Canal-U

Mon compte
Site Pouchet du CNRS

How much do jazz improvisers share understanding with each other and with their listeners?


Copier le code pour partager la vidéo :
<div style="position:relative;padding-bottom:56.25%;padding-top:10px;height:0;overflow:hidden;"><iframe src="https://www.canal-u.tv/video/site_pouchet_cnrs/embed.1/how_much_do_jazz_improvisers_share_understanding_with_each_other_and_with_their_listeners.20267?width=100%&amp;height=100%" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height: 100%;" width="550" height="306" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen scrolling="no"></iframe></div> Si vous souhaitez partager une séquence, indiquez le début de celle-ci , et copiez le code : h m s
Auteur(s) :
SCHOELLER Paul-Emmanuel

Producteur Canal-U :
Site Pouchet du CNRS
Contacter le contributeur
J’aime
Imprimer
partager facebook twitter Google +

How much do jazz improvisers share understanding with each other and with their listeners?

To what extent do collaborating improvisers understand what they are doing in the same way as each other?And to what extent do their listeners understand the improvisation in the same way as the performers? Thistalk reviews evidence from two case studies (with Neta Spiro and Amandine Pras) of pianosaxophoneduos, one improvising three versions of a jazz standard (“It Could Happen to You”) and one carrying out anextended free jazz improvisation. In both studies, immediately afterwards the performers were separatelyinterviewed, from memory and prompted by audiorecordings, about their detailed characterizations of theperformances. Outside listeners (expert musicians in the same genres) were also interviewed for theircharacterizations. Later, the performers and outside listeners rated the extent to which they endorsedanonymized versions of statements by all participants, based on close relistening to the recordings. 239internet listeners also rated their levels of endorsement of the jazz standard characterizations. In both cases,performers endorsed statements they themselves had generated most often, but they endorsed statementsby an outside listener more than their performing partner’s statements. Overall levels of agreement amongthe performers were greater than chance but quite low. Among the 239 listeners to the jazz standardimprovisations, only a very small number agreed with the performers’ characterizations at a level greaterthan chance. The implication is that fully shared understanding of what happened is not essential forsuccessful joint improvisation, and that performers’ interpretations are not necessarily privileged relative toan outsider’s.

 

commentaires


Ajouter un commentaire Lire les commentaires
*Les champs suivis d’un astérisque sont obligatoires.
Aucun commentaire sur cette vidéo pour le moment (les commentaires font l’objet d’une modération)
 

Dans la même collection

 Joint Improvisation Meetings 2015
 “Improvising together” Debate
 Improvising in Sign Language and Gestures
 There could be ten seconds where everyone is connected and you feel really joined by the same thread and it’s really magical
 Acting together without planning ahead?
 Deconstructing “joint improvisation”
 Carrying the Feeling
 "Beneficial JI" Debate
 “Beneficial JI” - Short talk 2.3: Rachel-Shlmoit Brezis - Testing the limits – and potential of joint improvisation: Motor skills, social skills and interpersonal synchronization in adults with autism spectrum disorders
 “Beneficial JI” - Short talk 2.2: Julien Laroche - Being together when time is improvised: interactive coordination in pedagogical improvisations
 “Beneficial JI” - Short talk 2.1: Neta Spiro - Joint improvisation in music therapy: characterising interaction in individual sessions with children with autism spectrum disorders
 Operationalizing Social Neuroscience through HumanHuman and HumanMachine Interactions
 From me and you to we: how our brain integrates our actions and emotions when we interact
 Going into the unknown in science and art
 Joint Improvisation in Music and Dance: Some Preliminary Phenomenological Considerations on Improvisation as an Enactive Process
 “Quantifying JI” Short talk 1.4 Debate.
 “Quantifying JI” Short talk 1.3: Ashley Walton - Musical Improvisation: Spatiotemporal patterns of coordination
 “Quantifying JI” Short talk 1.2: Tommi Himberg - Mirroring improvised hand movements in a dyad
 “Quantifying JI” Short talk 1.1: Saul Albert - Extemporary movement: an interactional account of partner dance improvisation
 Improvising Interaction
 Brain to Brain approaches to joint actions
FMSH
 
Facebook Twitter Google+
Mon Compte