Musical IQ test? Dodgy?

**rauschwerk** · 14-03-21, 17:14

I can't see for the life of me what this has to do with any accepted definition of IQ. So yes, dodgy to say the least.

**Eine Alpensinfonie** · 15-03-21, 09:52

It’s a bit like those (stupid) IQ-claiming tests found on Facebook.

**Dave2002** · 15-03-21, 11:45

Originally posted by Eine Alpensinfonie View Post

It’s a bit like those (stupid) IQ-claiming tests found on Facebook.

Did anybody actually look at the video, though? It has some interesting points - though I agree mostly about the comments on IQ tests and trying to apply similar things to music. I've not been terribly convinced by those who develop "similar" systems/acronyms - e.g EQ for emotional intelligence, as if these things do have any objective meaning.

**ardcarp** · 15-03-21, 13:19

Does anyone remember Arnold Bentley's 'Measures of Musical Ability' ? It involved kids listening to an LP and writing down answers about pitch and rhythm. 'Sceptical' doesn't begin to describe my thoughts about it!

**Dave2002** · 15-03-21, 13:32

Sounds as though nobody other than I is owning up to having watched it!

**Petrushka** · 15-03-21, 13:47

Originally posted by Dave2002 View Post

Sounds as though nobody other than I is owning up to having watched it!

A couple of possible reasons: The word 'dodgy' in connection with anything on the internet is a massive deterrent to any further investigation. In addition, you make it clear it's not worth watching anyway! Life's too short...

**Dave2002** · 15-03-21, 14:14

Originally posted by Petrushka View Post

A couple of possible reasons: The word 'dodgy' in connection with anything on the internet is a massive deterrent to any further investigation. In addition, you make it clear it's not worth watching anyway! Life's too short...

Sorry - I did use the word "interesting". I was rather hoping that others would watch first - subject to available time of course - and then comment. In this case Watch.Comment is not commutative, because obviously many are taking the lazy evaluation approach (look up the computer definition) and then doing things in the wrong order.

**Serial_Apologist** · 15-03-21, 16:01

Interesting to "my" generation inasmuch as there was a discussion to be had about received standards regarding musical correctness, which (I think, though I was only an autodidact after reaching Grade 5 at age 17) looked at alternative traditions' ways of regarding tuning and beat preciseness from a point of view of accommodation to Euroclassical values, rather than relatively, or neutrally. The first test, regarding intervallic incongruence in respect of unchanging harmony in different keys, had more to do with memory than the other tests.

**Dave2002** · 15-03-21, 16:47

Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post

The first test, regarding intervallic incongruence in respect of unchanging harmony in different keys, had more to do with memory than the other tests.

I thought that was the second test. It might have made more sense if there'd been three patterns all in the same key, then to pick the odd one out. After that one could try doing them in different keys as in the video test. One problem with that was simply remembering the sequences. I haven't actually tried the tests myself, just watched Adam try - and he guessed sometimes - and sometimes "got things wrong" - according to the test developers. I similarly guessed sometimes and sometimes according to the video I was right. I've not done the tests myself from the suggested web site.

I'm not sure about the first test. Did the developers get singers to actually sing those pieces, and change their tuning - which some singers might have found hard. Some find it hard to sing out of tune, while others find it hard to sing in tune

If the developers simply took the same tracks and then used computer technology to retune some of the notes, then it might be that some people could actually detect that - which is not the same thing as knowing when a singer isn't hitting the right notes.