Stanford Phil + Lit
Daniel Levitin of McGill University discussing evolutionary theories of music appreciation at “Evolution, Cognition, and the Arts,” a Stanford Philosophy and Literature colloquium, March 13, 2009.
Source
Daniel Levitin on auditory cheesecake and Steven Pinker – part 2
I came to learn about an evolutionary explanation (or theory) for the origins and sense/importance of music. Instead I got a rambling discussion about musical instrument history, timber and musicology in general. I'm glad @5:45 or so you caught two people sleeping. Not far off, really. Daniel Levitin pretty much converted me from thinking complexity was necessary to "brevity is the soul of wit."
@MoncefGridda
Agree, this is totally rambling. I struggled through the first video and then came here and checked out that moment you mention… hilarious!!
And in general, what a ridiculous, weak talk. And incredibly rambling. "Nobody sounds like Norah Jones or the Beatles… and Ravel understood this." Just ridiculous.
And the atmosphere is so uncomfortable, who is this guy on the left?
When Levetin uses Hendrix as an example to show how timbre is how we identify players, he is only partly right . It is only a small factor – timing differences provide much more cues. Hendrix sounds like Hendrix when he's playing acoustic. Listen to a single note, without the beginning, and you can't even tell what instrument it is, let alone who is playing.
Talk about beating a dead horse! Back to Pinker who isn't jaded or biased but truly scientific and substantially more interesting!
5:50 the camera caught a guy sleeping 😛