5 ms·

I sang in a children’s choir growing up. There were several kids with perfect pitch over the years. It’s an incredible skill; they really do get the pitch exact

by ttul 8y ago

I sang in a children’s choir growing up. There were several kids with perfect pitch over the years. It’s an incredible skill; they really do get the pitch exactly right - even better than the piano.

jacquesm 8y ago
Makes you wonder what the difference is, genetically speaking. The one set of genes codes for a crystal oscillator and the other for resistors and capacitors or the biological equivalent.
- dekhn 8y ago
  This is a really interesting area of research. I've been following roughly since the time I wrote the code I described above (at UCSF, a medical research institution). At the time, my genetics professor (Nelson Friemer) theorized it was primarily genetic (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090702170209.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090702170209.h...) and even found some genetic associations. I don't think that's really super-important. For example, when he heard that perfect pitch was frequently found in children of musicians, his conclusion is that it was inherited genetically. I think, instead, children of musicians are exposed to pitches and their labels (notes) very early, during neural plasticity, and develop the mental associations, probably with some assist from genetics. The biophysics of audition are pretty interesting; see http://dailynexus.com/2017-08-24/hearing-a-biophysical-and-neurological-enigma/ http://dailynexus.com/2017-08-24/hearing-a-biophysical-and-n... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_cell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_cell One could imagine any number of genetic changes that could affect the ability of the physical system (these parts) as well as the neural parts to do this, but personally I think this is much more learned behavior, not genetically dominated.
  - jacquesm 8y ago
    The big question is: what is the reference?
    - dekhn 8y ago
      reference to what? There is a collect of hair cells that vibrate in response to various pitches. When presented with enough training examples, the brain makes the association between those vibrations, and labels provided by others (that's where the pitch/note mapping comes from). For individual frequencies, I think most people with perfect pitch spend some time with pianos and tuning fork and eventually get a "feel" for what delta 1hz around 440 sounds like.
      - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
        Explain my four-year-old hearing chords played on a piano by the teacher, and able to tell the notes that made up the chord. First 3-notes, 4, 5, 6 and he was still able to do it. Sure the labels are learned. But the ability to hear all that is spread out over a bell-curve. The whole class could tell 1 note, 1/3 could tell 2, then 2 kids could tell 3, then just 1.
        dekhn 8y ago
        yes, and? I don't have perfect pitch, but with extensive training I have limited relative pitch. It's an acquired skill like anything else, and young kids exposed to music pick it up faster- with a distribution, like everything else.
        JoeAltmaier 8y ago
        Oh, and he has perfect pitch. Can tune stringed instruments without a reference, was employed to do so for some summers. It was something he could do, from a very young age. Not apparently learned. Not learned by most of his cohort at music school, so I'm guessing most likely something born with. If there is a distribution, then we have to task to explain that. Reasonable to call it genetic? Why not?
        dekhn 8y ago
        I don't know what you mean by "not apparently learned". Even with genetically inherited perfect pitch, the skill has to be "learned" (IE, presented with note labels). Nobody has the ability- without training- to tell you the frequency of a note. Genetic (in this case) doesn't mean "born with the ability", it means "predisposed towards greater ability after training"). Personally, I'd start with the strong observations like "People whose first language is tonal are more likely to have perfect pitch", while people whose ancestors spoke tonal languages, but were raised with a first language that isn't tonal, are less likely (and vice versa). That says to me "environmental differences" are as strong as genetic. All of this is covered in extensive (and relatively accurate) detail on the wikipedia page. if you want to argue with me further, I suggest getting a PhD in the field, or at least extensive experience with molecular biology, genetics, biophysics, experimental design, and scientific philosophy, as all those are necessary prerequisites for discussing complex traits that have both genetic and environmental components.

by ttul 8y ago

jacquesm 8y ago

Makes you wonder what the difference is, genetically speaking. The one set of genes codes for a crystal oscillator and the other for resistors and capacitors or the biological equivalent.

dekhn 8y ago
This is a really interesting area of research. I've been following roughly since the time I wrote the code I described above (at UCSF, a medical research institution). At the time, my genetics professor (Nelson Friemer) theorized it was primarily genetic (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090702170209.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090702170209.h...) and even found some genetic associations. I don't think that's really super-important. For example, when he heard that perfect pitch was frequently found in children of musicians, his conclusion is that it was inherited genetically. I think, instead, children of musicians are exposed to pitches and their labels (notes) very early, during neural plasticity, and develop the mental associations, probably with some assist from genetics. The biophysics of audition are pretty interesting; see http://dailynexus.com/2017-08-24/hearing-a-biophysical-and-neurological-enigma/ http://dailynexus.com/2017-08-24/hearing-a-biophysical-and-n... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_cell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_cell One could imagine any number of genetic changes that could affect the ability of the physical system (these parts) as well as the neural parts to do this, but personally I think this is much more learned behavior, not genetically dominated.
- jacquesm 8y ago
  The big question is: what is the reference?
  - dekhn 8y ago
    reference to what? There is a collect of hair cells that vibrate in response to various pitches. When presented with enough training examples, the brain makes the association between those vibrations, and labels provided by others (that's where the pitch/note mapping comes from). For individual frequencies, I think most people with perfect pitch spend some time with pianos and tuning fork and eventually get a "feel" for what delta 1hz around 440 sounds like.
    - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
      Explain my four-year-old hearing chords played on a piano by the teacher, and able to tell the notes that made up the chord. First 3-notes, 4, 5, 6 and he was still able to do it. Sure the labels are learned. But the ability to hear all that is spread out over a bell-curve. The whole class could tell 1 note, 1/3 could tell 2, then 2 kids could tell 3, then just 1.
      - dekhn 8y ago
        yes, and? I don't have perfect pitch, but with extensive training I have limited relative pitch. It's an acquired skill like anything else, and young kids exposed to music pick it up faster- with a distribution, like everything else.
        JoeAltmaier 8y ago
        Oh, and he has perfect pitch. Can tune stringed instruments without a reference, was employed to do so for some summers. It was something he could do, from a very young age. Not apparently learned. Not learned by most of his cohort at music school, so I'm guessing most likely something born with. If there is a distribution, then we have to task to explain that. Reasonable to call it genetic? Why not?
        dekhn 8y ago
        I don't know what you mean by "not apparently learned". Even with genetically inherited perfect pitch, the skill has to be "learned" (IE, presented with note labels). Nobody has the ability- without training- to tell you the frequency of a note. Genetic (in this case) doesn't mean "born with the ability", it means "predisposed towards greater ability after training"). Personally, I'd start with the strong observations like "People whose first language is tonal are more likely to have perfect pitch", while people whose ancestors spoke tonal languages, but were raised with a first language that isn't tonal, are less likely (and vice versa). That says to me "environmental differences" are as strong as genetic. All of this is covered in extensive (and relatively accurate) detail on the wikipedia page. if you want to argue with me further, I suggest getting a PhD in the field, or at least extensive experience with molecular biology, genetics, biophysics, experimental design, and scientific philosophy, as all those are necessary prerequisites for discussing complex traits that have both genetic and environmental components.