Jeremy McMillan:

>But for the people who can understand music notation (they may or may not
>have perfect pitch) need to have some kind of heightened intelligence to be
>able to rapidly interpret the symbols into audible music for the rest of
>the world to hear and enjoy.  (People have always prized my "100 mph"
>sightreading skills)
>
>-Is anyone up for contradicting that last paragragh?-

Certainly not me.  I have argued here before (but not for a couple
of years or so) that reading music is one of the most extraordinarily
complicated things that the human brain can do.  There are many
simultaneous levels of symbol manipulation going on, and they have to be
linked up to sophisticated perceptual processes (e.g.  the ability to "read
ahead" of what is actually being played) as well as to technical aspects of
sound production on the instrument.  Strangely, musicians who have this
skill to a high level generally seem to have difficulty in understanding
quite what a remarkable thing it is that they are doing.  Jeremy appears
to be an exception.  However, it does not follow that the necessary
ability has much, or any, correlation with what is commonly meant by
"intelligence".  Indeed, as David Runnion and others have pointed out,
some skilled musicians appear to be rather short on general intelligence,
and plenty of highly intelligent people do not show these skills or have
trouble acquiring them.  So I'm glad that Jeremy inserted the phrase "some
kind of".

Ian Crisp
[log in to unmask]