There are 4 messages totalling 430 lines in this issue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 21:44:21 +1300
From: Philip Dorrell <aud@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Rhythm perception (is really speech rhythm perception)
According to my "super-stimulus" theory of music=20
(http://whatismusic.info/), the primary purpose of the cortical maps=20
that respond to regular musical rhythms is to perceive the irregular=20
rhythms of speech in a time-scaling invariant manner (i.e. the same=20
rhythm at different tempos). My theory imposes an additional constraint=20
on any theory of rhythm perception, in that it requires that the=20
perception of musical rhythms must result in geometrical patterns of=20
neural activity which are more constant than is the case when perceiving=20
speech rhythms, and which have clearly defined perimeters between active=20
and inactive regions.
This theory is consistent with the incremental perception of beat,=20
because the purpose of rhythm perception must be to label the components=20
of speech rhythm as they occur, as being more or less part of a regular=20
rhythm. There is no purpose to "find" the regular beat, because in=20
general there are no regular beats in speech. It's like Fourier=20
analysis, which happens to produce a well-defined result for regular=20
repeating signals, but can be quite useful in the characterisation of=20
non-regular non-repeating signals.
The theory is also consistent with the observation that the ability to=20
perceive musical rhythms is uniquely human (since speech is uniquely huma=
n).
Philip Dorrell.