Cargando…

What About Their Performance Do Free Jazz Improvisers Agree Upon? A Case Study

When musicians improvise freely together—not following any sort of script, predetermined harmonic structure, or “referent”—to what extent do they understand what they are doing in the same way as each other? And to what extent is their understanding privileged relative to outside listeners with simi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pras, Amandine, Schober, Michael F., Spiro, Neta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5483471/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28694785
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00966
_version_ 1783245766019514368
author Pras, Amandine
Schober, Michael F.
Spiro, Neta
author_facet Pras, Amandine
Schober, Michael F.
Spiro, Neta
author_sort Pras, Amandine
collection PubMed
description When musicians improvise freely together—not following any sort of script, predetermined harmonic structure, or “referent”—to what extent do they understand what they are doing in the same way as each other? And to what extent is their understanding privileged relative to outside listeners with similar levels of performing experience in free improvisation? In this exploratory case study, a saxophonist and a pianist of international renown who knew each other's work but who had never performed together before were recorded while improvising freely for 40 min. Immediately afterwards the performers were interviewed separately about the just-completed improvisation, first from memory and then while listening to two 5 min excerpts of the recording in order to prompt specific and detailed commentary. Two commenting listeners from the same performance community (a saxophonist and drummer) listened to, and were interviewed about, these excerpts. Some months later, all four participants rated the extent to which they endorsed 302 statements that had been extracted from the four interviews and anonymized. The findings demonstrate that these free jazz improvisers characterized the improvisation quite differently, selecting different moments to comment about and with little overlap in the content of their characterizations. The performers were not more likely to endorse statements by their performing partner than by a commenting listener from the same performance community, and their patterns of agreement with each other (endorsing or dissenting with statements) across multiple ratings—their interrater reliability as measured with Cohen's kappa—was only moderate, and not consistently higher than their agreement with the commenting listeners. These performers were more likely to endorse statements about performers' thoughts and actions than statements about the music itself, and more likely to endorse evaluatively positive than negative statements. But these kinds of statements were polarizing; the performers were more likely to agree with each other in their ratings of statements about the music itself and negative statements. As in Schober and Spiro (2014), the evidence supports a view that fully shared understanding is not needed for joint improvisation by professional musicians in this genre and that performing partners can agree with an outside listener more than with each other.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5483471
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54834712017-07-10 What About Their Performance Do Free Jazz Improvisers Agree Upon? A Case Study Pras, Amandine Schober, Michael F. Spiro, Neta Front Psychol Psychology When musicians improvise freely together—not following any sort of script, predetermined harmonic structure, or “referent”—to what extent do they understand what they are doing in the same way as each other? And to what extent is their understanding privileged relative to outside listeners with similar levels of performing experience in free improvisation? In this exploratory case study, a saxophonist and a pianist of international renown who knew each other's work but who had never performed together before were recorded while improvising freely for 40 min. Immediately afterwards the performers were interviewed separately about the just-completed improvisation, first from memory and then while listening to two 5 min excerpts of the recording in order to prompt specific and detailed commentary. Two commenting listeners from the same performance community (a saxophonist and drummer) listened to, and were interviewed about, these excerpts. Some months later, all four participants rated the extent to which they endorsed 302 statements that had been extracted from the four interviews and anonymized. The findings demonstrate that these free jazz improvisers characterized the improvisation quite differently, selecting different moments to comment about and with little overlap in the content of their characterizations. The performers were not more likely to endorse statements by their performing partner than by a commenting listener from the same performance community, and their patterns of agreement with each other (endorsing or dissenting with statements) across multiple ratings—their interrater reliability as measured with Cohen's kappa—was only moderate, and not consistently higher than their agreement with the commenting listeners. These performers were more likely to endorse statements about performers' thoughts and actions than statements about the music itself, and more likely to endorse evaluatively positive than negative statements. But these kinds of statements were polarizing; the performers were more likely to agree with each other in their ratings of statements about the music itself and negative statements. As in Schober and Spiro (2014), the evidence supports a view that fully shared understanding is not needed for joint improvisation by professional musicians in this genre and that performing partners can agree with an outside listener more than with each other. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-06-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5483471/ /pubmed/28694785 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00966 Text en Copyright © 2017 Pras, Schober and Spiro. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Pras, Amandine
Schober, Michael F.
Spiro, Neta
What About Their Performance Do Free Jazz Improvisers Agree Upon? A Case Study
title What About Their Performance Do Free Jazz Improvisers Agree Upon? A Case Study
title_full What About Their Performance Do Free Jazz Improvisers Agree Upon? A Case Study
title_fullStr What About Their Performance Do Free Jazz Improvisers Agree Upon? A Case Study
title_full_unstemmed What About Their Performance Do Free Jazz Improvisers Agree Upon? A Case Study
title_short What About Their Performance Do Free Jazz Improvisers Agree Upon? A Case Study
title_sort what about their performance do free jazz improvisers agree upon? a case study
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5483471/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28694785
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00966
work_keys_str_mv AT prasamandine whatabouttheirperformancedofreejazzimprovisersagreeuponacasestudy
AT schobermichaelf whatabouttheirperformancedofreejazzimprovisersagreeuponacasestudy
AT spironeta whatabouttheirperformancedofreejazzimprovisersagreeuponacasestudy