Comments for Beauty and Birdsong at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 10 out of 10 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Thu, 23 May 2013 21:23:08 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/beauty-and-birdsong.html#comment-15077 Indian music, the most scientific music on the face of this earth is based on melody, whereas western music is based on harmony.. The total number of scales can be derived like this.. 15 Major Scales (12) 15 Natural Minor Scales (12 However not Unique Since they are Enharmonic with the 6th mode 'Aeolian' of the major scale so 0) 15 Harmonic Minor Scales (12) 15 Medolic Minor Scales (12) 2 Whole Argumented Scales (Whole Tone ? 2) 3 Diminished Scales (3) 2 Pentatonic Scales (This one is not so easy, there are at least 12 of the standard Pentatonic scale made from a stack of 5ths [CGDAE], if you want to inclue other types of 5 note scales in this class then there will be many more) But whereas South Indian Carnatic music has got millions of scales.. Scales which use all seven notes in an octave is 72 melakartha ragas (ragas are scales) sca,es which use seven on the ascending and six and five notes on the ascending and vice versa would come to about 38,484 ragas or scales.. Bird songs maynot be harmonious but they are melodious..Science may say that bird songs are musical. Music has proved science to be wrong on many occasions.. In India there is a percussion instrument called "Mirudangam",wherein the structure of the two layers of cow skin should not bring sound.This is what the great scientist Sir.C.V.Raman had proved. But msuic has proved physics wrong. According to physics , two different. cannot be made from either side of one hole.. But, a stone pillar in one the temples in India has a hole drilled through it. When blown on one side one could hear a conch and when blown on the opposite side a horn sound.. If scientists says bird songs are not musical, music would certainly prove that science is wrong. Cos music is more scientific.. The whole planet is still working since it is based on harmony.. - a j mithra Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:20:54 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/beauty-and-birdsong.html#comment-13152 Beautiful! What Randall said, also Mack Hall! Last, it surely wasn't science we heard in bird-song on 9//12/01. - Carol O. Mon, 27 Aug 2012 04:07:42 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/beauty-and-birdsong.html#comment-13138 Of course even human music is SOMETIMES for asserting territorial possession, - jason taylor Sat, 25 Aug 2012 18:58:36 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/beauty-and-birdsong.html#comment-13104 Spurn not the frog! O Ye of Little Frog for those who deny that frogs sing to God O ye of little faith in night’s mysteries Oft hasten to explain away God’s arts, And dampen joys with your false-writ histories Believing in dull books, and not your hearts. You claim that frogs sing only to gain mates, Based on some long-dead dullard’s science log, Claiming the last word on reptilian traits - What do you know of the love-life of a frog? You might then with equal injustice claim That Compline is sung in order to attract Women – but is that Saint Benedict’s aim? Poor frogs and monks sing hymns; and that’s a fact! - Mack Hall Thu, 23 Aug 2012 15:21:45 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/beauty-and-birdsong.html#comment-13103 Bravo, David Warren! I don't want to take anyting away from Dr. Baruzzini's helpful and delightful atilce, but David Warren has s own that naure is not full of mere utility, an observation that is important for several reasons, not the least of which is that it counters the notion that all biological phenomena emerge for merely evolutionary purposes, leading the new ahteists to claim that our very virtues can be explainend away as sentamenetlized survival stratiegies. And Gian pointed out (without using this expression) that harmony is is in the ear of the listener. We have all heard about the first reactions to The Rite of Spring. Today who would say that they Tristan chord is disonant? How would Mozrt have reeacted to the simple flattenin of a few notes that produces the tonal quality called bluess? The woods are filled with gorgious sounds, and so is the woodwind section. Neiher musical genious nor the love of beautiful music is a surival or evoutionary advantage. Both are gifts from God, and only the saddest of souls imagaines otherwise. - Thomas C. Coleman, Jr. Thu, 23 Aug 2012 14:42:00 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/beauty-and-birdsong.html#comment-13102 If we enjoy birdsong, it is because it is beautiful and raises our spirits. Compare that to today's rap and atonal so called music. Where there is no beauty, there is no truth. Man seeks truth, in seeking knowledge and goodness and in art. If God gives the animal world the capacity to enthrall us with beauty that God has given them by instinct, should we not embrace the beauty of their song? Too much analysis is deadening. - senex Thu, 23 Aug 2012 12:03:53 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/beauty-and-birdsong.html#comment-13101 I also think that this study doesn't really prove anything about the musicality of birdsong. I wonder if its author took the time to compare birdsong to each one of the hundreds of different scales in use throughout the world. Many Eastern music traditions would also be considered unharmonic according to a narrow view of harmony. Even if birdsong didn't match to any scale currently in use, that would seem to say more about our system of musical notation and composition than about the harmonic nature of birdsong. And also, the great French Catholic composer Olivier Messiaen considered birds to be the finest musicians around, and found it worth his time to catalogue hundreds of different species' songs, using a custom notation. It makes some sense to consider his opinion on music more authoritative than that of biologist. - Patrick Thu, 23 Aug 2012 11:16:04 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/beauty-and-birdsong.html#comment-13098 We have, up here in the High Doganate (our Toronto flat), several seemingly scientific books on birdsong, dating back half a century, plus field studies by e.g. the sainted (by us) Alexander Skutch. This last, for instance, did extensive work on the hummingbirds of Central America, showing that different species had different background choral arrangements, & within a species, local populations appeared to have their own choral traditions, sustained from one generation to another. Too, Skutch, along with such "classic" birdsong authorities as Edward Armstrong & William Homan Thorpe, was under the impression that they sang for no damn good reason except, being free of predators, under no breeding pressure, & having found enough food, they wished to amuse themselves. Quite elaborate repetitive patterns have often been observed; but we don't recall anyone ever suggesting that any species of bird sang on humanly-interpretable harmonic principles, or could be taught to do so except by rote. So, contrary to the learned & charitable Catholic apologist, we suspect the test was indeed designed to contribute to "the scientific disenchantment of the world," by providing a fresh cartload of statistics characteristically irrelevant to the question. Further aside. Thorpe, mentioned above, was a pioneer of animal ethology, the principal engine of advance in the study of animal behaviour through the 20th century. He used sound spectrography to analyse birdsong. A heavyweight perfesser at Cambridge (U.K.), sometime president of British Ornithological Union, fellow of Royal Society, &c, he was not exactly an amateur. His magnum opus was (to my mind), Duetting & Antiphonal Song in Birds (Leiden, 1972). I mention him particularly because I vaguely recall a crude & stinking attack on his reputation, by a Darwinoid some years ago, based on the fact Thorpe was Christian, & had received superb training in classics & philosophy. To the vicious & ignorant Darwinoid mind, this disqualifies a man from the practice of biology. The main scandal was a book he wrote towards the end of his life, entitled, Purpose in a World of Chance (Oxford, 1978). It is, among other things, a magnificent demonstration of the inevitability of the "intelligent design" principle in nature, & it says explicitly that without taking a religious view, one is blinded to phenomena that are obvious & demonstrable. He lamented the decay of metaphysics, which in the 17th & 18th centuries was still manly enough to deal with realities. Since the 19th it had been running away from all challenges. He admired Whitehead for at least not being a coward. - David Warren Thu, 23 Aug 2012 04:45:10 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/beauty-and-birdsong.html#comment-13095 Welcome to TCT, Mr Baruzzini. This is a beautifully written, intelligently balanced piece of writing. I look forward to reading more of you on this website. - Randall Wed, 22 Aug 2012 23:50:10 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/beauty-and-birdsong.html#comment-13094 But why should I believe the biologists that the birds sing only because of reproductive utility? "bird songs lack the underlying musical structure that we normally associate with music." Music is what is pleasing to hear. If the bird songs lack some mathematical structure found in some human music, that is so much worse for the notion of music as a mathematical harmony and is not derogatory to the bird songs. Perhaps, tomorrow the scientists will discover a more subtle mathematics hidden in bird songs, even richer than human harmonic music. I believe not all human music is harmonic either. - Gian Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:13:05 +0100