Newsgroups: comp.music
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!batcomputer!cornell!cs.cornell.edu!rapo
From: rapo@cs.cornell.edu (Andy Rapo)
Subject: Re: Perfect Pitch
Message-ID: <1991Apr2.145836.16301@cs.cornell.edu>
Sender: news@cs.cornell.edu (USENET news user)
Nntp-Posting-Host: spinet.cs.cornell.edu
Organization: Cornell University, CS Dept., Ithaca, NY
References: <3744@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.UUCP> <1991Mar27.122408@Think.COM> <1991Apr1.165504.5325@cs.cornell.edu> <716@synopsys.COM>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1991 14:58:36 GMT
Lines: 13


The sunglasses arguments - for relative visual color detection are pretty good.  They make it clear that the eyes are susceptible to relative color levels.  But they also reveal something important about how we 'understand' color.  

It is pretty amazing that our eyes can 'normalize' after having a certain band of light frequencies cut out.  It makes sense that screwing up th input would also srew up the interpretation.  However, in order for things to look 'normal' again, we have to have an unchanging idea of what normal is.

Our understanding of what 'green' is doesn't change when we put on sunglasses.  Our eyes depend on color relationships but our understanding of color doesn't change.

This does not seem to be true of sound - for most people.  My understanding of what a C# is is completely dependent on what I'm given to be a C.

Andy Rapo

P.S. - Hopefully this reply isn't formatted as 'horribly' as my first one.
 
