Can they hear a difference? Professional digital composition and the ability of music students to discriminate deep-sampled vs. acoustic instrumental performance recordings | Intellect Skip to content
1981
Volume 4, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 2397-6721
  • E-ISSN: 2397-673X

Abstract

The majority of popular music is produced utilizing deep-sampled instruments. This may be important for music educators to understand as the ability to expertly manipulate deep-samples to sound like live performance is an expected industry standard. The purpose of this exploratory study was to evaluate the ability of music students (=96) and professors (=9) to discriminate between deep-sampled and acoustic recordings and to explore why they believed recordings were composed with deep-samples or were live acoustic performances. Results indicate weak ability of participants to discriminate between deep-sampled and acoustic recordings. Essay responses indicate participants doubted such refined and expressive recordings were possible using deep-sampled instruments. Implications for music education include reconsidering skills that students and their teachers need to strive towards industry-standard production.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/jpme_00015_1
2020-03-01
2024-04-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bigoni, F., and Dahl, S.. ( 2018;), ‘ Timbre discrimination for brief instrument sounds. ’, in E. Gomez,, X. Hu,, E. Humphrey, and E. Benetos. (eds), 19th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference (ISMIR) 2018 International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference, Paris:: DBLP Computer Science Bibliography;, pp. 12834.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Braun, H. J.. ( 2002), Music and Technology in the Twentieth Century, Baltimore, MD:: JHU Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Chang, J.. ( 2005), Can’t Stop Won’t Stop: A History of the Hip-Hop Generation, St. Martin’s Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Desain, P.. ( 1992;), ‘ A (de)composable theory of rhythm perception. ’, Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9:4, pp. 43954.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Gabrielsson, A.. ( 2016;), ‘ The relationship between musical structure and perceived expression. ’, in S. Hallam,, I. Cross, and M. Thaut. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Music Psychology, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;, pp. 21532.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Geiser, E.,, Ziegler, E.,, Jancke, L., and Meyer, M.. ( 2009;), ‘ Early electrophysiological correlates of meter and rhythm processing in music perception. ’, Cortex, 45:1, pp. 93102.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Geringer, J. M., and Madsen, C. K.. ( 1981;), ‘ Verbal and operant discrimination-preference for tone quality and intonation. ’, Psychology of Music, 9:1, pp. 2630.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Harlow, L.. ( 2014), The Essence of Multivariate Thinking, , 2nd ed.., Abingdon:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Kopiez, R.,, Wolf, A.,, Platz, F., and Mons, J.. ( 2016;), ‘ Replacing the orchestra? The discernibility of sample library and live orchestra sounds. ’, PLoS ONE, 11:7, e0158324.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. May, W. V.. ( 1985;), ‘ Musical style preferences and aural discrimination skills of primary grade school children. ’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 33:1, pp. 722.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. McAdams, S.,, Beauchamp, J. W., and Meneguzzi, S.. ( 1999;), ‘ Discrimination of musical instrument sounds resynthesized with simplified spectrotemporal parameters. ’, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 105:2, pp. 88297.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. McAdams, S., and Giordano, B. L.. ( 2016;), ‘ The perception of musical timbre. ’, in S. Hallam,, I. Cross, and M. Thaut. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Music Psychology, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;, pp. 11324.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Parncutt, R.. ( 2012), Harmony: A Psychoacoustical Approach, vol. 19, Berlin:: Springer Science & Business Media;.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Pejrolo, A.. ( 2012), Creative Sequencing Techniques for Music Production: A Practical Guide to Pro Tools, Logic, Digital Performer, and Cubase, Waltham, MD:: Focal Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Rentz, E.. ( 1992;), ‘ Musicians’ and nonmusicians’ aural perception of orchestral instrument families. ’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 40:3, pp. 18592.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Sarath, E.,, Myers, D., and Campbell, P. S.. ( 2016), Redefining Music Studies in an Age of Change, Abingdon:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Sundstrup, L.. ( 2009;), ‘ The virtual orchestra: A systematic method of realising music composition through sample-based orchestral simulation. ’, University of Wollongong;.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Väkevä, L.. ( 2010;), ‘ Garage band or GarageBand®? Remixing musical futures. ’, British Journal of Music Education, 27:1, pp. 5970.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Wise, S.,, Greenwood, J., and Davis, N.. ( 2011;), ‘ Teachers’ use of digital technology in secondary music education: Illustrations of changing classrooms. ’, British Journal of Music Education, 28:2, pp. 11734.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Ruiz, José Valentino,, Cooper, Patrick K., and Muhammed, Jalil Najeeb. ( 2020;), ‘ Can they hear a difference? Professional digital composition and the ability of music students to discriminate deep-sampled vs. acoustic instrumental performance recordings. ’, Journal of Popular Music Education, 4:1, pp. 8199, doi: https://doi.org/10.1386/jpme_00015_1
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/jpme_00015_1
Loading
/content/journals/10.1386/jpme_00015_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error