Subject: Re: Aural Training
From: huwmcgregor (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Aug 20 2005 - 03:25:58 EDT
On 20/8/05 9:27 am, "Eliot Handelman" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Kevin Austin wrote:
>> PS I have found Pierre Schaffer's conception of sound to be of minimal
>> use in extended study -- a good quick introduction but not a solid
>> basis for refined aural development.
> I confess I never read it but nowadays the concept of the "auditory
> object" is all the rage and Schaffer may or may not be useful
> in that regard. The question posed is, "what is an auditory object,?"
> Music clearly offers obvious examples, eg, "the theme." Is
> process an object? I think no -- we understand process as being applied
> to something, namely the object whose
> identity remains constant. Is a violin glissando an object or a process?
> I think we understand it as "something rising," and the
> something, which is perhaps not nameable, is the object.
I believe it could be both....dependant on who your speaking to. With
regards to students then they should certainty be introduced to both, as it
is of course integral to their aural training. Ea being all encompassing
then you will use both terms in their composition and production process.
I am also trying to think of intuitive ways of introducing aural and
listening skills to my students at further education level. One possibility
of development I thought possible was by free Improvisation, thus developing
their ears within a real situation. This will help to speed up their
intuitive reactions to listening. Then to develop this further I thought a
group analysis which would involve both aural and listening skills. By
listening back to their own creation they will have already gained the
'previous knowledge that might help them to push that little bit further.
Thoughts on this would be appreciated!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:10 EST