Music and Maths relationship

[morethanpotatoprints]

Hello.
My dd is a gifted musician was working within level 8 at end of y3.
She struggles a bit with maths and when at school was average in a class of average dc.
People constantly ask if she is good at maths, and sometimes comment she must be good here as well.
Apart from her getting fed up with having to answer that she is indeed rubbish at maths can't understand the relationship between the two.
I don't know either and would think that an ability in language would be more likely. In fact dd is better at languages than she is maths, not exactly gifted but picks them up easily enough considering she is 10.
So can somebody with knowledge or G*T dc good at Maths and music explain please.

There's a definite relationship. I think a lot of it comes down to spacial awareness. Someone who has the right kind of spacial perception can easily put together chords and understand the relationships between notes in a key, as well as key changes, etc. Maths can describe music perfectly when working out harmonics, and different scales and how each semi-tone fits in a particular scale. Then there's rhythm, the list goes on and on. This complicated kind of structural thinking also helps in understanding maths. Both subjects are essentially puzzles that all fit together but you can take bits out, move them around and play with them, which is what a person with talents in both subjects does in their head.

Of course this doesn't mean every child good at music WILL be good at maths, or vice versa, or that they have this spacial way of thinking. There's different aspects to every subject. I think the most likely explanation for your daughter being good at music and languages but not maths may be due to the fact she is good at memorizing and engraving languages into her brain. Music notation is a language, so it comes naturally to her as it may be to take on say french and actually understand it rather than recognize phrases/words.

Musical theory can get pretty technical and mathematical. To be able to read music, you have to be able to count, it's all sequential fractions.

Each bar is worth a number, e.g 2/4, 3/4, 4/4, 6/8, etc, etc, and each note within that bar is worth a certain 'value'. Semibreves, minims, crotchets, quavers, semi-quaver, demi-semi-quavers, etc, are worth, e.g. 1, 2, 4, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, etc, etc.

This is a crap explanation, it's explained better here!

For some people this comes naturally, and for others it does take a fair bit of effort. And likewise, some people are extremely technically proficient, but not necessarily artistically/interpretatively brilliant, IYKWIM.

What it boils down to, I think, is if you're a technically proficient musician, you probably have more of a mathematical brain.

If you're able to take a piece of music and interpret it in such a way that, say, you render it your own, or it moves people, you're probably more closely aligned with languages and creativity, etc.

Disclaimer: massive generalisation.

You should read Gödel Escher Bach. It's very interesting - although it contains no 'answers' to your question as such.

Many people believe there is a strong connection between maths and musical ability but there are as many counter examples as there are examples. Of the professional musicians and composers I know, about 50% were also good to very good at maths at school. And 50% very much not. Maths, further maths and music A level used to be a common combination for kids headed to both conservatoire and maths degree but again - shit loads of counter examples. In my cambridge college, there were 8 mathmos in my year, 6 of us were diploma level musicians. 2 had tin ears. I'm not sure if that was reflected across the whole maths cohort in all the colleges, but certainly the mathmos were well represented in most of the musical activities. In my A level music group at school, I was the only mathematician and in my further maths group (only 3 of us) I was the only musician (there were some decent musicians in the normal maths group) - but in the year above, the A level music and further maths groups were identical in composition. Thinking about the people who taught me and the people who now teach my kids, my main teacher was one of those double maths and music guys - and he is (still) a well known composer who is often quite mathematical in his approach. The kids' teachers are all non mathematicians, I think.

To sum up, I think there is some correlation but it's by no means an inescapable connection. And I really wouldn't worry about it. Especially since the teaching of maths (certainly at primary level) is now more directed towards those things that most people can do proficiently (with good teaching) rather than those things which you really need to be a mathmo to 'get'.

Music theory is quite mathematical. My DC is very musical, but is not great at maths and similarly doesn't find music theory that easy. However, she is very good aurally, which is helpful for both music and languages.

A good theoretical understanding of music and ability to analyse structure/harmony must surely be linked with some mathematical ability as they are very similar conceptually.
However, I completely relate to the link between languages and music (and so does my DD whose aural ability far outstrips any theoretical understanding and who plays with real musicality and rubbish theoretical understanding - far easier for her to rely on perfect pitch and an insane musical memory than bother with all the 'theory stuff') She struggles with maths but is excellent at languages (opposite ends of the spectrum in achievement with these subjects).

I wouldn't say I was gifted at maths but I always liked it, in the top set, A etc and I got almost full marks in grade 8 music theory (4 music grade 8s). I think there is a connection.

My brain likes the patterns of keys, the principles of theory, harmony, the rules and that is very similar to maths. I also have absolute pitch so I know what a key is if I hear music and am much more auditory than visual. My children are fairly good at maths (not geniuses), all 5 play/played a lot of instruments and 3 won music scholarships so I think in our case there is a link. Music theory is in a sense the building blocks of classical music so it makes sense there would be.

There are sorts of really interesting patterns of keys, intervals etc in music which people with one sort of brain (like mine) like.

How interesting. DP has a physics PhD and is a gifted musician.

I'd never put two and two together before.

Japanese Margaret your idea is really interesting. My sister and I are both good musicians, not out of this world musicians, but certainly good (by which I mean grade 8, A level music, degree, rather than Royal College of Music type musicians). She loves maths, did it at A level, and is outstanding at harmony, theory, and all the technical stuff. I am fine at maths but much better at lamguages, and I am much better at performance and interpretation than her. Interestingly we are both best of all at aural tests, we can hear intervals, rhythms etc and memorise them and write them down etc after hearing them only once.

There certainly are inherent talents there with both.
I can't even do anything else including talk if music is on because I seem to listen to it in a sort analytical way as well as an emotional way.

I reached the same level as you, treacle, and it was certainly my observation, having been exposed to many, many musicians all of varying degrees of ability.

I was generally bright, but not exceptional (third highest CAT score in my year at selective school, brought down by low non-verbal reasoning, top sets for everything). I was top-set maths and grasped concepts easily but wasn't interested, and although I'm okay at things like logic puzzles I don't see music in a pattern-related way.

In my case, I think music relates to my language aptitude and interest - I speak French fluently to the point of classing myself as bilingual though we only spoke English at home, taught myself Latin and Koine Greek as an adult, tried to learn German by myself aged 9 (failed!), have a smattering of Spanish from GCSE but more importantly am good at picking things up, puzzling out meanings, picking up accent and tonality (even Norwegian is a tonal language). I also learn language in a logical way now, as an adult, starting by puzzling out grammar rather than rote learning - so maybe that plays on the maths/logic/pattern skills?

I don't think it's a subjective thing, as to whether you 'see music in a pattern-related way'. It is, whether individuals pick that up themselves, or not.

But it doesn't then follow that you need to be mathematical in order to be a good musician, as has been demonstrated on this thread.

JapaneseMargaret,

Yes, the patterns are there, regardless. However, the way individuals treat music varies, the way our minds process it can be different. Like Jane, I can be analytical - physics (B) and chemistry (A) at A-level, GCSE maths at A plus extra GCSEs in statistics and astronomy - but it's not* how I usually view the world. My other A-levels were pretty random, for a start.

The fact that I don't think of music in a mathematical way, but rather in a linguistic mode, is probably best shown by the fact that at university when doing my BMus I hated analysis with a passion, did pretty badly on the fugue module and didn't do at all well on composition... whilst excelling in some of the contextual musicology modules and in general musicianship, which was predominantly aural or improvisatory.

It's like the difference between learning French from a grammar book and learning it by living in France, and it's why I opt for general musicianship over music theory for most of my students (I teach violin, viola, traditional and jazz fiddle, piano, jazz piano and play multiple other instruments). At the same time, that won't be appropriate for all of them. I have a colleague who is like obsessed with theory and the patterns music makes, so if I ever get any advanced theorists she can deal with them - not because I couldn't, but because she is genuinely enthusiastic about it in a way I could never be.

I'm a professional musician (instrumentalist) and I
rubbish at maths,as are lots of my colleagues

I didn't end up doing music although spent probably 10,000 hours of my teens doing it... (did / do law) but I did/do tnik like Julie's friend - constantly impressed by the mathematical connections. When teaching our 4th/5th children their music theory a few years ago and they were learning the order of sharps and flats F sharp, C sharp etc for key signatures the patterns there are just amazing, like the mathematical natural patterns some plants grow in. I suspect it may b e why I like Purcell, Bach and most of all Handel. That structure, fugues etc really gets into my brain and pleases me whereas rhythm (or art in a gallery) leaves me colder.

Languages - I certanily taught myself bits of Latin as a teenager, did French and German (and indeed German to A levels) and like grammar.

However as the thread shows there is not always a connection between good musicians and maths by any means. I remember a brilliant singer in the choir at university who was reading music. She had dreadful exam results at school and then in the written exams in her music degree but that did not in any way stop her with her career.

I think studies show that children generally do better at school in all subjects if they learn instruments although it must be hard to distinguish whether that is because the sort of parents prepared to put in the time sitting with them day after day to make them practise or because the music itself makes them better.

I went to a specialist music school, and we had university maths depts visit us to encourage us to take that route. I was always awful maths, infact I paid a mate to do my homework so I could practise.... I teach harmony and counterpoint, and often explain it mathematically. Seems to work for some students, but not for others. But basically if you can count to 12, you can do music theory, I reckon! However being able to could to 12 will not make you a good all round musician.

My husband studied maths at uni, and can't play an instrument to save himself, despite numerous attempts.

My daughter is amazing at maths - and did grade 8 music theory at 14. My other kids are either amazing at music or maths, but not both.

What I'm saying is, there are so so many examples that either prove or disprove the music/maths thing. Don't stress about it...

Haven't read the whole thread, so apologise if I repeat anything, but here's my take.

Over the years I am coming to doubt the whole "Mozart effect" thing. I am coming to the conclusion that it could be the other way round. I mean that clever children often make good musicians because they pick everything up quickly. Including maths.

So I think - in my opinion - that the music/maths connection is a red herring, and that often (not always) the kids that get referred to like this are often good at everything, not just music and maths.

1805 that may be so. It might also be so that those professional musicians who are not good at maths ended up as musicians rather than leading actuaries or bankers on £1m a year because they did not pass their school exams with with enough grades whereas those of us who are doctors and lawyers who probably were good at just about everything at school including music and maths and languages may not be professional musicians as it can be a hard life on low pay so we had more choices.

Jane - yes, you're probably right!!! I'm hoping my ds will get a 'proper' job later on and not follow his parents!!! He is one of those good-at-everyhting kids. (proud mum boast there!!!!)

We'll I am very crap at music and a bit crap at maths....

Does that prove anything

(Come to think of it, I'm a bit crap at languages too. )