Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Birds Found Using Human Musical Scales For the First Time

Posted by samzenpus on from the song-of-the-wild dept.

sciencehabit writes The flutelike songs of the male hermit thrush are some of the most beautiful in the animal kingdom. Now, researchers have found that these melodies employ the same mathematical principles that underlie many Western and non-Western musical scales—the first time this has been seen in any animal outside humans. It's doubtful that the similarity is due to the physics of the birds' vocal tract, the team reports. Rather, it seems male hermit thrushes choose to sing notes from these harmonic series. It may be that such notes are easier for the males to remember, or provide a ready yardstick for their chief critics—female hermit thrushes. The study adds to other research indicating that human music is not solely governed by cultural practices, but is also at least partially determined by biology.

80 comments

  1. That explains it... by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Funny
    ..I could have sworn I heard Whole Lotta Love blasting out of the magnolia tree across the street.

    Turns out, it might have been a couple of bluejays getting horny!!!

    The only thing missing was the sound of the thermin...

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    1. Re:That explains it... by PPH · · Score: 2

      And that explains the magpie saying, "Needs more cowbell."

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:That explains it... by flyneye · · Score: 1

      I heard "SAIL!", but it was just two Ostriches screwing in a Volkwagen.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    3. Re:That explains it... by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      ..I could have sworn I heard Whole Lotta Love blasting out of the magnolia tree across the street.

      Probably not. Blues uses mostly sharps and flats (eg: not the notes this article is talking about).

      Most likely it was just John Cusack with a boom-box on the lawn trying to get his girl back. Stereotypical stalker. If it happens again, call the cops on him.

    4. Re:That explains it... by jdschulteis · · Score: 1

      ..I could have sworn I heard Whole Lotta Love blasting out of the magnolia tree across the street.

      Turns out, it might have been a couple of bluejays getting horny!!!

      The only thing missing was the sound of the thermin...

      If you mean the descending sound in the chorus, I don't think it's a theremin. I've always thought it was slide guitar and volume control.

  2. Pretty sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That mockingbirds beat them too it, if only by imitation.

    1. Re:Pretty sure by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Well, yes, and my wife's parrot can accurately whistle the theme to Castle, but I don't think imitation counts. I think what the article is talking about is birds in the wild with no contact with humans, using the well-tempered scale.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    2. Re:Pretty sure by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      When we lived in urban Phoenix, I used to occasionally hear mockingbirds singing the Chinese default car alarm tones.

    3. Re:Pretty sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Used to hear birds in london that could do the Nokia ringtone...

    4. Re: Pretty sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      From Scottsdale, they still do.

    5. Re:Pretty sure by omnichad · · Score: 1

      and my wife's parrot can accurately whistle the theme to Castle

      Please, post this to Youtube...or Snappamatic.

    6. Re:Pretty sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, yes, and my wife's parrot can accurately whistle the theme to Castle, but I don't think imitation counts. I think what the article is talking about is birds in the wild with no contact with humans, using the well-tempered scale.

      I'd pay good money for a parrot that could whistle the X-Files theme.

    7. Re:Pretty sure by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      I would guess these birds would use Pythagorean or Just Intonation, not a well temperament. Even meantone is significantly bent from the natural harmonic series in order to close up the thirds in the keys close to C, and well temperaments come even later and are much closer to equal temperament than is meantone.

      Birds probably don't worry about modulation on a twelve-note keyboard. There's no reason they need to be consistent even if they do transpose. A doesn't always have to be 440.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  3. As long as the birds don't start rapping by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

    or hip hop, I don't mind.

    1. Re:As long as the birds don't start rapping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evolution dictates that some other bird will pop a motherfucking cap in that nigga's ass if he starts rapping. That is the only reason we don't see it more often.

  4. Bah humbug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless they can twerk while they sing who cares...

    1. Re:Bah humbug by ChipMonk · · Score: 1

      The bird of paradise comes pretty close.

  5. Who wrote that birdcall? DMCA that chirp! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can we be sure that the birds didn't learn the scale from hearing human music? The phenomenon of birds adding things like car alarms & ringtones to their repertoire is well known.

    In fact, I suspect in a few (human) generations, people will think the ringtones were made to sound like birdcalls...

    captcha: peaceful

    1. Re:Who wrote that birdcall? DMCA that chirp! by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > Can we be sure that the birds didn't learn the scale from hearing human music?

      Dunno, the article doesn't mention whether the birds in question were observed near a human habitat.

      I can see it going either way -- that birds have adopted the well tempered scale through virtue of listening to the scale used worldwide for 300 years, or that JS Bach either knowingly or unknowingly, copied nature when he popularized the scale in 1722.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    2. Re:Who wrote that birdcall? DMCA that chirp! by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      I can see it going either way -- that birds have adopted the well tempered scale through virtue of listening to the scale used worldwide for 300 years, or that JS Bach either knowingly or unknowingly, copied nature when he popularized the scale in 1722.

      I'd say neither.

      First of all, TFA says that the birds' note-frequencies follow a harmonic structure. Well-tempered (or more correctly, equal-tempered) scales follow a logarithmic structure.

      Secondly, development of equal-tempered scales pre-dates Bach by a century and a half, and arguably even much earlier. To be sure, Bach played a crucial role in popularizing equal temperament, but he wasn't copying nature when he wrote Das Wholtemperierte Klavier (book 1 in 1722 and book 2 in 1742.)

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    3. Re:Who wrote that birdcall? DMCA that chirp! by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      Bach was promoting well temperament, NOT equal temperament. Well temperament was much closer to equal than the meantone that preceded it, closing up the wolf interval Eb to G# and making all keys playable. It did not make them all equal. Keys far distant from C were still more discordant than F-C-G-D.

      It's also true that while it's possible to formulate an equal temperament in terms of beats per second between fifths, this depends on having a uniform starting pitch (like our modern A=440), which ALSO did not exist in those days. "A" could be anywhere from 390 to 460+, depending on which town you went to. (Anywhere from a whole tone flat to a semitone sharp.) A tuning regime using beats cannot survive such variances.

      Equal temperament didn't become prominent until late in the 19th century. Well temperaments for keyboards were still the standard, and instruments not limited to fixed pitches (including voices) still have a tendency to drift toward 5-limit Just Intonation, even when playing with equal-tempered accompaniment. Barbershop quartets even use 7-limit JI. Solo lines and melodies not doubled by fixed-pitch instruments tend toward Pythagorean (which is really 3-limit JI) -- which I suspect is also what the birds are doing.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    4. Re:Who wrote that birdcall? DMCA that chirp! by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      Thanks very much for that. Obviously I was confusing the two.

      After reading your post, I vaguely recall hearing long ago that there was a difference between well-temperament and equal-temperament. But that's no excuse for my confusion now.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  6. Meanwhile in bird news... by Narcocide · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bird Reporter: This just in! Humans now claiming ownership of our musical scales.

    1. Re: Meanwhile in bird news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other news, the worm has turned, and it appears "bird" really is "the word".

      Buh buh buh, badabum.

  7. The extent hearing is determined by physics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The extent hearing is determined by physics is largely ignored. Musical theory is, in its most literal form, about matching waveforms. They harmonize because the waveforms are in harmony, literally. That such a physical point exists outside of human cognition allows it to be an emergent point for evolution, easier to learn how to detect through the white noise than patterns that fail to resonate coherently in the listener's environment.

    Frankly, duh.

    1. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Frankly, duh.

      I guess you know everything.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I guess you know everything.

      He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones. Pot meet kettle. Etc.. This is just a sampling of your bashing other people over the past 7 days.

      So......do you understand the greenhouse effect or not?

      you're not understanding the scale of things involved

      Do you lack reading comprehension?

      do you actually understand the science involved?

      My first instinct was to completely ignore you, but I figured it would only be fair to warn you before I blocked you out completely.

      SystemD is trying to make a clean bootup system. Who doesn't like that?

      Surely you understand that. Furthermore, another way you are also wrong

      I'm kind of surprised you found it difficult, actually.

      does it really bother you that much when someone implies you might be stupid

      You got it wrong too.

      Try taking your own advice:

      Someone else doing something wrong isn't a justification to also do something wrong.

    3. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by acroyear · · Score: 2

      Indeed. The nature of the relationship between the 'first' and 'fifth', the first harmonic overtone, is inherent in the actual physics of sound itself. The order of 'discovery' of the other notes of the scale inherently result from developing an ear to notice the other harmonics - it only takes finding 8 harmonics to end up with a pentatonic scale, found in almost every historical culture in the world.

      It does, however, take a matter of conscious choice to actually develop the whole circle of fifths, the idea of modulation, and then the necessity of tempering the instrument - all aspects strictly of western tonality (with the resulting western a-tonality that followed in the 20th century: our atonality is actually still a limitation of our instruments of choice and the temperament they inherited).

      I don't expect the birds to actually get that far...and even if they did, we'd just be accusing them of impersonating Messiaen's works.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    4. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. If you express a note as a sine wave, you'll find that ones ring together after a shorter number of cycles are harmonious and those which take more cycles to ring at the same time are discordant. If you factor two frequencies into prime factors, you'll find that harmonious ones share all but a very small prime factor(s), and the product of these remaining prime factors determine how long it takes for the notes to ring together again, allowing you to predict how harmonious or discordant any two frequencies will be.

    5. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by acroyear · · Score: 2

      That may be a fact, but we didn't need to know any of that. And neither do the birds.

      That's the whole point of the harmonic series: our ears, in their ability to hear, can hear the overtones in a note because they are there *physically* in the sound. It is unavoidable.

      "Dissonant" notes, such as a tritone or a minor 2nd, aren't dissonant because of some sine wave detail: that's just a matter of mathematical transposition and simplification. The notes are dissonant because their collective overtones within them are clashing all the way up the harmonic series as well. We hear ALL of those harmonic clashes, even if we're not conscious of it. The sine wave isn't why they are dissonant: the harmonics are.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    6. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      First came music, then language, symbolism, and finally math. The last two are where humans have unique abilities.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    7. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How mathematical would they have to be? The basic intervals are nice clean ratios of small integers: 1:2 (octave), 2:3 (fifth), 3:4 (fourth), 4:5 (third). They sound so nice because of how simple they are. No wonder the birds would pick them up.

      Now, really, how far around do they go in the circle of fifths? Do they go far enough to hit the Pythagorean Comma? That doesn't sound so sweet.

    8. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      Indeed. The nature of the relationship between the 'first' and 'fifth', the first harmonic overtone, is inherent in the actual physics of sound itself.

      You're mixing modern and archaic terminologies. The first harmonic (modern) of a note is its fundamental (lowest) frequency. The first overtone (archaic) is the octave above it. The "fifth" is the third harmonic (or second overtone.)

      modulation [...] and then the necessity of tempering the instrument - all aspects strictly of western tonality (with the resulting western a-tonality that followed in the 20th century: our atonality is actually still a limitation of our instruments of choice and the temperament they inherited).

      I wouldn't call atonality a limitation of Western instruments. Rather, it was a natural progression from the flexibility that modulation and equal temperament provided, from Wagner to Schoenberg.

      I don't expect the birds to actually get that far...and even if they did, we'd just be accusing them of impersonating Messiaen's works.

      I think Messiaen would smack you for saying that. He was a great lover of birds. He considered them to be nature's most gifted musicians, and would have nothing to do with a student who didn't agree. Messiaen impersonated the birds, not the other way around. [Of course, you probably know that already. :-)]

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    9. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by jblues · · Score: 2

      > I don't expect the birds to actually get that far...and even if they did, we'd just be accusing them of impersonating Messiaen's works. So we will have: Prelude and Fugue No. 1 in C major for the well-tempered hermit thrush . . . but if an equal tempered Hermit Thrush ever comes along and uses a dominant 7th to modulate to the key of G we'll all be flabbergasted.

      --
      If it acquires resources on instantiation like a duck, then its a shared_ptr<Duck>
    10. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      That's the whole point of the harmonic series: our ears, in their ability to hear, can hear the overtones in a note because they are there *physically* in the sound. It is unavoidable.

      Only in (theoretical) 1-dimensional vibrating bodies, which are the only ones which generate a pure harmonic series. Actual vibrating bodies in the real world tend to generate very complex sets of overtones, most of which are NOT harmonic and/or relate to multiple "fundamentals" (resulting in the "clangy" sound of bells, for example).

      I'm not at all saying the harmonic series is bogus -- but its importance in human music is due to many cultures using string and wind instruments which approximate this 1-dimensional pattern of vibration. Cultures which, for example, tend to use lots of gongs and bells and objects which don't vibrate with only the harmonic series often tend to have music and scales which do NOT fit well within our "western" scale system.

      The notes are dissonant because their collective overtones within them are clashing all the way up the harmonic series as well. We hear ALL of those harmonic clashes, even if we're not conscious of it.

      Absolutely true, but again this is a description which assumes a certain type of vibrating body (which, by the way, is rare in nature). One could easily produce vibrating bodies that include a tritone or some other dissonant interval within their set of overtones -- and people have done this -- which basically makes those intervals sound much more "consonant," particularly to people without musical training who are less likely to recognize the weirdness of the intervals.

    11. Re:The extent hearing is determined by physics... by beernutz · · Score: 1

      Thank you!

      I firmly believe in calling out this kind of negative behavior.

      Sunlight being the best disinfectant and all that.

      --
      (stolen from DaBum) I am dyslexia of borg - your ass will be laminated.
  8. Everything is determined by biology, even culture by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Every single thing we do is determined by biology, which is determined by chemistry, which is determined by physics... after that, turtles... or the Loch Ness Monster

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  9. I'm sure I heard by Threni · · Score: 2

    a bird singing some Messiaen the other day. The resemblance was uncanny.

    1. Re:I'm sure I heard by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      When I used to live in the foothills of the Ozark Mountains some decades ago, there was a bird whose song I could hear right about dusk every night. It would sing the first few notes of "The Way You Look Tonight". I was even able to pick out the exact pitches on my chromatic harmonica. The song is in Eb and the bird was in perfect tune. Bb, Eb, F.

      I never did find out what bird it was, and only lived there for a matter of months. There were so many songbirds around there, it really did sound like Messiaen sometimes. And then all of a sudden...it would get absolutely quiet. Then they'd come back little by little.

      There was also a rooster that would wake me up at daybreak, but I didn't appreciate that nearly as much.

      The last few times I was in Europe, I noticed a significant absence of songbirds (and birds in general, in fact). Of course there are pigeons all over the cities, but very few songbirds.

      Regarding birds, and offtopic, if you want to read a really interesting book, I recommend A Feathered River Across the Sky: The Passenger Pigeon's Flight to Extinction, by Joel Greenberg. I'm not a birder or even much for nature, having grown up in downtown Chicago, but this book, which someone gave me as a gift, blew my mind. It's a hell of a story. Here, if anyone is interested:

      http://www.amazon.com/Feathere...

      It was so interesting that I'm thinking about reading another book that I heard was about the now-extinct passenger pigeon, The Silent Sky, which is actually about the last of the species that died in the early part of the 20th century..

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:I'm sure I heard by SternisheFan · · Score: 1
      Your observation of bird decline in Europe is confirmed...

      A study found that about 90 percent of a decline occurred in the most common bird species, including grey partridges, skylarks, sparrows and starlings

      Europe has an estimated 421 million fewer birds than three decades ago, and current treatment of the environment is unsustainable for many common species, a study released on Monday said. The population crash is related to modern farming methods and the loss and damage of habitats, according to the study published in science journal Ecology Letters. "This is a warning from birds throughout Europe. It is clear that the way we are managing the environment is unsustainable for many of our most familiar species," said Richard Gregory of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, which co-led the study.

      www.france24.com/en/20141103-europe-has-421-million-fewer-birds-30-years-ago/

      On topic, since songbirds have always been around us humans, it occurs to me perhaps we learned scales and melody from our prehistoric avian friends?

    3. Re:I'm sure I heard by acroyear · · Score: 1

      So glad I'm not the only one who thought that when I read the headline.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    4. Re:I'm sure I heard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently many people in Cyprus trap migrating songbirds for food http://news.discovery.com/anim...

    5. Re:I'm sure I heard by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      That is disturbing. Reminded me of the old "Faces of Death" videotape when the South African tourists eating the brains of freshly slaughtered monkey at a local restaurant.

    6. Re:I'm sure I heard by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Except, if your theory about humans learning melody from birds is true, this is more like the hairless monkey eating its own brains.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  10. Lyre bird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Bird sounds from the lyre bird and more

  11. Obligatory by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gc4QTqslN4

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    1. Re:Obligatory by unitron · · Score: 1

      I was thinking even more old school than that: Rockin' Robin

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    2. Re:Obligatory by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      But you didn't come through with a URL, so, what difference, at this point, does it make?

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    3. Re:Obligatory by treeves · · Score: 1

      This is even more old school anyways: www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8pFNQv35uI

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    4. Re:Obligatory by unitron · · Score: 1

      But you didn't come through with a URL, so, what difference, at this point, does it make?

      But all you supplied was a link to YouTube which has to be loaded before you know what it is, instead of just being able to mouse over it and see something written in human understandable language at the bottom of the page to possibly give you a clue as to whether you want to bother with it or not.

      Which is really more a complaint against YouTube than against you.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  12. but are these _true_ hermits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not valid if these birds have previously been within hearing distance of any human music, is it? We know how easy it is to catch a tune and how hard it is to ever forget it.

  13. Disagree by s.petry · · Score: 1

    While the world is surely made up of math and physics, we learn to observe, measure, and act based on our social interactions. If nobody bothered to teach you math, language, etc.. you would be no better than an animal (and most likely eaten by one).

    Biology gives us basics, such as survival instincts. Interaction, observation, and accumulated knowledge give us Physics and Music. Young birds seem to learn learn to call just like we learn to yell if we need something, and they progress beyond that basic yell just like we do. Based on other birds (and other influences depending on the bird), they learn more complex songs.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Disagree by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      Statistical anomaly remains such until more study proves otherwise.

      Or do you think those contributions were original, and outside what the researchers have encountered in existing feedback?

      Because it seems like you took a position Based on a poorly reported and poorly presented bit of crap research. Hint, when the conclusion is anthropomorphize, it takes a lot of evidence.

      Are you aware how many times sexual reproduction evolved? Independent discovery among very different people, or species, or kingdoms, is not rare.

    2. Re:Disagree by s.petry · · Score: 1

      You received the exact wrong impression. My comment was more that Biology is not the primary factor involved in social interactions, as GP seemed to claim.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    3. Re:Disagree by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Yes, every social interaction clearly is a biological/chemical/physical function. There is nothing higher than the laws of nature. Man is not supernatural. Brain chemistry determines how he feels, what he thinks, and what he does.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  14. So, in other words... by Zanadou · · Score: 1

    ...that underlie many Western and non-Western musical scales...

    So, in other words... that underlie all musical scales??

  15. Maybe it's the opposite. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We ended up having a bird-like scale, out of imitation.

    I seem to remember (vaguely) a movie depicting Strauss (???) getting the inspiration to one of his works from a bird song...

  16. mp3s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the end of this one sounds kind of cool:
    http://www.pnas.org/content/su...

    "A hermit thrush song type classified as harmonic (slowed down 6Ã--)."

    from: http://www.pnas.org/content/su...

  17. And car alarms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mocking birds mimic car alarms all the time... I assume there is a scale in there

  18. I can see the first lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who will sue a zoo first when the bird sings a copyrighted song in public? Zoo will probably have to join ASCAP.

  19. Musical scales based on math, not on culture by nut · · Score: 1

    Harmony in music is based almost directly on the simplicity of the ratio of the frequencies of notes in a chord.

    Octave = 1/2
    Fifth = 2/3
    Fourth = 3/4
    Major Third = 4/5
    Minor Third = 5/6

    and so on.

    Their are certain cultural anomalies; For example our our preference for three notes in a simple chord (first, third and fifth) means that fourths are generally considered slightly more disharmonious that thirds, due to their relationship to the third and the fifth.

    Also the intervals in most instruments are fudged slightly to make the work in any key. This practice started with Bach I believe.

    The point, of course, is that it is not that surprising that harmony is more universal that human culture. The mathematics that underlies harmony is more universal than human culture.

    --
    Never trust a man in a blue trench coat, Never drive a car when you're dead
    1. Re:Musical scales based on math, not on culture by ExecutorElassus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Pedagogy time. Vibrating bodies of any physical type will vibrate at an infinite ascending series of whole number multiples of the base frequency f (so, f, 2f, 3f, etc.) in decreasing -- but not linearly or regularly decreasing -- amplitude (the exact difference in the proportions of the various overtones, among other factors, is why different instruments sound different).

      The musical scale used in most music in the Western tradition, however, does not use anything like a harmonic series. Rather, it (presently) uses an equal-tempered scale, such that each note is the same distance from the next. This is a convention adopted to make keyboard music in many different styles and keys more practical to play, but has almost no musical basis per se. To a sensitive ear, a lot of the intervals in an equal-tempered system (most notably the major third) are starkly out of tune from their harmonic manifestations.

      Bach did not use, nor attempt to use, equal-tempered scales. This is an error of historical writing that was introduced by a poorly-informed musicologist into the 1890 edition of the Grove Dictionary of Music, and has persisted ever since. Bach not only could not have tuned his instruments to a truly equal temperament (the technology to do so was not available until the 1820s), almost everybody of his time agreed that more-equal temperaments sounded generally awful and unmusical. Bach used "Well Temperament," which is a distinct system of temperament (of which there are many variants; just which one he used is subject to debate), that kept most intervals in most keys acceptably approximate, while allowing each key to have a slightly different flavor/color.

      I imagine the birds sing notes out of a harmonic series because the intervals are much easier to hear.

    2. Re:Musical scales based on math, not on culture by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

      Not anymore. Since the domination of the equal temperament scales, only the octave sounds pure. I am curious to whether the birds use our modern equal temperament scales or more natural scales.

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    3. Re:Musical scales based on math, not on culture by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 2

      Pedagogy time. Vibrating bodies of any physical type will vibrate at an infinite ascending series of whole number multiples of the base frequency f (so, f, 2f, 3f, etc.) in decreasing -- but not linearly or regularly decreasing -- amplitude (the exact difference in the proportions of the various overtones, among other factors, is why different instruments sound different).

      False. Your description is only true of very even (theoretical) one-dimensional vibrating bodies. Thin strings and thin columns of air (think some brass instruments) come closest to this, but those are generally not naturally occurring.

      Even other human instruments display a much greater variety of potential harmonics -- if you introduce a conical bore instead of a cylindrical one into a wind instrument, for example, some harmonics will be emphasized over others, and the "infinite ascending series" of continuously decreasing amplitude becomes less and less true.

      But if you look at other vibrating bodies that have more than one dimension -- which is actually of course true of ANY real thing in the real world -- the set of overtones produced will be quite irregular and not generally relatable to one single fundamental frequency.

      Even among human societies, ethnomusicological studies have shown that cultures which tend to use a lot of instruments which are NOT one dimensional often have scales that diverge greatly from the "normal" construction using "standard" intervals. (For example, traditional Javanese music, which is often based around gongs and other instruments with irregular 3-D shapes.)

      So, there's nothing "natural" about the harmonic series except when you construct an instrument to specifications which are somewhat rare in nature. (That doesn't mean they do not occur in nature, but among the variety of sounds produced in the world, they are only a small part...) Which means, of course, that acceptable "musical" scale and sounds are shaped by our cultural expectations.

      I imagine the birds sing notes out of a harmonic series because the intervals are much easier to hear.

      For birds or for humans? Having read a lot of the previous literature on animal and music studies, it's not at all clear that birds hear anything like humans or react to elements in a harmonic series in anything like the way humans do. I'm not saying it's impossible, but people have been looking at this stuff for MANY years (including quite a few previous bird studies that have found NO evidence of this), and there is a reason this study is claiming to be the "first" to show anything like this.

      So, unless all the previous literature is flawed, or unless this particular species somehow "hears more like humans" than other birds, I'm not sure what general conclusions can be taken away from this one study.

    4. Re:Musical scales based on math, not on culture by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Bach used "Well Temperament,"

      Hence, "The Well-Tempered Clavier".

  20. Maybe it's their spines. by Rujiel · · Score: 1

    The twelve tone scale in humans corresponds to the resonant frequencies of our vertebrae. I've always wondered if different species have their own spine-songs, so to speak. As a fun side-note, humans automatically speak in a major or minor key depending on whether their message is positive or negativr.

  21. The early bird ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... catches the earworm.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  22. Sounds not unlike the intervals used by other bird by bshell · · Score: 1

    Surprised nobody has linked to this YouTube video of the thrush in the paper: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... Doesn't sound that much different from a lot of other birds that use similar intervals. e.g. Red winged blackbird and chickadee.

  23. Where do I get my grant dollars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  24. Quibble with your disagree by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    While the world is surely made up of math and physics

    IAAMandP, and I'll be the first to tell you tell you humbly that I have no idea what the world is "surely" made up of. What I am sure of is that MandP (and by extension, science) is the best way for humans to construct an understanding of what the world is made up of.

    Interaction, observation, and accumulated knowledge give us Physics and Music.

    I'm with you there. And aren't we blessed to receive both.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    1. Re:Quibble with your disagree by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I guess my thoughts were more along the lines of how animals and plants reproduce and grow based on what we recognize as mathematical principles. We also know that our laws of physics limit our world, just like they limit us. When free, 2 Hydrogen atoms + an Oxygen atom will create a water molecule if the conditions are correct. Bonded, the rule changes and we are stuck with a different molecule unless atoms are freed.

      "Surely made up of" simply indicates that there seem to be a finite set of rules that make up the Universe. Often times our understanding is incorrect, but once the rule is found the world makes more sense.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  25. Surely the headline is way off. by mjgday · · Score: 1

    Humans discover they really have been copying the birds all along.

    --
    foo
    1. Re:Surely the headline is way off. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      There was a video I watched on wimp.com that went over this exact same thing. Many birds in nature already naturally do minor and major scales. They compared many bird calls to various pieces of music and found many striking similarities.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  26. Bah humbug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn, now I have to wonder who would want to watch a bird twerking.

  27. The extent hearing is determined by physics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The extent hearing is determined by physics is largely ignored. Musical theory is, in its most literal form, about matching waveforms. They harmonize because the waveforms are in harmony, literally. That such a physical point exists outside of human cognition allows it to be an emergent point for evolution, easier to learn how to detect through the white noise than patterns that fail to resonate coherently in the listener's environment.

    Frankly, duh.

    Disclaimer: I don't sing, am not musical and couldn't carry a tune in a bucket!

    My epiphany came when I talked to a young lady that sang choir. She talked about "tuning" to sing in pitch with the rest of the choir. She mentioned a technique that the music teacher taught - she plugged her ears and hummed near the note, varying it up and down until she felt a "buzzing" in her ear that told here she was exactly on pitch.

    Now, as an engineer, that tells me that there are probably resonance points in human hearing that leads to preferred notes. Your points about physics determining the harmony of notes may be well-taken but what caused the fundamental frequencies of notes in our scales to be picked in the first place? I suspect that is physiological.

    We may only truly know when (if) we meet a race that evolved completely separately and see what (if anything) passes for music in their culture.

  28. Free Bird!! by BenSchuarmer · · Score: 1

    Not sure whether that's free as in freedom or free as in lunch.

  29. scientist correction comment from page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Emily Doolittle
    This is just a quick note to clarify that we did not find that hermit thrushes sing "human musical scales". We found that many of their songs are based on the harmonic series, just as the intervals in many human musical scales are drawn from the harmonic series. But we found no evidence that hermit thrushes are singing "scales". (And even if they were singing scales, they'd be hermit thrush scales, not human scales.)"

  30. # the way that we walk, the way that we talk... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, almost

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:# the way that we walk, the way that we talk... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      I always considered mathematics to be a way of expressing physical law. Not really a force per se, more of a language to make it understandable and quantifiable.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”