BBC R3 test: How Musical Are You?

[Lateralthinking1]

Quote: "Nothing to gain my admiration Im afraid. As a matter of interest, what were your scores on the musical tests?"

People are clearly troubled by this scientific exercise. Goodness me. With respect, the logic appears to be all twisted:

(1) Why are people answering the questions about, say, enthusiasm with a "not particularly enthusiastic" attitude and then moaning like Larry that the results don't show them as being wildly enthusiastic? (2) Partially, they are saying that performance is about musicality and appreciation of performance is not. If audiences ever felt that such disdain was commonplace, there would be no place for performance at all. You could forget about anyone making much of a living out of music. Everyone would turn off.

I think I have been very fair in my comments. More than most. Time for a few more critical observations. The very idea that the musically technically accomplished and appreciative could be so disconnected emotionally from music is a hoot. In the future, when I witness a performance from someone who seems somewhat remote, I will be asking myself whether they would feel more emotional connection with a mallet or a power drill.

For some, it is clearly all about categories, a bit like being at Oxford or Cambridge. As long as they are there, they are on a superior course. To put it another way, while it may well be true that Radio 3 and "The Guardian" frequently go hand in hand, the attitudes being presented are more in line with those of Eton and Harrow than they are with the eleven plus. This is the musical equivalent to David Cameron rather than Clement Attlee. In fact, it is questionable whether it is musical at all.

I do not believe that the BBC was ever singing from that particular hymn sheet. From the word go, it sought to discover and then present a diversity of cultural richness. It is the increasing loss of that ethic and the emphasis on commercialism that concerns me. Non-classicism is not the same as populism or pap. Just as there are strands and subtleties in classical music, not to mention stances, so there are in other areas of music. Perhaps see "The Radio Ballads" broadcasts of Ewan MacColl as a reference point.

I will dig out my results on the practical tests in a moment. However, I know how the arguments will go. If they are seen as low, people will say so. If they are regarded as high, there will be more dismissing of the tests themselves. It is unsurprising that the scores for curiosity should be so low, along with enthusiasm. You can't have a high mark for curiosity and be musically narrow-minded.

[Lateralthinking1]

Group the Music - 10 out of 16
Match the Beat - 14 out of 18
Tap to the Beat - 2 High, 6 Medium, 1 Low
Melody Memory - 8 out of 12

.....and as I said, had I known that hip-hop was one of the genres - it is now plastered everywhere - that would have probably been 16/16 or pretty close to it. The rock and jazz ones weren't exactly difficult.

[Anna]

Oh come on now Boys! It's a bit of a silly quiz, there are no winners or losers are there? I got 57% for enthusiasm, 76% for emotion, 59% for curiosity and a paltry 11% for perception. That's fair enough, I don't know me A minor from me E flat, have never played an instrument or sung and are tone deaf! For me, the results were quite valid. On the practical I scored best on tap to the beat, 8/9 high which probably is because I dance. Lighten up!

[mangerton]

My results:

Enthusiasm 97
Perception 99
Emotional Connectivity 76
Social Creativity 47
Musical Curiosity 84

About social creativity they said this:

You scored medium for Social creativity, which suggests that you have a fairly good memory for melodies and are able to recall many of the new songs or musical phrases you hear. If you feel confident enough, you can probably contribute to group activities where music is involved, and are able to join in, singing or clapping along with others. You may not find it as easy as some people to imagine new melodies in your head.

This is dubious at best. I got 11/12 for the melody memory. "Fairly" good? I suspect the low mark was because I said I wouldn't "join in" singing or clapping. Was there not also a question about "moving"? Anyway, I said I wouldn't, so doubtless that got me several black marks.

"If you feel confident enough, you can probably contribute to group activities where music is involved" Well, that's reassuring. I've been singing in choirs and groups ranging in size from OVPP to c100 since the 60s.

Not in the least scientific, but fun.

Probably.

[subcontrabass]

Oh come on now Boys! It's a bit of a silly quiz,

Er, no. It alleges to be a science experiment. The conclusion that some of us have come to is that much of it is ill-conceived and approaches "musicality" (whatever that might be) from a perspective which is rather different from what we consider relevant.

[Vile Consort]

To get a decent mark on the emotional connection scale, you not have to feel the music, but you have to demonstrate it in particular ways, it would seem. And, indeed, use music to influence your emotional state rather than (for example) go to a concert or recital and wallow in whatever gets played. And I take it there were points to be gained by using music as aural wallpaper, which doesn't strike me as a particularly musical thing to do.

Being asked to agree or not with statements like "Do you ever forget to breathe when listening to a piece of music" or "Do you ever find you cannot speak after listening to a piece of music" or "Does music ever make you cry" would have been better indicators, I think.

[french frank]

I've done it again and now that I've managed to find all their comments and suggestions it becomes both more understandable and more bizarre.

On enthusiasm, I think it's much more about how much music dominates your day, even if it's only by being on in the background. I never have background music and it's doubtful whether I find time to listen to even one CD because it means stopping everything else to listen to it. That apparently shows a lack of enthusiasm (down from 12% to 9% this time). Viz. under enthusiasm: "Music is not particularly important to your daily life. You probably spend less time than most people just listening to music or having music on in the background while you do other things."

Emotional connection is half about whether you "use" music to "manage" your mood (no, I don't). But it's also about whether it "affects your feelings". Now, excuse me, but that surely isn't at all the same as whether you detect (legitimately or not - let's not go there) emotion in the music. If I feel that Mozart's Masonic Funeral Music seems to reflect deeply tragic feelings, should that make me feel horribly dejected? I'd have to admit that music doesn't work in that way for me - hence presumably another big fat 0% for emotional connection.

Did they get me right? Well, of the four R3 programmes they recommended for me, two I've never listened to and am not remotely interested in sampling, the other two are (usually) rather trivial and I haven't bothered with either for years.

[Lateralthinking1]

Quote: It alleges to be a science experiment. The conclusion that some of us have come to is that much of it is ill-conceived and approaches "musicality" (whatever that might be) from a perspective which is rather different from what we consider relevant.

Reminds me of:

It alleges to be a General Election. The conclusion that some of us have come to is that much of it is ill-conceived and approaches "politics" (whatever that might be) from a perspective which is rather different from what we consider relevant.

Incidentally, a world music colleague who appears to have no knowledge of any of this discussion - lucky him - has just delivered the results from his Nantwich constituency and they are what is known in the trade as "immense".

[french frank]

Well, I'm quite happy to admit I've got a tin ear, can't keep the beat, can't sing in tune and can't tell hiphop from a carrot. But I do love those Beethoven quartets, Mozart operas, Sibelius symphonies and ooohh, ever so much more (I agree with Anna, people are beginning to take this a bit seriously).

[Vile Consort]

It's actually rather more like "It alleges to be a General Election, but some of the ballot papers asked voters to say what their favourite breakfast cereal was, and some of us have come to the conclusion that it is ill-conceived and approaches voting from a perspective which is rather different from what we consider relevant".

[Lateralthinking1]

ff - Perhaps that's it really. Not so much that the tests have the wrong emphases but that musical ability and appreciation are different for each person, that this is the beauty of music, and that no test would ever be able to capture it's essence.

[mercia]

hiphop helps you see in the dark

[vinteuil]

I've done it again and now that I've managed to find all their comments and suggestions it becomes both more understandable and more bizarre.

On enthusiasm, I think it's much more about how much music dominates your day, even if it's only by being on in the background. I never have background music and it's doubtful whether I find time to listen to even one CD because it means stopping everything else to listen to it. That apparently shows a lack of enthusiasm (down from 12% to 9% this time). Viz. under enthusiasm: "Music is not particularly important to your daily life. You probably spend less time than most people just listening to music or having music on in the background while you do other things."

Emotional connection is half about whether you "use" music to "manage" your mood (no, I don't). But it's also about whether it "affects your feelings". Now, excuse me, but that surely isn't at all the same as whether you detect (legitimately or not - let's not go there) emotion in the music. If I feel that Mozart's Masonic Funeral Music seems to reflect deeply tragic feelings, should that make me feel horribly dejected? I'd have to admit that music doesn't work in that way for me - hence presumably another big fat 0% for emotional connection.

French Frank - many thanks for having articulated so lucidly what were my own (less well worked out) reservations about the bizarre thinking underlying (underlaying?) this whole 'experiment'.

[doversoul1]

ff - Perhaps that's it really. Not so much that the tests have the wrong emphases but that musical ability and appreciation are different for each person, that this is the beauty of music, and that no test would ever be able to capture it's essence.

In short, the whole thing is pointless (as it seems to have more or less proved itself)? So why is Radio3 doing it? I don’t think it was a free gift from Goldsmiths College.

[french frank]

ff - Perhaps that's it really. Not so much that the tests have the wrong emphases but that musical ability and appreciation are different for each person, that this is the beauty of music, and that no test would ever be able to capture it's essence.

There are - as I see it - two major purposes to the test:

1) Radio 3's - which is another gigantic publicity stunt, press releases, stories in the press, to draw people to the R3 website (as they have to access the test from there) with recommendations and links to Radio 3 (and other BBC radio) programmes. As with the Mozartfest, it says to the outside world, come over and sample Radio 3 folks - and if you tune in for 5 minutes you'll count in our Rajar listening figures (and, boy, do we need you!)

2) Goldsmith's (as I understand it): a love and appreciation of music is an age-old human attribute. It doesn't matter what training we've had or what music we listen to or why we listen to it. There are basics like a response to rhythm, an ability to memorise and sing a tune, and to recognise one that we've heard before. There's an ability to create. All these things are part of 'musicality'. The test is trying to measure in general the degree of musicality in the population, no one need feel at a disadvantage from their background or musical experience.

But the test is to demonstrate that we all (or most of us) have that innate gift because we're human beings, and to measure, by some means, how well-developed that gift is in the general population.

Mind you, I think the 'enthusiasm' thing is pretty pointless, judging from the questions they're asking and the comments they make.