GG: Re: absolute pitch

[Manuel Martinez <Manuel.Martinez@Schwab.COM>]

Hi! Your discussion on absolute pitch has spurred my memory...
Some twenty years ago, I read about a certain Joseph(?) Joachim, a
violinist who sued the Royal Conservatory (London, cir. 1930's) for not 
implementing the correct, absoulte pitch. I remember wondering how 
something as preposterous as this could happen to a prestigious musical 
institution. 

I don't think its worth my time to research on the matter, but I still 
wonder: Did this really happen? Or was it apocrypha? When exactly did
A440 become standardized?

I would be glad if someone can verify this for me, and tell me (since I
can't remember the source anymore) I didn't just make this up.


At 02:37 PM 12/10/96 EST, you wrote:
>     
>        Whether absolute pitch is important depends on what you are 
>        doing and who you are playing with.  You have a lot of control 
>        over how you process auditory information, and if you want to, 
>        you can train yourself to recognizes pitches without an external 
>        reference (although it is somewhat harder to train yourself to 
>        recognize very small deviations from some fixed standard such as 
>        A-440).  It is certainly easiest if you begin playing at a very 
>        young age or if you have a hereditary knack for identifying 
>        pitches.
>        
>        On the other hand, I started playing about the same time I 
>        started talking and I tend to hear sounds as intervals rather 
>        than in absolute terms.  I can identify a pitch if I want to, 
>        particularly if I hum it to myself after I hear it, but I don't 
>        spend a lot of time doing this.  I like to have my piano tuned 
>        as close to equal temperament as possible because, to me, this 
>        reinforces the impression of floating in the pitch spectrum with 
>        no external reference, of being able to go from one key to 
>        another with a feeling of intense pleasure from the way the 
>        modulation takes place while being indifferent to where I am at 
>        any given moment in time.
>        
>        Most musicians I have worked with, including those with 
>        "absolute pitch," believe it is better to listen for intervals 
>        in music and to tune according to what is going on around you 
>        rather than according to some fixed standard.  In fact, some 
>        wind and string players I know with "absolute pitch" view it as 
>        something of a handicap because they find it gets in the way of 
>        playing with pitch flexibility.  On the other hand, it can be a 
>        signficant advantage in playing with people who have "absolute 
>        pitch" (or think they do) because not only might they expect you 
>        to play to the same standard, but they may be very exacting 
>        about small pitch discrepancies that other people would be 
>        willing to tolerate.
>        
>        The funny thing to me about some musicians that I have found it 
>        most difficult to work with is that some people who claim to 
>        have "absolute pitch" are also the most outspoken about altering 
>        pitches according to the key you are playing in, which is a 
>        completely valid concept but highly subjective.  There is no 
>        question that a perfectly equally tempered scale is not the most 
>        pleasing, but I do not think there is a universal consensus on 
>        how best to improve it.  I think for this task it is more 
>        important to know how to communicate and work well together than 
>        it is to have "absolute pitch." 
>        
>        I continue to think that for string and wind players, the most 
>        important thing is to be intimately familiar with the instrument 
>        you are playing at any given time so that, through mechanical 
>        means, you can play any note within a certain margin of error 
>        before making any adjustments.  Then you make adjustments 
>        according to what is going on around you.  That way you're never 
>        too badly out of tune but you're always in a position to do 
>        better.
>        
>        Once again, thank you for a very meaningful post for our little 
>        group.  :)
>
>______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
>Subject: More comments on Kazdin
>Author:  Eugene Selig <aq094@lafn.org> at internet
>Date:    12/10/96 1:07 PM
>
>
>There is a telling exchange between AK and GG involving absolute pitch. 
>GG had stated in another book with another interviewer that the two most 
>important gifts required for one aspiring to become a concert pianist 
>were the ability to concentrate intensely, and the possession of absolute 
>pitch. As for concentration, we know GG had a photographic memory, and 
>his musical memory was remarkably reliable. Kazdin had a layman's awe
>on the subject of absolute pitch. I think GG enjoyed touting his gift 
>before this man. The one thing GG could not abide was the company of a 
>lesser intellect. The fact remains that Wagner, Schumann, Berlioz, and 
>Tchaikowsky did NOT have absolute pitch. Modern research has shown that 
>there are various reasons why otherwise highly gifted musical persons 
>may not possess it. Some people have it through heredity (K. Flagstad), 
>while in most cases it comes merely as the result of starting training 
>at an early age, say before the age of six. It seems that the capacity 
>to "memorize" sounds while identifying their pitch diminishes greatly
>after early childhood. The composers mentioned got relatively late starts 
>before launching themselves totally into a career in music.
>     
>I think that part of Kazdin's problem is that his idol had the proverbial 
>feet of clay, and as such K. felt that his admiration (adoration) was 
>misplaced and unappreciated, and as a result felt deprived a position
>of special closeness to an non-existent hero. And, as I said before, GG 
>seemed to harbor contempt for anyone who behaved like a toady.
>     
>
>
>