Synaesthesia

[Martian]

Originally Posted by me, in an email to redlemon

Thanks, I really do like that. The line that jumped out at me was 'when the Beatles sing it's a yellow thing,' because that's actually very much how I perceive it. I've always believed that John wrote a song that stylistically the Beatles simply couldn't handle when he wrote Helter Skelter; Ringo just doesn't seem capable of being that red. As well, the line about bars - the dance music in bars tends to be very jagged and intense, which is why I prefer the quieter pub environment.

...

If I were a better artist, I really would attempt to recreate the experience, but the problem is that I just can't keep up with what I'm hearing and I don't think it'd work. I think I'd have a hard time selecting yellow if there's red playing, if you follow me.

Like I said, it doesn't really change anything. It's not disruptive or anything like that. I suppose the best analogy would be to say that when I hear a certain passage, I just know that it's a specific colour. The third stanza of that song is a good example, as it is very green, as opposed to the yellows and pinks of the rest of the song. I know this passage is green in the same way that everyone knows grass is green and until last night, I would've assumed that everybody else knew it too.

I don't think I'm articulating the experience quite right. There's colour and shape involved. Sounds can be round or jagged or spiky or square; they can be soft or hard or rough or smooth. I remember once in my late teens that I commented to my sister that the song Yellow by Coldplay was ironic, as it wasn't very yellow at all; rather, it's mostly blue, all smooth and glossy like a piece of tape. And now I know why she gave me a weird look.

I guess I'm still processing the whole thing. I mean, the experience isn't new to me, I'm completely used to it. What's a bit hard for me to grasp is that not everybody has it.

Y'all can blame Redlemon for my posting about this topic so heavily lately. He seems to think that it will stimulate discussion; I still think of the actual phenomenon as rather pedestrian, although the idea that others don't share it is rather novel.

As noted, the above is taken from an email that I sent to Redlemon (with his permission to post it publically, of course) in response to one he sent me. The song in discussion is one that he turned me towards; it's called Synaesthesia, and it's by an a capella group known as the Bobs.

This thread is intended for any questions or discussion regarding the condition, as opposed to the other thread, where I have offered insight into the perceptions of a synaesthete by documenting my impressions of various songs. As noted above, however, I have experienced this all my life and thus don't really know what sort of questions a non-synaesthete would have, or even if I'll be able to answer them (would this be like trying to explain the difference between red and yellow to someone who is afflicted with that particular form of colour blindness)?

But ever onward. Does anybody have any questions or experiences to relate?

[Jetée]

Does it count at all if I use my media player's visualization as I listen to music?

[Martian]

Originally Posted by Jetstream

Does it count at all if I use my media player's visualization as I listen to music?

It's funny you should mention that. I remember as a child in the nineties always getting annoyed with those, because they never got the colours or shapes right. I just figured it was a limitation of the technology though, and that it would get better as the technology matured.

[roachboy]

i am not convinced that synesthesia is a particularly unusual phenomenon.

i have been doing experimental music for many years--through this, i have come to know lots of folk who have been doing variants of improvised music for very long periods--and it turns out that most of them order what they play in real time visually and generally have color correlates to the figures that they "see".

so my experience is that the kind of cross platform linkages called "synesthesia" is generally available, but that it unfolds in a space of real-time making of sound that has no particular cultural privilege and so is the object of default terms---the language of mysticism, the language of some vague pathology (synesthesia as some "neurological condition").

because it is an aspect of the process of interacting with a medium/instrument, it follows that synesthetic connections can develop/change over time--they can be used to make stuff once you get by the novelty of being able to make linkages. and it is better to get over it, because this is a perfectly ordinary aspect of how people interact with sound.

if you find that you are able to generate visual correlates of audio percepts without playing an instrument, then cool for you--but you probably would find playing to be most interesting and i would cheerlead for you taking up an instrument or sound practice and using this capacity...

the collective i have been working with developed criterion for determining the extent to which our performances work--talking to audience members afterward, trying to get them to describe what they experienced in the way of hallucinations and the colors that were involved---we were (and still are) interested in the extent to which this kind of information (which we use to organize what we are doing) transmits directly... we have been finding that these colors and some visual correlates do transmit---but they are always tangled up with a riot of other associations on the part of the audience/listeners.

this is why trying to figure this out interesting.

[Martian]

Originally Posted by roachboy

i am not convinced that synesthesia is a particularly unusual phenomenon.

i have been doing experimental music for many years--through this, i have come to know lots of folk who have been doing variants of improvised music for very long periods--and it turns out that most of them order what they play in real time visually and generally have color correlates to the figures that they "see".

so my experience is that the kind of cross platform linkages called "synesthesia" is generally available, but that it unfolds in a space of real-time making of sound that has no particular cultural privilege and so is the object of default terms---the language of mysticism, the language of some vague pathology (synesthesia as some "neurological condition").

because it is an aspect of the process of interacting with a medium/instrument, it follows that synesthetic connections can develop/change over time--they can be used to make stuff once you get by the novelty of being able to make linkages. and it is better to get over it, because this is a perfectly ordinary aspect of how people interact with sound.

if you find that you are able to generate visual correlates of audio percepts without playing an instrument, then cool for you--but you probably would find playing to be most interesting and i would cheerlead for you taking up an instrument or sound practice and using this capacity...

the collective i have been working with developed criterion for determining the extent to which our performances work--talking to audience members afterward, trying to get them to describe what they experienced in the way of hallucinations and the colors that were involved---we were (and still are) interested in the extent to which this kind of information (which we use to organize what we are doing) transmits directly... we have been finding that these colors and some visual correlates do transmit---but they are always tangled up with a riot of other associations on the part of the audience/listeners.

this is why trying to figure this out interesting.

I am actually a musician. I could loosely be termed a multi-instrumentalist, as I play guitar and harmonica quite regularly and could probably re-learn the trumpet fairly quickly. It's been about six years since I last played a horn, but most of what I'd have to get back is my embouchure training - I'm entirely certain the rest would come back quite quickly.

In terms of the prevalence of synaesthesia, my reading on the subject so far has been somewhat vague. So far as I've been able to determine, estimates place prevalence amongst the general population as being anywhere from 1 in 20 to 1 in 20 000. This also includes the other forms (ie, grapheme->colour, or number form) and optionally includes pseudo-synaesthetes, which are people like you describe who influence themselves to see colours.

I didn't have to make any linkages. They've always been there. I've always perceived colours to go along with music; it's not something that developed or changed. As I've previously stated, the novelty here for me is not the condition itself, but rather the idea that it's a form of perception that isn't commonly shared.

Also, the colours do not change. I've never really bothered to try to figure out what makes different sounds different colours (I have the vague idea that it may be modal, but haven't tested this). I find it easiest to liken the perception to vision, since that's really what it is. Grass is green. That does not change and barring physical trauma your perception of green never changes either. For me, a green song is always a green song. It's a similarly base property of the music.

[Redlemon]

Originally Posted by Martian

Also, the colours do not change. I've never really bothered to try to figure out what makes different sounds different colours (I have the vague idea that it may be modal, but haven't tested this). I find it easiest to liken the perception to vision, since that's really what it is. Grass is green. That does not change and barring physical trauma your perception of green never changes either. For me, a green song is always a green song. It's a similarly base property of the music.

Ah, that's the question I was coming in to ask. What makes the color change? What if...
... a metal band covers a soft rock song?
... a metal band does an acoustic cover of one of their own songs?
... a band replaces their lead singer and sings the same song?

[Martian]

Originally Posted by Redlemon

Ah, that's the question I was coming in to ask. What makes the color change? What if...
... a metal band covers a soft rock song?
... a metal band does an acoustic cover of one of their own songs?
... a band replaces their lead singer and sings the same song?

Those are interesting questions. The thing is, they're a bit difficult to answer, because it's not a rational thing. I'll need examples of each situation. Let's see...

a metal band covers a soft rock song

A good example of this would be HIM covering Wicked Game. Chris Isaak's version is quite soft and mellow. HIM's version on the other hand.. well, isn't. Melodically, they're similar and the vocals are quite close. But HIM's cover is pretty much the opposite end of the spectrum in terms of colours. The power chord chugga-chugga-chugga is a deep blood red, where Isaak's is more of a blue, bordering on purple. If I were better at identifying colours I might be able to describe it better, but I tend to think in terms of the primary and secondary colours for the most part. Also, Isaak's is.. sloppier somehow. It's like wet paint that he smears around with his fingers, whereas HIM's cover is tighter and harsher. It's all peaks and spikes. This property seems to be tied to the previously mentioned power chords.

a metal band does an acoustic cover of one of their own songs

I can't think of any examples of this, so I'll use Dave Grohl's acoustic cover of Everlong. Most Foo Fighters is very orange and the cover incorporates a lot of that, but the shape is quite different. For one, being just a guitar, it's much simpler; there are less elements involved. It's also softer, and more inviting but doesn't have the same energy. It doesn't move as quickly. Dave's voice adds a blue element to both, but there's less going on in the acoustic and his voice isn't processed or overdubbed. That tends to concentrate it and really bring it out. It's much more noticeable. The acoustic version is much more melancholy.

a band replaces their lead singer and sings the same song

I think this one requires a bit of further explaining. I've taken to referring to songs by their dominant colour, but it's rare for a song to be just one colour. All of the various elements add their own hue and the colours themselves are not static; they move and change depending on what's going on in the song. So when I say that a song is red or orange or green or what have you, it's really something of a shorthand, because unless I've decided specifically that I'm going to describe everything that's happening (like in the other thread) I'm probably not going to break it down like that. I just pick the dominant colour and go with that.

So what happens if we replace the singer? Well, that depends. The singers may be close enough stylistically that there is no significant change. Or they may not and the whole song might be altered by replacing that one element. The example I think of is AC/DC. Bon Scott and Brian Johnson are similar, but they're not identical. Brian's voice reminds me of cotton that's been pulled, so that it's thin and sort of translucent. Bon's voice was much thicker and cord-like. In terms of colour, Brian seems to be brighter, but other than that they're pretty close (I'm using two versions of Highway to Hell, one live and the other the studio version, for comparison).

[Not Right Now]

Originally Posted by Jetstream

Does it count at all if I use my media player's visualization as I listen to music?

I tend to associate music with color as well. It's helpful in musical appreciation