Learning to percieve a genre...

[ggalen]

Besides being a performing songwriter, I have a masters-level degree in cognitive psychology, focused on medical decision making by expert physicians. My masters' thesis involved research into how experts differ from novices in medical diagnosis.

It seems to be all about automatic, now-subconscious pattern recognition.

I say "now-subconscious" because at first, when you are a novice, you consciously have to pay attention and think about the pattern there in front of you, to then ponder how it matches a target pattern (a disease, let's say).

But after seeing hundreds of cases of a disease, the physican's brain "compiles" the knowledge into an almost instantaneous recognition that they don't have to think about.

The pattern just jumps out at them. They don't ponder it. They just "see" it instantly.

All infants learn language the same way-> hear enough examples of sounds, and their furiously developing brain eventually "gets it". They learn to speak and communicate. Amazing.

And universal. Our brains appear to be automatic pattern-recognition devices.

Question: how can you teach a doctor to be an expert?

You show medical students *many* examples. They go on hospital rounds. They are shown a patient, saying basically: "This is an example of multiple sclerosis...and over here is a patient with a different condition that SEEMS to be multiple sclerosis, but is actually something else, and the symptoms are different in these ways".

With enough examples, most doctors begin to get better and better at recognizing diseases and conditions.

So I think that's how you would teach people to be good at recognizing a genre: repetition of examples of closer and farther matches.

Taxi does this by saying "these are matches" ("ala"s). And sometime later they tell people when they missed the target. Over time many people can learn. But it takes a lot of listening. (And maybe the time lag between creating their example and being told it was a faulty match inhibits the learning process).


The problem with a novice is that their brain just hasn't learned the "genre patterns" yet.

Expert doctors match patterns effortlessly. It is easy for them: no pondering is involved.

Experts in musical genres find it effortless as well:

It just jumps out at them.

[ernstinen]

Glenn --- Thanks so much for that wonderful look into perception! Expertly written by an expert.

In my experience, learning musical genres is enhanced by actually performing those genres. For instance, do you want to write for orchestra convincingly? It helps to actually have performed in an orchestra. Same goes for pop music. Since I personally gigged for over 30 years, I've played just about every style of music that was necessary for the gig in order to make a living. From Bar Mitzvahs to Hard Rock, whatever the audience wanted it was my job to provide the live music. That goes for Jazz, Country, Big Band, Oldies, Ethnic, pretty much all styles --- maybe not Rap! But if I was still performing to put food on the table, I'd probably be doing some form of Rap.

I'm sure genres can be learned by listening, too. That's just as valid as performing. --- But I think my musical tastes are so eclectic because of having to perform so many different styles over the years to make a buck!

My 2 cents,

Ern

[ggalen]

Ern,

Thanks.

I think you are right; you have to get intimately familiar with different syles and gemres, and understand how they "work" to make their "sound". And yeah, I think playing is best, but intense, active listening can also work.

But if a person only plays in one style, they just aren't going to understand and recognize other genres, I don't think.

I think that's a reason why individuals from other races can look similar to us if we have not seen many of those folks in our lives: we are not familiar with that races facial variations, and we view them at a "high level", not noticing the details. A person who has spent time with people of that race will be familiar with the "details".

[dannydep]

Hi Glen,

I don’t think it’s “Learning to perceive a genre...” as much as it is learning to create in a genre.
Exactly as Ern via his 30 years of gigging experience mentioned.

But how can someone who doesn’t have that level of playing experience get forwards via TAXI?

I would say to have a look at the listings and find something that interests you and then write.
Put it up in the Peer-to-Peer to get some feedback and go from there.
And by all means, have fun doing it.

ciao, Dan

[ggalen]

Dan,

Yes, good point and I agree. Ultimately you have to be able to create in a genre.

Of course, the very first track you lay down in the song has to be spot on for the genre, and if you can't perceive if it is "wrong"...then you won't erase and try again to get it right.

And even before that, there is the choice of instruments. The timbre.

And the mix.

It takes real skill and understanding the genre, no doubt about it.

[mazz]

Really breaking down a genre is not that much different from studying classical music theory, it's just recognizing the common practices of a particular genre of music and these days it's also important to be able to recognize and discern production styles, which are inseparable from the musical creation, such as hip hop. I believe this can be done with focused listening and then somehow creating a way to quantify what one is hearing. Sometimes this is an unconscious process that may come from years of gigging such as in Ern's case or some combination of gigging and extremely intensive listening.

One could start with finding the similarities, for instance in blues one could break it down:

1. A large percentage of blues music uses I, IV, V progressions. Once one recognizes this, then it is easier to tell the difference when a blues tune uses a slightly different progression.
2. Most blues tunes use 12 bar form. Of course, there are 8 and 16 bar forms as well, but once one can hear the 12 bar form, it's easier to tell when a tune is not that form.
3. Discern the difference between a shuffle and straight blues groove.

Then once these basics are ingrained, one can dig deeper into the differences between Chicago and Southern Blues, and even begin to recognize different artists and even be able to tell the era from the quality of the recording. The one can even hear the influences of the older blues musicians in the younger ones, and it goes on and on!

It's much the same with any style of music, for instance in classical music I was having a discussion the other day with another composer and we were discussing the difference between the German and French approach to orchestration (which is a lifetime study in itself!). It would be possible to quantify the differences and I'm sure it's even been done!

Another conversation with another composer on hip hop took me back to iTunes to listen and it was apparent the differences in the production and beat styles of Eminem and some of the other artists out there today, not to mention the production styles, even from song to song.

Basically in order to do it effectively, I believe one would need to begin to find out how to describe what they are hearing so as to be able to re-create it on their own system. I believe it takes a lot of focused ear training, which could include playing lots of styles, and for sure takes a lot of focused listening to train the ear to be able to pick a recording apart.

What are the common traits within any genre? How many can you name? Can you give examples of each? If you were given an unfamiliar genre to describe, could you do it?

Robin Fredricks' books break it down well, as well as Jai Josefs' "Writing Music for Hit Songs". He spends a lot of time dissecting songs harmonically and melodically.

It's not a mystery, all the information one needs is contained right in the recordings.

[ggalen]

Mazz,

Great examples, and great observations.

I think we can see that the ability to create a recording spot-on to the genre is a real skill, and takes lots of time and experience listening and understanding how the various genres "work".

You could apply the same ideas to classifying paintings and architecture, couldn't you.

There is, in fact, a famous artificial intelligence computer algorithm called the ID3 algorithm, that can take examples of things and their mix of traits, and spit out "rules" on how to classify a new example.

That can't be easily applied to music, since the "traits" are sonic and complex. They must be recognized from hearing the song.

But it could work with verbal description to some extent.

For example, it could come up with a rule that said: "IF the drumbeat is a TR 808 THEN the genre is likely hip-hop or rap (80% certainty)"

Anyway, I enjoy this discussion.

[mojobone]

It definitely helps to play in ensembles of any style or genre, but if you can't do that, go see live music any way you can. Get there early, get a good seat and pay attention to how the musicians interact on stage, visually as well as musically. You have to learn to listen deeply and with focus. (but without closing your eyes, and believe it or don't, it helps to not tap your foot or clap while you're absorbing) Playing in an ensemble, particularly an improvisational one, teaches one to truly multitask, something most humans can't really do, they just think they can. You listen to your instrument and you listen to the group, you focus your energy toward the audience and the music, and hopefully you lose yourself in the middle of all that, and if you can truly get your ego out of the way using all those distractions, THEN the music can really come through.

Most musical forms that exist today started as live music, and most recorded music exists in these forms and was recorded in groups performing simultaneously, so it's an uphill battle to try to get music that was recorded by a single person to sound live, but that's often the gig, in TV and film work.

It's probably less important to understand the Nashville number system or jazz theory than it is to go see a great blues band and note that while the lead singer/performer is communicating with the audience, he's also communicating with the band using his instrument and a rather sophisticated form of body language, he conducts the rhythm section; if a guitar player raises and drops the neck of his axe, it signals the drummer, who's in charge of the dynamics, to hit the snare as hard as he can-which tells everybody in the band to drop the dynamics down to a whisper; even the audience tends to get quiet, it's all about the tension and release. The band members are communicating with each other as well, playing ahead of, on top of or behind the beat as indicated by the needs of the audience and the song, playing broadly or sitting on the beat, anticipating, syncopating, breathing. It's our job to make our recordings do this and move the people in the same way, toward what Carlos Santana would call a musical/spiritual orgasm or what most would just call a climax. The best way to learn it is to go do it or at least hear and see it being done; there's no substitute for being there. /sermon

[Casey H]

Interesting discussion and a lot of good points made...

I think for a lot of folks, when it comes to Taxi-style listings, the sub-genres (and sub-sub) for wide open ones like rock and pop are tough. For example, within Classic Rock is it John Mellencamp or Rolling Stones? That's where the ability to hone in on a "a la" sample and imitate the styles of the various components comes in the most.

Definitely, if the "a la"s are for song you've played in a band, that's a great advantage. Excellent point there... Interestingly, there are many successful folks here who do amazing sound-like work and have never played live gigs in their lives. They have been born with and/or developed the skill to hear it all and imitate as required.

Random thought over first cup of coffee. Maybe a rally class on sound-like work would be a good one. The instructor could play various tracks (e.g. a Blink-182, Kings of Leon, etc) and talk about the compenents-- what the bass lines are like, drum style, etc, etc. The focus would be on how to "hear" the parts and re-create them- not for rip off, but to understand them enough to imitate the style.

Casey

[mojobone]

Copping the music and copping sounds are two different things; I was talking more about making the music seem real when you're layering parts; recognizing drum treatments and knowing which bass or amp was used involves some serious study, too.