Search This Blog

Monday, July 10, 2023

WHY WE ARE ALL DEAF TO CERTAIN SOUNDS AND WHY MANY ARE "MUSIC DEAF."

  



Whether or not you have a "musical ear" you can not detect a sound unless it lasts more than one-fortieth of a second, no matter how loud it may be, although practice may enable the ear to catch a still shorter one. There are many sounds that the ear can not detect, so scientists tell us, while the less exact and more imaginative persons call these undetected notes indications of "divine harmonies." 

Some ears are more acutely attuned than others and can pick out these ordinarily "inaudible sounds," just as some eyes can see colors that are invisible to other eyes. Which brings us to a realization of what a wonderful apparatus the human ear is, and the interesting process through which sound vibrations go in being taken into our consciousness, bringing their story of human emotions, or jarring dissonances and of exquisite harmonies!

Some ears have no affinity for music—they are blind to harmony, so to speak—while others seem created for the appreciative reception of music. And, says an English observer, the musical ear and the unmusical ear are easily recognized and classified by the external formation. It is not necessary to study the artistic tastes of friends to discover whether they have an ear for music, says the aural savant. The shape of the ear clearly indicates a musical temperament and shows whether one has a taste or talent for music. 

There is a musical ear and an unmusical ear. The contour of the musical ear shows symmetry and grace in curvature. It is also inclined to be broadly rounded at the top with an evenly-defined rim. It is generally placed forward and outward, instead of flat against the head. Musicians have ears of this type with a tendency to broadness across the center and top. Singers generally have ears of similar outline, but long and narrow. 

The unmusical ear is angular in shape, inclining to a sharp point at the top as well as at the lobe. This point is brought to our attention by Newberry 0. Norwood, American observer of men and things, who declares that the evangelist, "Billy" Sunday, has just such an ear, the sharp-pointed top of which is evident in all his photographs facing the camera and those snapped at three-quarter face. 

"Satyr-point," is the way Mr. Norwood characterizes it, but whether the ear of the redoubtable revivalist is musical or not, it might be indiscreet to venture a guess, for Mr. Sunday is entirely able to speak for himself. But if you ever have an opportunity to see him at close range and note that the interior of the ear is sharply defined and more or less irregular in line— then you will know that he has another character classified as the unmusical ear by the English expert, who, furthermore, declares that any ear that is poorly formed, irregular and ugly in appearance indicates a lack of musical taste and ability on the part of the possessor. 

The unmusical ear, therefore, is less likely to detect the elusive sounds in the air. "Vibratory disturbances" is the technical classification ; for whether those that can not be heard should be called "sounds" is perhaps debatable. But, at any rate, they differ in sounds in no respect except that they do not affect the ear. Recent experimenters find that both the number of vibrations and the duration of the sound influence its audibility—probably the latter more than the former. Apparently no ordinary sound can be heard unless it lasts longer than one-fortieth of a second, no matter how loud it may be, although practice may enable the ear to catch one that is still shorter. 

A French writer draws attention to the fact that Savart, in 1830, attempted to find out whether a very small number of successive vibrations, or even a single vibration, would be sufficient to produce a recognizable sound. Others after him took up the same question, but all do not agree. Some assert that a considerable number of vibrations is necessary, while others say that even a fraction of a period is sufficient. It is generally acknowledged, however, by those who have examined all the evidence that two complete vibrations suffice to identify a sound. 

Dr. Gianfrancheschi, who has been investigating the graphic trace of the vowels, has taken up the problem, using the differential interrupter of Blaserna. This is a very simple apparatus —a cylinder, partly covered with a conducting layer on which rubs a contact. If the cylinder be made to rotate regularly and the contact be moved from left to right, the electric circuit will be closed for a shorter and shorter time. The sound is produced near a microphone, situated near the interrupting cylinder. The operator who identifies the sound listens at a telephone in a distant room. 

The results of numerous experiments show that the number of vibrations necessary to enable a sound to be heard is not constant; it varies from two to forty or more. What is constant is rather the duration of the sound, which must be at least one-fortieth of a second in order that the sound may be identified. 

This is apparently the smallest time required by the auditory organs to adapt themselves to a sound that strikes them. This period constitutes a sort of physiological constant. Dr. Gianfrancheschi, however, was able to recognize certain sounds of much shorter duration—less than a hundredth of a second, but it should be said that these sounds were very familiar ones, such as the voice of a singer who had assisted him for several years in his studies of the vowel sounds. In this case his ear had become habituated by practice to recognize a given sound more quickly. 

When sung by another voice the same sounds required for identification a longer time, of the usual order of magnitude. It should also be said that the Blaserna interrupter, running at five to six revolutions per second, makes a noise at each revolution, and a repetition of this kind is naturally capable of facilitating greatly the identification of the note.—1915 Cincinnati Commercial Tribune.

No comments:

Post a Comment