC would do. Vladimir Vassilevsky DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant http://www.abvolt.com
Reply by ●August 28, 20112011-08-28
In comp.dsp RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote: (snip)> During this passage, I started wondering, how do the > listeners so easily follow the beat? If you're a > mathematican, you'd probably do DFT, and pick out > the fundamental. I find it hard to imagine the brain > does this.Well, to start the inner ear does an approximation to the Fourier transform of the signal. One reason that it is approximate is that the resonators have a lower Q.> Is there any theory regarding what's happening, at the > neural level? How does the ear filter the beat?In addition, there should be some reason that nature would have use for finding the beat. That is, that there would be an evolutionary advantage to it. One thing that the ear (and brain) has to do well is to determine the time difference between a signal at the two ears, to help determine the direction to the source. Since that only gives one dimension, the second has to come through the difference is the frequency response and the effects of the outer ear on those frequencies. There is pretty strong evolutionary advantage to knowing where the large animal that is about to pounce on you is coming from. It might be that there is some connection between the two problems.> It might be hard to separate this specific question > from the whole huge puzzle of how the brain > processes music.-- glen
Reply by ●August 28, 20112011-08-28
Vlad, how is it that you are so willing to spout off something with such a large confidence-ignorance product? On 8/28/11 5:11 PM, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:> > > RichD wrote: > >> Last week I attended a blues concert. It was called >> blues, but they rocked! Not the traditional ballad style, >> but high energy. >> At one point, during an instrumental, the audience clapped >> along with the music. The band included electric guitar >> and bass, acoustic bass, piano, drums, and trumpet. >> It was not a simple melody, the orchestration was complex, >> each instrument playing its own part. During this passage, I started >> wondering, how do the >> listeners so easily follow the beat? If you're a >> mathematician, you'd probably do DFT, and pick out >> the fundamental. >> I find it hard to imagine the brain >> does this. >> Is there any theory regarding what's happening, at the >> neural level? How does the ear filter the beat? > > Detecting the beat is a trivial DSP task. It has nothing to do with DFT > or the fundamental frequency.tell that to Jean Laroche. perhaps google "Jean Laroche beat detection" without quotes and see what you get. it's so easy to check the veracity of what some of your neurons are firing that you might want to do that before committing it to text and broadcasting it. -- r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
Reply by ●August 28, 20112011-08-28
robert bristow-johnson wrote:> > Vlad, how is it that you are so willing to spout off something with such > a large confidence-ignorance product? > > On 8/28/11 5:11 PM, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote: >>> Detecting the beat is a trivial DSP task. It has nothing to do with DFT >> or the fundamental frequency. > > > tell that to Jean Laroche.Laroche, Terez and you are the shameful bunch of quacks.> perhaps google "Jean Laroche beat detection" > without quotes and see what you get. it's so easy to check the veracity > of what some of your neurons are firing that you might want to do that > before committing it to text and broadcasting it.Detecting a beat is trivial and primitive DSP task. Even a stupident or matlabi could do that.
Reply by ●August 28, 20112011-08-28
> > > >robert bristow-johnson wrote: > >> >> Vlad, how is it that you are so willing to spout off something with such>> a large confidence-ignorance product? >> >> On 8/28/11 5:11 PM, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote: >> > >>> Detecting the beat is a trivial DSP task. It has nothing to do withDFT>>> or the fundamental frequency. >> >> >> tell that to Jean Laroche. > >Laroche, Terez and you are the shameful bunch of quacks. > >> perhaps google "Jean Laroche beat detection" >> without quotes and see what you get. it's so easy to check the veracity>> of what some of your neurons are firing that you might want to do that >> before committing it to text and broadcasting it. > >Detecting a beat is trivial and primitive DSP task. Even a stupident or >matlabi could do that.Detecting trivial beat patterns strongly pounded out in the music is trivial. Do your trivial solutions do as well with other kinds of music which humans have no trouble tapping their feet to? Like music which is totally legato, played on instruments with no percussive quality; or complex polyrhythmic music; or classical music, especially music for small chamber groups, where the rhythm is almost implied, rather than sounded out? Regards, Steve
Reply by ●August 29, 20112011-08-29
On 28/08/2011 22:11, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote: ..>> Is there any theory regarding what's happening, at the >> neural level? How does the ear filter the beat? > > Detecting the beat is a trivial DSP task. It has nothing to do with DFT > or the fundamental frequency. > >> It might be hard to separate this specific question >> from the whole huge puzzle of how the brain >> processes music. > > No need for brains, a mere PIC would do. >Strange, then, that so many beat detector tools can get it very amusingly wrong. They invariably rely on certain basic assumptions about the genre being tracked. Confusing duple and quadruple time is merely the most common error. ~If~ you assume the beat is indicated by a single equally spaced transient "on the beat", you may well be able to do it with "a mere PIC". The reality is usually rather different, and is, among other factors, culturally determined at least as much as it is acoustically determined. So I am led to wonder, whether you have yourself actually made a beat detector? And if so, which genres of music did you test it on? You might like to consider certain styles of African drumming. It was explained to me once this way - "everyone knows where the beat is, so nobody actually needs to play it". Richard Dobson
Reply by ●August 29, 20112011-08-29
On 28/08/2011 22:04, HardySpicer wrote: ..>> >> During this passage, I started wondering, how do the listeners so >> easily follow the beat? If you're a mathematican, you'd probably >> do DFT, and pick out the fundamental. I find it hard to imagine >> the brain does this...> > they don't always. In fact pianists don't either, not in the > mathematical sense anyway. If a pro plays Chopin to a Midi file it > will not be perfectly aligned to the bar lines. > >And of course it would be hopelessly wrong if it was. The bar line (and indeed the tempo marking, such as it is) is just a heavily quantised semantic framework or space in which the player moves. A simple analogy would be with the "timing" of an actor or orator. Nothing to do with a metronome. And so, again, both genre and culture-specific. Some music does need a pretty "tight" pulse, but by no means all of it, nor even most of it. And if you are considering the brain, you have to consider ~all~ music cultures, not just Western metric idioms. Brains are very remarkable organs. Music changes them, rewires them, and the favour is then returned when the brain reinvents or rewrites the music, and the whole cycle iterates for ever. IMO it is the single best form of brain training that has ever existed. Richard Dobson
Reply by ●August 29, 20112011-08-29
I guess a simple beat finder would also be quite confused with this type of music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWqwITnbugM However, a human brain has no difficulties in getting it right! On 29.08.2011 11:38, Richard Dobson wrote:> On 28/08/2011 22:11, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote: > .. >>> Is there any theory regarding what's happening, at the >>> neural level? How does the ear filter the beat? >> >> Detecting the beat is a trivial DSP task. It has nothing to do with DFT >> or the fundamental frequency. >> >>> It might be hard to separate this specific question >>> from the whole huge puzzle of how the brain >>> processes music. >> >> No need for brains, a mere PIC would do. >> > Strange, then, that so many beat detector tools can get it very > amusingly wrong. They invariably rely on certain basic assumptions about > the genre being tracked. Confusing duple and quadruple time is merely > the most common error. ~If~ you assume the beat is indicated by a single > equally spaced transient "on the beat", you may well be able to do it > with "a mere PIC". The reality is usually rather different, and is, > among other factors, culturally determined at least as much as it is > acoustically determined. So I am led to wonder, whether you have > yourself actually made a beat detector? And if so, which genres of music > did you test it on? > > You might like to consider certain styles of African drumming. It was > explained to me once this way - "everyone knows where the beat is, so > nobody actually needs to play it". > > Richard Dobson