| Gregsynth 21.05.2010 17:50 |
I know the guy wasn't perfect live (he was great though), but the fact that he could "play what he had heard on the radio" sparks a question: Did Freddie possess perfect pitch? |
| royopvp 22.05.2010 03:13 |
"Perfect" is a bit relative to everyone's ear. If you enjoy listening to crappy crowd recordings and judging from that I think I may have found your problem. If you have listened to the retail release of the '81 Montreal concert, either the CD version, or preferably the 5.1 Blu-Ray edition, that's what I like to call a perfect live performance (in terms of Freddie's vocal performance, as some people seem to want to understand something else). |
| Sebastian 22.05.2010 05:55 |
You don't need perfect pitch to play what you hear on the radio. Fred, AFAIK, only had relative pitch. A very well-trained one, though, enough to complement his genius. |
| andreas_mercury 22.05.2010 12:10 |
another dumbfucking question from you and i should be surprised to be not even at that. |
| kosimodo 22.05.2010 14:47 |
@Sebastian: Was He well trained? |
| AlbaNo1 22.05.2010 23:01 |
No, too much adrenalin in latter years detracted from the vocal pitch, if properly concentrating then yes |
| jamster1111 23.05.2010 01:51 |
Ya you don't need perfect pitch to figure out songs on the radio. That just takes intervalic skills |
| Gregsynth 23.05.2010 02:50 |
No, you don't "need" perfect pitch to play stuff you hear on the radio, but read THIS: link "Freddie Mercury was born in Zanzibar, where he lived with his mother, father and younger sister. He attended a boarding school in Bombay where his talent for the piano was first noticed. Friends commented that he could hear anything on the radio, and turn around and play it on the piano." If Freddie can hear stuff, then just turn around and play it on the piano--that's a sign. He's got some form of Perfect Pitch--maybe not the "obvious" form of it. But he's definitely got more than a "good ear." |
| Sebastian 23.05.2010 03:49 |
In retrospect, friends could've commented loads of things. That's hardly defining evidence. |
| Dane 23.05.2010 04:19 |
I can hear anything on the radio and play it on my guitar... has nothing to do with perfect pitch though. If you play every day (which Freddie did) you understand what notes are where on an instrument. Having absolute hearing (hearing what key a song is in without playing it) helps alot. But that is also due to a lot of playing and good memory. Just practice everyday, and you'll be as good as freddie. Piano-wise that is. |
| mooghead 24.05.2010 16:45 |
Dane wrote: Just practice everyday, and you'll be as good as freddie. I await your next chart topping composition with interest... |
| thomasquinn 32989 25.05.2010 05:27 |
Right, I think a few misunderstandings need to be cleared up here: 1) "Perfect pitch" refers to being able to tell exactly what tone or combination of tones is sounding by ear (passive perfect pitch) and/or being able to 'hear' in one's mind or vocalise the exact tone(s) from, for instance, musical notation (active perfect pitch). It has nothing to do with the pitch-quality of a voice or instrument or anything like that. 2) Disregarding for a moment that, like Sebastian said, such latter day testimonies by friends and relatives have little or no value as evidence, being able to play a song upon hearing it (note that there are no comments on whether or not he was able to copy the song exactly or whether he was able to do what is usually referred to as "faking", meaning playing a correct-sounding accompaniment on the fly, common in jazz) is evidence of both relative pitch and a good musical ear and mind, but not necessarily of perfect pitch. In fact, most people with perfect pitch would have a lot of trouble playing a piece of music by ear if, for instance, the piano they were doing that on was a fraction of a tone out-of-tune in relation to the original recording. |
| andreas_mercury 25.05.2010 11:33 |
freddie wasnt even close to perfect pitch. musical genius he was but perfect pitch you only need to hear outtakes of his singing to know he was deaf to music without a refernce. |
| Gregsynth 25.05.2010 15:14 |
ThomasQuinn wrote: Right, I think a few misunderstandings need to be cleared up here: 1) "Perfect pitch" refers to being able to tell exactly what tone or combination of tones is sounding by ear (passive perfect pitch) and/or being able to 'hear' in one's mind or vocalise the exact tone(s) from, for instance, musical notation (active perfect pitch). It has nothing to do with the pitch-quality of a voice or instrument or anything like that. 2) Disregarding for a moment that, like Sebastian said, such latter day testimonies by friends and relatives have little or no value as evidence, being able to play a song upon hearing it (note that there are no comments on whether or not he was able to copy the song exactly or whether he was able to do what is usually referred to as "faking", meaning playing a correct-sounding accompaniment on the fly, common in jazz) is evidence of both relative pitch and a good musical ear and mind, but not necessarily of perfect pitch. In fact, most people with perfect pitch would have a lot of trouble playing a piece of music by ear if, for instance, the piano they were doing that on was a fraction of a tone out-of-tune in relation to the original recording. link This guy has perfect pitch--yet he can play anything after hearing it once (I don't know if that's related to perfect pitch or his Savant Syndrome/Autism). I have perfect pitch myself--and let me tell you: It's a blessing and a curse at the same time. While I can identify notes, key signatures, tunings, the pitches of machines/vehicles and (to an extent) chords without references, it's a pain sometimes. |
| Dane 28.05.2010 10:56 |
mooghead wrote: Dane wrote: Just practice everyday, and you'll be as good as freddie. I await your next chart topping composition with interest... Being in the charts nowadays has little to do with being a good musician I'm afraid. |
| Wiley 28.05.2010 23:26 |
I don't think Freddie had perfect/absolute pitch, although he obviously had tremendous musical skills and abilities. I remember some The Works gig in which the audience chants "Mustapha" and Freddie asks the band "What key is it? Give me the key" Then I believe it is John who plays a note in his bass and only THEN Freddie starts singing. I believe he did something similar in the intro to It's a Hard Life live, but I could be wrong. |
| Micrówave 29.05.2010 03:18 |
Thomas Quinn wrote: Right, I think a few misunderstandings need to be cleared up here: 1) "Perfect pitch" refers to being able to tell exactly what tone or combination of tones is sounding by ear (passive perfect pitch) and/or being able to 'hear' in one's mind or vocalise the exact tone(s) from, for instance, musical notation (active perfect pitch). It has nothing to do with the pitch-quality of a voice or instrument or anything like that.Right. Now we have to clear up another misunderstanding here. Do you make this shit up as you go, TQ? You seem to think you're an expert on everything, so let me set you straight on this. Just because I can go to the chalkboard and chart a song on the fly does not mean I have perfect pitch. The fact that I can tell a string is out of tune is a much better example. able to do what is usually referred to as "faking", meaning playing a correct-sounding accompaniment on the fly, common in jazz) is evidence of both relative pitch and a good musical ear and mind, but not necessarily of perfect pitch. In fact, most people with perfect pitch would have a lot of trouble playing a piece of music by ear if, for instance, the piano they were doing that on was a fraction of a tone out-of-tune in relation to the original recording. No, again if they had perfect pitch, they'd know right away if the piano was out of tune or if the recording was. And what kind of jazz do you listen to? Alice Cooper? |
| thomasquinn 32989 29.05.2010 12:52 |
Learn to read first, then learn how to use a dictionary to look up the terms you don't understand. That way, your rants might at least have the semblance of reason behind them. |
| andreas_mercury 29.05.2010 13:26 |
i dont understand this place .... the smarter the poster the more time they waste to try to talk to morons like microwave. cannot you and sebastion and others use your intelligence on a better purpose and just leave microwave to stupidty? |
| The Real Wizard 30.05.2010 18:37 |
Micrówave wrote: "Just because I can go to the chalkboard and chart a song on the fly does not mean I have perfect pitch. The fact that I can tell a string is out of tune is a much better example." Not at all. The very definition of perfect pitch is knowing notes when you hear them. If you haven't been given a starting point and you can chart out a song upon hearing it for the first time, the only way to do this is with perfect pitch. If you compare one guitar string to another, you can tell if it's out of tune without having perfect pitch. Otherwise, every guitarist would have to use a tuner. |
| Sebastian 30.05.2010 22:05 |
IMO, the thing about the friends claiming 'x' and 'y' goes like this: You've got a handful of teenagers (keyword: teenagers, many of which are statistically prone to be wowed and impressed by what they find 'cool' and unusual), one of whom listens to a song on the radio (another key phrase: 'song on the radio', which in early to mid sixties was more often than not a four-chord lovely but simple ditty with clichéd-driven harmony and square phrasing) and then plays it. We've got the following options: - He played the melody with his right hand and a simple accompaniment (e.g. octave bass, broken chords) with the left. If his friends were knowledgeable about music, they'd realise that such skill, while useful and interesting, is hardly limited to geniuses (it's sort of like driving or skating on a simple level ... remember that radio songs aren't exactly Rachmaninov). If they weren't knowledgeable about music, they'd be easy to impress and then, due to their own lack of theoretical grasp, recall the experience as if the bloke in question had played the song verbatim. - He played a simple accompaniment and sang or mumbled the melody. Again, something that may easily impress peers (especially if they're not musicians themselves) but hardly restricted to the Mozarts, the Bachs or, dare I say, the Mercurys (or Bulsaras) of the world. Given Freddie's training (both formal and unschooled), he surely knew (even if just instinctively) the way radio-friendly songs tend to work and the chord combinations that most of them have. Moreover, if his mates weren't musicians themselves, he could've played a wrong chord here and there and they wouldn't notice unless he caused a very annoying dissonance, which he probably didn't as, again, 60's radio hit songs aren't Rachmaninov or Chopin. - He orchestrated the whole arrangement on the piano, emulating the brass, string or any other sections, duplicating the vocal harmonies on the keys, even including the same microscopic nuances and covering all the pertinent dynamics. For his mates to even notice that, they'd have to be musical geniuses, and as such, they wouldn't be astonished by it. So there you have it. |
| Micrówave 31.05.2010 00:36 |
So you're saying that I have perfect pitch, because I CAN chart out a song upon the first listen. But the fact that I can tell that the guitarist's E string is out of tune during a song does not? Well, then I'm almost as confused as Andreas. Wait, no scratch that. I'm not that "confused". See there's a little more to it than just being able to play or chart a song. Sure, you have to be able to (1) identify or reproduce the note but ALSO be able to (2) identify the key of the piece of music, being able to (3) identify all the tones of a given chord, (4) Identify the pitch of common everyday noises, and (5) identify the numerical value in hertz of a given note. There are many people who posess perfect pitch, but simply cannot play any musical instrument. That does not mean that they don't have perfect pitch. |
| andreas_mercury 31.05.2010 03:03 |
this is not even funny as i'm not a theory expert but can tell you of perfect pitch is just someone who is of the have to say "this is 440hz" for example without hearing it reference first, although i think there is a small accpeted margin of error freddie would have had great they call it relative pitch, but no evidence here to say he was of "perfect" pitch. doesnt meant anything against him to a musician as he was a god of music (not the ONLY god though as max might say) |