'i915 ai«s 1 Correspondence. bob 



CORRESPONDENCE. 

 Methods of Recording Bird Songs. 



Editor of 'The Auk,' 



Dear Sir: — With great interest I read the "Suggestions for Better 

 Methods of Recording and Studying Bird Songs," which appeared in the 

 April issue of ' The Auk.' All methods of notation used in bird-work are 

 open to some criticism and suggested improvements should be welcomed. 

 This is particularly true in the study of bird-song, which has not enjoyed 

 the scientific analysis from students, it should have had. 



The title, given to the paper by Mr. Aretas A. Saunders, would indicate 

 an entirely new method of notation. A perusal of the subject matter proves 

 such is not the case. What he suggests is a modification of the old method 

 of musical notation. An enlarged form of musical staff is used and notes are 

 pitched within the limits of one octave. The chief difference consists in 

 the representation of the notes by horizontal lines instead of by the musical 

 dot at the top of a vertical line and the abandonment of the indication of 

 rhythm for the sake of ascertaining a song's duration. Now a method of 

 notation should be as comprehensive, accurate and simple as the subject 

 under study will allow. Is Mr. Saunders' improved method more compre- 

 hensive, more accurate or more simple than the old. It must be one of 

 these three to justify its employment in place of the older method. 



In order to answer this, let us follow Mr. Saunders' order. He enumerates 

 five characters of bird music, about which we desire knowledge: "pitch, 

 duration, intensity, pronunciation and quality." Now this enumeration 

 is peculiar to Mr. Saunders. The usual enumeration, followed by students 

 of music, is "pitch", time, intensity, and quality" and these four factors 

 are said to cover all that we can learn about any kind of music. "Time" 

 is a much more comprehensive term than "duration" and covers not only 

 the relatively unimportant factor of "duration," but also "metre" and the 

 extremely important factor of "rhythm." The omission of time and with it 

 rhythm is a serious one and at the outset renders doubtful any improvement 

 by this method. 



But avoiding for a moment a discussion of rhythm, I shall take up in order 

 the five points he has selected . To begin with the third and fifth characters, 

 he admits quality and intensity cannot be recorded accurately by his 

 method. Of the fourth, pronunciation, he says: — "It is probably true 

 that a purely musical note has no real vowel sound and that the only 

 difference in such notes is that of quality and not 1 pronunciation." Of 

 consonant sounds he has recognised only one, the "liquid L" and he 

 represents this by a loop in his record, which at once blurs the pitch of that 

 particular note. Such a blurring of the important factor of pitch can be 

 avoided in the old method by recording these rare consonantal suggestions 

 with graphic symbols above the staff. But the truth is that, if pronunci- 



1 Italics are not in the original paper. 



