Here is a quick flash test to see if you're tone deaf or not - you listen to a series of musical phrases in pairs, and have to decide if they're different or the same. It was created by Jake Mandell, who is a true renaissance man. Originally a producer of some repute, he also worked for Native Instruments in Berlin, helping to develop Reaktor and Absynth. Now he's at Medical School, specialising in Neurology. (Full bio here). The Tone Deaf Test is "purposefully made very hard, so excellent musicians rarely score above 80% correct". This is clearly true, because I'm certainly not an excellent musician, and I got 83.3%. How about you? (Thanks, Stefan)
Posted by Tom Whitwell.
Comments:
I'm really not that good musician, but at least I'm not tone deaf. 80,6% - You beat me Tom.
I got 91.7% and had musical training when I was young. I don't know if that makes any difference in general but do feel it has helped me get my result.
86.1% Maybe I shouldn't have given up music after all.
Then again, they pretty much all sounded different to me: Was anyone else tempted to hit 'same' a bit more towards the end because it all seemed to be going one way?
86.1% I'm quite proud of that, given that I've had no formal musical training. . . I used bookshelf speakers, the same ones I mix with (though I sometimes refer to headphones when mixing)
this test reminded me of my old yamaha pss680 (more like p.o.s. 680).. you know, cheezy synth sounds...but I liked it anyway.
Bengoldacre, tone deafness refers to discriminating between relative pitch differences, not the acuteness of perception. I can duplicate chord voicings, but I can't remember a melody, so my 75% makes sense.
I don't see how headphones would help at all in this test. An EQ shift might pronounce the melodies, but the length of the segments was the most important component.
the ability of relative pitch is actually inherent, there is no such thing as tone deaf, unless you just mean being really really bad ...or actually deaf haha. jeez I hate that I was such a nerd and pointed that out.
I bombed,I won't tell you how badly, but it's interesting that it's a test of memory, as post chemo I have some slight cognitive damage, and memory is one of the areas affected.
But I'm also a lousy tone deaf singer, so this test could explain a lot :)
Woo! 94.4% Correct!! The last few months of musical frustration have melted away thanks to this test. I feel whole again, as well as having a new appriciation for Quasi-GM soundsets.
deifintely felt more like a memory test. i was inclined to say different more often because i wasn't sure if the samples were different or if i could just make out more detail on the second listen.
86.1 with my powerbook speakers. I don't know if my formal music training really helped at all there. Maybe. But I'd agree that there's a lot to do with memory here, too. And I've done lots to destroy that ;)
ok, i guess i was a little distracted by having the tv on in the background but even so...
i think maybe i had the wrong idea about this too, i thought the phrases may have been different but musically the same (y'know, inversions and stuff). It was purely whether the two phrases you heard were exactly the same then?
Got 91.7% no musical training whatsoever. Unfortunately my fingers aren't as fast as my ears, therefore I suck at guitar. (Also I gave up after like 1 year xD never practiced)
i got 0%... which is really the same as 100%, had I gone against my instinct in every question. Okay, no, I didn't really take the test... I don't really listen to music. Stumbled across this while reading about tone deafness.