Voi.xxxiiij Correspondence. 22& 



the 1/64 note, which is often a smaller unit than Mr. Saunder's 1/10, 

 It is just exactly as accurate to measure a song by 1/64 notes as by 1/lOs, 

 even if the song is not rhythmical. If it is rhythmical (which is true of 

 95 songs out of 100) the use of the musical unit permits a clear indication 

 of the rhythm, which is vitally important! Mr. Saunder's records do not 

 indicate the rhythm clearly, for in six of his songs, whose authors invariably 

 sing rhythmically, the rhythm is absolutely obscured by his failure to mark 

 the accented notes. In his Robin's record it is possible to show it existed, 

 only because the pauses happen to be all of the same length and come at 

 regular intervals. 



I agree with Mr. Saunders it is "absolutely ludicrous" to play bird-songs 

 on the piano and expect them to sound like the bird. I regret that the old 

 system is so "intricate" and "unintelligible" to him, but hundreds of 

 thousands of people do understand it and thousands of children from six to 

 fourteen years of age readily grasp it. The vital difference between the 

 two systems is this: The new method is most efficient for exploitation of 

 such obvious things as the "duration of the songs"; the old system is most 

 efficient for recording the really important factors, — the harmonical rela- 

 tions of the song and its rhythmical beat, which latter for most songs is 

 the "specific character." 



Robert Thomas Moore. 

 Haddonfield, N. J. 



Editor of 'The Auk,' 

 Dear Sir: — 



Replying to Mr. Moore's latest remarks concerning methods of recording 

 bird songs, it might not be irrelevant to the subject to say that musicians 

 are as a rule artists and not scientists. The science necessary for the 

 student of bird songs consists almost entirely of the physics of sound, not 

 the use of technical musical terms. The student of bird songs is working 

 primarily for the ornithologist, not the musician. So why use an obscure, 

 musical definition of a trill or cast slurs at the "large family dictionary" 

 when the small pocket dictionary is, as far as my examination of it goes, 

 equally to blame? 



It would throw much light on the subject, and remove some serious 

 objections to the old method, if Mr. Moore would explain how he is able to 

 record certain bird songs on the musical scale without artificially changing 

 them to fit the method. How, for instance would he write a note pitched 

 half way between A and A flat? How can he record in 1/64 notes and 

 multiples of it, notes whose relative durations are incommensurable? 



The old system is not unintelligible to me. I began its study myself 

 when somewhere between six and fourteen years of age, and have consider- 

 able use for it at the present time. But I still believe that it is too intricate 

 and mechanical to be of the highest utihty in recording bird songs. That 

 my original records did not show accent, which is simply a variation in 



