I wrote this in another thread.i have read your post the first time with great pleasure....
believe it is relevant here also…
When I was in film school, we had a prof who had an amazing approach to teaching.
I forget the context this bit came out in class, but here goes.
(this relates to MC’s thoughts on listening and learning how to hear)
The discussion went something like this. Cave drawings were outlines. The idea he presented (which was not his, but from others research) argued that as primitive beings, we saw the world as outlines. These outline drawings became solids at a point. The solids eventually became detailed. Visual representation was up until this point depicting a 2 dimensional world. Then perspective (forgive the pun) came into the picture. The development of artificial “sight”, follows the exact same trajectory. Edge detection, solid/form detection, detail detection and finally perspective.
The theory goes something like this. As primitive beings, it is speculated that we could only see edges. Then someone drew solid forms, and we learned to see solids. Then details and finally perspective. The theory goes that we learned to see in a more complex way, we didn’t always have access to the full spectrum we now have. Artificial object detection has followed the same path.
So, being able to see was an evolved process.
This is where I spin that to audio.
Here’s the difference between sight and sound. Prior to recorded/reproduced sound, our biological hearing abilities evolved to where they needed to be. Meaning, we only need to be able to hear so much to be able to survive. Recorded sound is new. Recorded images, go waaaaaay back.
So, now that we can record and reproduce sounds in a manner, and of a quality beyond what we can currently “hear”, that doesn’t mean that what we currently hear is actually the limit of what our ears are capable of identifying. As we develop new technologies, and as we continue to live with the technologies we currently have access to, our hearing, like our vision will continue to evolve. We are limited biologically by the demands placed on our hearing
That happened in real time for me btw, I never made that correlation before.
And i immediately say that this was a great piece of thinking....
I will rtepeat here the same thing and i thank you for adding to the " perspective" of us all ...
Anyway seeing is like hearing a perspective learned by the soul which manifested in a temporary living form we call a body...Cassirer called that a "symbolic form"....
If we take for example the " conic perspectival" acquisition at the times of Brunelleschi and Alberti, many books were written about this new pictural tool which reflect a very deep change in the human consciousness...
Save for the classic book about perspective in art like Panovsky a disciple of the great Cassirer, the greatest illuminated exposition of the meaning of "perspective" is about to be found in Jean Gebser " the ever present origin"...
Perspective is a manifestation of the way the consciousness now link itself to the world...
«
According to Gebser, the five structures of consciousness we met up with in my November 18, 2020 post Stages Versus Structures: Exploring Jean Gebser, Lesson I (you will find the link is at the bottom of this post)—archaic, magic, mythic, mental, and integral—can be grouped into three larger categories, or three worlds, as he calls them: unperspectival, perspectival, and aperspectival. While the nomenclature may at first feel intimidating, it’s actually quite easy to master if you keep your elementary school art days in mind. Unperspectival is how you drew before you learned about foreground and background, when everything was all just jumbled onto the drawing sheet. Perspectival is the drawing sheet once you’ve learned to arrange it in relationship to that hypothetical point on the horizon. And aperspectival is what ensues once you’ve learned to convey several perspectives simultaneously, as in some of Picasso’s surrealistic artwork where he simultaneously shows you the front side and back side of a person. A heads up: in Gebser the prefix “a” always conveys the meaning of “free from.” Thus an aperspectival view is one that is free from captivity to a single central point of reference.
The Unperspectival World embraces the archaic, magic, and mythic structures.
The Perspectival World hosts the mental structure.
The Aperspectival World is the still-emerging integral structure.
Each of these three perspectives is properly called a world because it comprises an entire gestalt, an entire womb of meaning in which we live and move and make our connections. Each has its own distinctive fragrance, ambience, tincture. Each is an authentic pathway of participation, an authentic mode of encountering the cosmos, God, and our own selfhood. Each has its brilliant strengths and its glaring weaknesses. Compositely, they evoke “the width and length and height and depth” of our collective human journey into consciousness.»
https://wisdomwaypoints.org/2020/11/unperspectival-perspectival-aperspectival-exploring-jean-gebser-lesson-ii/
Then your post pekri and tought are spot on...
Learning to hear is also a consciousness manifestation...It takes time and hearing music for example of Scriabin, Bruckner, Monterverdi, Schoenberg, or Jazz or Persian and Indian music or Chineese etc cannot be instantaneous at all...All of these styles reflect unique perspective on not only music but about consciousness in history...
All musical history reflect constraints imposed by consciousness on himself in some "perspective"...This perspective is some take on consciousness by consciousness itself at a moment in time...
Then music is not about taste ONLY but about learning....
Only simple mind believe that we know what sound is and musical sound...I own a book about timbre which is written by specialists around the world...No one explain "timbre" experience and perception fully.... Timbre experience is a sonic perception irreducible to Frequencies spectrum...
It take more then the actual education at school to learn that...