Musicality Test

pr said:
lolita said:
93.9 :D Exceptional indeeed :D
Click to expand...
I think you got the digits wrong ;), because

N / 36 can't be equal to 93.9 % (36 questions in the tone deaf test)
and
N / 25 can't be equal to 93.9 % (25 questions in the rhythm test)

...for N being an integer.

8)
Click to expand...

There were 10 replay chances. Unutilised such may award points.
 
Must have statistics for a test, so I did it 3 times, 3rd test with earphones:

tonedeaf: 83.3%, 69.4%, 83.3%
pitch: 7.8. 6, 5.4
rhythm: 68%, 84%, 84%

I think I might be losing some hearing on one ear from all that salsa club noise. I do use earplugs at the clubs.
 
pitch 2.85Hz. 3Hz was perfectly distinguishable, and 1Hz sounded exactly the same. I doubt that would change if my ear canals weren't filled with mucus :)
rhythm 80.0, which is nto a straight test of pitch either, since it requires short term memory and pitch perception
I wonder what they are doing with all this data. Hope that "ethnicity" row won't be used to prove that black folks have better rhythm :)
 
I wonder if there is a learning effect for tonedeaf and rhythm (obviously not for pitch). There definitely is a test taking advantage as I found that I concentrated better on the later tests.
 
86% In the tone test and
84% In the rhythm test. Or it could be the other way around minus a few percent as that is from memory.
 
bailar y tocar said:
I wonder if there is a learning effect for tonedeaf and rhythm (obviously not for pitch). There definitely is a test taking advantage as I found that I concentrated better on the later tests.
Click to expand...

Well, my first take on pitch was 1.8 Hz, and on the second it was 0.4875 Hz. Isn't that quite a learning effect? Or you meant with musical training and not test training?
 
Ron Obvious said:
pr said:
lolita said:
93.9 :D Exceptional indeeed :D
Click to expand...
I think you got the digits wrong ;), because

N / 36 can't be equal to 93.9 % (36 questions in the tone deaf test)
and
N / 25 can't be equal to 93.9 % (25 questions in the rhythm test)

...for N being an integer.

8)
Click to expand...

There were 10 replay chances. Unutilised such may award points.
Click to expand...
I don't think so... It says "% correct" and it doesn't make it more or less correct if one use replay. :P
 
So, I finally decided to try the test as well and got about 72% for the tonedeaf test. But looking taking the rhythm test, I only scored about 55% (with my laptop speakers) and 60% (with headphones) in the rhythm test. Maybe I should give up dancing as I seem to have no rhyhtm? :)
 
pr said:
I don't think so... It says "% correct" and it doesn't make it more or less correct if one use replay. :P
Click to expand...

You're right. After the other tests there is a combo box with different alternatives for the score in the tone deaf test. All possibilities are listed there.
 
Gemini1357 said:
OK, how musical are you?

Click the button and tell if the tunes are the same or different, fine tune your speakers and pay attention..

http:// jakemandell.com/tonedeaf/

I scored 83.3 %
Click to expand...

Whoa - I got the exact same score :D

I can't imagine great musicians wouldn't do a lot better though...
 
Is everyone on high here or there aren't any low scorers posting ? :)

I always thought I was tonedeaf - 58.3% every time, three tries. 69.4% on fourth try.
Pitch ranged between 2.2 to 2.9 when paying better attention and otherwise around 3.8
Rhythm was definitely below low-normal first time and 64% second time.
 
80.x tone deaf, 68.x rhythm, 3.6hz pitch, no replay used, could be higher if i knew how it was getting tested. looks like i am average among the folks here on this forum.
 
kkksss said:
could be higher if i knew how it was getting tested.
Click to expand...

True. Especially the Rhythm and the Musical Phrase part. At the end of the test it asks about what level of musical background the test taker has. The subject needs to understand what is being measured for the results have accuracy.

For someone with little musical background and no explanation/demonstration of what musical phrasing and Rhythm before taking the test, would the result really reveal their innate musical intelligence (as opposed to acquired one)? Until I got into salsa dancing I didn't know what musical phrasing meant and had a very vague idea of what/how Rhythm is.

Therefore which part of these tests are testing the "acquired musical ability" (i.e. what a trained ear can distinguish) and which one's testing "inherent hearing/interpretation skill that helps in understanding music" (i.e. trained or untrained ear don't bias test taker's ability significantly). I think the Pitch test is an example of latter.

Here is what I observed in my case (after taking each test repeatedly):

1. On the Rhythm and Tonedeaf tests, I could score better when I didn't spent any time analyzing. The more I went by instinct (i.e. just hear and then choose answer immediately based on what I "feel" is right one) the better the score become.

2. On the Pitch test even when my brain could detect the difference (at 1.25hz and less) sometimes the fingers will hit the wrong button (brain-motor co-ordination and the resulting reaction of pushing the button going haywire). By difference I meant able to tell whether second tone is higher or lower, and not that they sound dissimilar but unable to distinguish why.
Even in this case the results were better when I couldn't see "Success" and "sorry" being flashed.

It is fascinating to observe how the response to the test got better or worse depending on various factors! Which also shows how difficult it is to designing a good test when it comes to measuring skills/ability involving neural functions .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top