"I wouldn't necessarily say that this is indicative of superficial judgment," Tsay says. Now, if the judges weren't going on the music, what was the X factor? Good looks? In a separate analysis, Tsay found it wasn't about superficial looks. That's why volunteers who only saw the performers were able to guess what the judges had decided. "What this suggests is that the original judges - the professional musicians - had actually heavily overweighted visual information at the expense of sound," Tsay says. Tsay says this not only says something about the volunteers, but it also says something important about the original experts who judged the competitions. In fact, it was even worse than that: When the volunteers could see the musicians and hear the music, they became less accurate in picking the winners compared with when they could only see the performers. Incredibly, the volunteers were better able to identify the winners when they couldn't hear the music at all, compared with when they could only hear the music. "What was surprising was that even though most people will say sound matters the most, it turned out that it was only in the silent videos, the videos without any sound, that participants were able to identify the actual winners," Tsay says. And some could only see the musicians - they heard nothing. Some could see the musicians and hear the music. In other words, some volunteers could only hear the music. Different volunteers were given different kinds of clips: silent videos, audio recordings or videos with sound. She asked her volunteers to guess the winners, but there was a twist. In the PNAS study, she showed amateur and professional musicians clips from classical-music competitions. In addition to her music career, Tsay is also a psychologist at University College, London. The researcher who published the study: Chia-Jung Tsay. "I noticed that for whatever reason I seemed to be doing better when I submitted video recordings, or when the auditions or competitions involved live-rounds kinds of evaluations," Tsay says.Ī study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences explains why the judges liked Chia-Jung Tsay more when they could see her perform. The judges all said they were evaluating her music, but Tsay started to notice a pattern. Getting into the schools and competitions often required auditions, and different auditions had different rules. And she was throwing her hat in the ring for different competitions. Soon, she was on her way to some of the best music schools in the country - Juilliard and the Peabody Conservatory. At 16, she made her debut at Carnegie Hall. By age 12, she was performing Mendelssohn in concert. If someone like Lang Lang were starting out now, the energetic concert pianist could nail every piano competition without the judges ever hearing a note, according to a new study.Ĭhia-Jung Tsay was something of a piano prodigy.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |