In a message dated 7/3/02 8:54:05 PM, RCzekay@AOL.COM writes: << It should be described as relative pitch. >> Relative pitch refers to the ability to "relate" one pitch to a another known pitch. In other words, this is an "A" because it is a major third above the previously heard pitch "F". Theory classes in college focus on sharpening all musicians' relative pitch through practice, and everyone, with education and practice, can develop relative pitch. The phenomenon of "perfect pitch", whereas it might technically be a misnomer, is completely different from "relative pitch", and as far as I know, cannot be taught. This argument that pops up every couple of months or so, that "perfect pitch" is incorrectly named strikes me as a pointless argument. Piano (meaning "soft" in Italian) is not an apt name for this instrument that we all know and love, because it plays not only soft, but loud, too. Wouldn't Pianoforte would be a more correct name for this modern-day instrument? Yet no one constantly brings up the argument that the piano should be called something else. Could there be an agenda on the part of those who keep bringing it up? After all, none of us named the piano nor did any of us name the phenomenon "perfect pitch". Nor the dog or cat. What's the point of this argument? Tom Sivak
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC