Expressive semitones: Music students’ perceptual preferences for melodic intonation on the violin

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 0 MUSIC Musicae Scientiae Pub Date : 2024-02-03 DOI:10.1177/10298649231225777
Sheng-Ying Isabella Weng, Erkki Huovinen
{"title":"Expressive semitones: Music students’ perceptual preferences for melodic intonation on the violin","authors":"Sheng-Ying Isabella Weng, Erkki Huovinen","doi":"10.1177/10298649231225777","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Studies of performance intonation and musicians’ own statements suggest that classical string instrumentalists often deviate in their intonation from equal temperament for expressive purposes. However, it is not clear to what extent corresponding perceptual preferences for intonational deviations might rely on listeners’ instrumental expertise or such contextual aspects as the metrical placement of tones. We investigated higher-education music students’ perceptual preferences for melodic intonation of local leading tones in unaccompanied classical violin performances. Recordings of 12 excerpts were manipulated in the size of ascending semitones (110, 90, or 70 cents) leading to tones that were more stable in the tonal context. Groups of violin students and music education students listened to pairs of excerpts differing only in the size of semitones and chose the intonation variant that they preferred. In the comparison between 90- and 110-cent semitones, violin students showed a stronger group consensus for preferring 90 cents. However, greater instrumental expertise did not result in a stronger overall preference for the sharpest 70-cent variant. Instead, the violin students showed an expertise-related connection between intonation preference and meter, which was not observed for the music education students. In particular, the violin students more often preferred 70-cent intonation (i.e., the sharpest leading tones) in metrically unaccented than in accented positions. In effect, this is to prefer an expressive intonation that colors the music while not challenging the harmonic structure at metrically salient tones. It is argued that understanding expressive intonation in musical performance requires consideration of the metrical context.","PeriodicalId":47219,"journal":{"name":"Musicae Scientiae","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Musicae Scientiae","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10298649231225777","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MUSIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Studies of performance intonation and musicians’ own statements suggest that classical string instrumentalists often deviate in their intonation from equal temperament for expressive purposes. However, it is not clear to what extent corresponding perceptual preferences for intonational deviations might rely on listeners’ instrumental expertise or such contextual aspects as the metrical placement of tones. We investigated higher-education music students’ perceptual preferences for melodic intonation of local leading tones in unaccompanied classical violin performances. Recordings of 12 excerpts were manipulated in the size of ascending semitones (110, 90, or 70 cents) leading to tones that were more stable in the tonal context. Groups of violin students and music education students listened to pairs of excerpts differing only in the size of semitones and chose the intonation variant that they preferred. In the comparison between 90- and 110-cent semitones, violin students showed a stronger group consensus for preferring 90 cents. However, greater instrumental expertise did not result in a stronger overall preference for the sharpest 70-cent variant. Instead, the violin students showed an expertise-related connection between intonation preference and meter, which was not observed for the music education students. In particular, the violin students more often preferred 70-cent intonation (i.e., the sharpest leading tones) in metrically unaccented than in accented positions. In effect, this is to prefer an expressive intonation that colors the music while not challenging the harmonic structure at metrically salient tones. It is argued that understanding expressive intonation in musical performance requires consideration of the metrical context.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
富有表现力的半音:音乐学生对小提琴旋律音调的感知偏好
对演奏音调的研究和音乐家本人的陈述表明,古典弦乐器演奏家出于表现目的,经常在音调上偏离平均律。然而,对于音调偏差的相应知觉偏好在多大程度上依赖于听众的乐器专业知识或音调的韵律位置等语境方面,目前尚不清楚。我们调查了高等教育音乐专业学生对无伴奏古典小提琴演奏中局部前导音旋律音调的感知偏好。我们对 12 个选段的录音进行了升半音(110、90 或 70 音分)大小的调整,以获得在音调背景中更为稳定的音调。小提琴专业学生和音乐教育专业学生组成的小组聆听了一对仅在半音大小上有所不同的选段,并选择了他们更喜欢的音调变体。在 90 分半音和 110 分半音的比较中,小提琴学生更倾向于 90 分半音。然而,更高的乐器专业知识并没有导致学生们更倾向于选择最尖锐的 70 分变体。相反,小提琴学生在音调偏好和节拍之间表现出了与专业知识相关的联系,而音乐教育专业的学生却没有观察到这种联系。特别是,与重音位置相比,小提琴学生在非节拍位置上更倾向于 70 分音调(即最尖锐的前导音)。实际上,这就是偏好一种富有表现力的音调,这种音调既能为音乐增添色彩,又不会挑战乐谱上突出音位的和声结构。有人认为,要理解音乐演奏中的抑扬顿挫,就必须考虑节拍背景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Musicae Scientiae
Musicae Scientiae Multiple-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: MUSICAE SCIENTIAE is the trilingual journal, official organ of ESCOM, published with the financial support of the Belgian Science Policy.
期刊最新文献
Characterizing music for sleep: A comparison of Spotify playlists Performance profiling: A systematic approach to the enhancement of music practice and peak performance A phrase in a loop: A rethink of verbatim repetition in the speech-to-song illusion and a new approach to the study of involuntary auditory imagery Assessing aesthetic music-evoked emotions in a minute or less: A comparison of the GEMS-45 and the GEMS-9 Opera trainees' cognitive functioning is associated with physiological stress during performance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1