The Aural Perception of Nontxaditional Chords in Selected Theoretical Relationships: A Computer-Generated Experiment

Abstract

The nontraditional chords in this study represent relationships defined by Allen Forte and Charles Lord. These relationships may be viewed as various degrees of similarity in pitch and interval structure between two chords. This experiment attempted to determine any correlation that may exist between theoretical and aural relatedness. The PLATO computer system presented subjects (N = 198) a randomly ordered series of 39 experimental items. In each item, two pairs of chords were presented with one pair theoretically more similar. Listeners were asked to choose “which pair sounds more alike.” Chi-square calculations demonstrated nonsignificant differences in responses by subjects with varied backgrounds and levels of education. Confidence intervals, calculated for each item, demonstrated five significant levels of response, three of which were in accord with the theories. The results suggest that intervallic characteristics, a principal basis for the pedagogy of atonal music, are not a primary attribute in our perception of atonal music.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Beach, S. (1979). Pitch structure and the analytic process in atonal music: An interpretation of the theory of sets. Music Theory Spectrum, 1, 7–22.

Brown, R. (1974). [Review of The structure of atonal music by Allen Forte]. Journal of Music Theory, 18(2), 390–415.

Bruner, C. L. (1984). The perception of contemporary pitch structures. Music Perception, 2(1), 25–39.

Chapman, A. (1981). Some intervallic aspects of pitch set relations. Journal of Music Theory, 25(2) 275–290.

Deutsch, D. (Ed.). (1982). The psychology of music. New York: Academic Press.

Deutsch, D. , & Roll, P. L. (1974). Error patterns in delayed pitch comparison as a function of relational context. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 1027–1034.

Ferguson, G. (1966). Statistical analysis in psychology and education (2nd ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill.

Forte, A. (1973). The structure of atonal music. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Forte, A. (1964). A theory of set complexes for music. Journal of Music Theory, 8(2), 136–193.

10.

Gilbert, S. (1974). An introduction to trichordal analysis. Journal of Music Theory, 18(2), 136–193.

11.

Hull, C. H. , & Nie, N. H. (Eds.). (1981). SPSS update 7–9: New procedures and facilities for releases 7–9. New York: McGraw-Hill.

12.

Lord, C. H. (1981). Intervallic similarity relations in atonal set analysis. Journal of Music Theory, 25(1), 91–111.

13.

Meyer, L. B. (1967). Music, the arts, and ideas: Patterns and predictions in twentieth-century culture. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

14.

Morris, R. D. (1979). A similarity index for pitch-class sets. Perspectives of New Music, 18(1), 445–460.

15.

Plomp, R. , Wagenaar, W. A. , & Mimpton, A. M. (1973). Musical interval recognition with simultaneous tones. Acustica, 29, 101–109.

16.

Rahn, J. (1980). Basic atonal theory. New York: Longman.

17.

SAS Institute. (1979). SAS user's guide, 1979 edition. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.

18.

Slawson, W. (1983). [Review of The psychology of music by D. Deutsch, (Ed.)]. Music Theory Spectrum, 55, 121–126.

19.

Snedecor, G. W. , & Cochran, W. G. (1980). Statistical methods (7th ed.). Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.

20.

Spencer, P. (1983). The practice of harmony. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

21.

Teitelbaum, R. (1965). Intervallic relations in atonal music. Journal of Music Theory, 9(1), 72–127.

22.

White, J. D. (1984). The analysis of music, (2nd ed.) Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press.

23.

Whittlich, G. E. (Ed.). (1975). Aspects of twentieth-century music. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.