Re: Fw: animals and music

[Richard Nance <rnance@xxxxxxxxx>]

I took my first piece of real acousmatic music over to mys sister's house
and put it on the stereo. Her dog, Janet ran in the room and stared betwen
the speakers the whole 5.5 minutes. The cat looked at it a while too, but
eventually wandered off.

rick

-----Original Message-----
From: Lowel P. O'Mard
To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 3/5/2005 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: animals and music

Hi People,

We as humans have a tendency towards elitism with regard to the
capabilities of other animals. Just because they do not seem moved by
human music as much as humans can be, does not mean that they are
incapable of being so moved.

Nonetheless the following URL is an investigation of the effect of music
on the neurochemistry of rats.  It shows that music "shifted the
physiology of rats clearly towards relaxation or recreation".

        http://web.telia.com/~u57011259/Sutoo.htm

I think that most of the time other animals just don't understand our
music - just as some contemporary classical music, heavy metal and jazz
is beyond me.

...Lowel.


On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 20:12 +1100, Nikki Rickard wrote:
> > No one is likely to claim that nonhuman animals appreciate music
just as
> > humans do, but the extent to which they do (or, more importantly, do
not)
> > can teach us which aspects of music do make it uniquely human.  Be
careful
> > to prejudge as we see how "fur" we can get with these issues!
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Stew Hulse
>
> (and a chicken's favorite composer?  Bach, bach bach bach....)
>
> I think Prof Hulse's point above is a good one - the study of how
animals
> respond
> to music can be a valuable contribution to understanding human
responses to
> music. I think animal models may become useful in differentiating the
> 'direct' effect on neurological circuits/chemical release s.
'indirect'
> effects via higher order processing (e.g. via musical preferences,
past
> experience).  The former may be common to a range of listeners,
including
> possibly comatose patients, foetuses and animals, while the latter may
be
> reserved for humans (note the 'may'!).
>
> Our work with chicks show that their memory is significantly improved
by
> *rhythmic* auditory stimuli but not by non-rhythmic stimuli - which
means
> they are cognitively sensitive to at least one musical universal.
>   Toukhsati, S., & Rickard, N.S. (2004).  Journal of Comparative
Psychology,
> 118 (1), 65-70.
>   Toukhsati, S., & Rickard, N.S. (2001).  Journal of Comparative
Psychology,
> 115(2), 132-139.
>
>
> my 2 feathers,
> Nikki
>