Aural Diversity
June 2018
Andrew Hugill
Most music is made
and reproduced on the assumption that all listeners hear in the same way.
Psychologists generally write about aural perception as though it is a single
standardised thing. Acousticians normally design the sonic environment using
uniform measures. Musicologists typically discuss music at it is meant to
be heard, not as it actually is heard.
The reality, of course, is that almost all people hear
differently from one another. BS ISO 226:2003 is the standard for otological normality and is taken to be the hearing of an 18-25 year old. After this age, presbycusis (age-related
hearing loss) usually sets in, at rates that vary from person to person. On top
of this comes a range of other potential losses, from noise-induced hearing
loss to sensorineural disorders, from genetic problems to losses caused by
trauma or medication. In other words, every single person is likely to have at
least some hearing loss after the age of 25 and very many people have
significant hearing difficulties. I am willing
to bet that a substantial number of 18-25 year olds also have hearing problems!
Given this state of affairs, it is
surprising that more is not spoken about aural diversity. In an era when
diversity is such a hot topic in so many aspects of society and life in
general, why is aural diversity so neglected? My friend
Professor John Levack Drever has written about it quite a lot,
but otherwise there seems to be a dearth of discussion of the subject. There is
plenty on disability, of course, which is great, but for those who would not
classify as disabled but nevertheless are aurally diverse: not so much. This
affects musicians as much as anyone else. I am aware of many musicians and
composers (myself included) who struggle with their hearing, but who
nevertheless continue to make music that sounds as it should to “normal” ears. Perhaps it is time
that we started to reflect more honestly on our own limitations and present
these in our music?
I certainly find myself at a compositional crossroads. If I
continue to create normal music, I will have to revert to writing dots on paper
because I can no longer hear digital sound accurately enough. At least my aural
imagination is intact. If, on the other hand, I want my music to reflect my own
experiences, then I have to start engaging with my
aural limitations by introducing into my sound world those elements that I
actually hear (including such disturbing things as diplacusis and tinnitus).
How to do this yet still create beautiful music is a real challenge.
In the meantime, I
can envisage a series of musical events that celebrate aural diversity. Surely
there are composers and musicians out there (including those with normal
hearing!) who would wish to make music that reflects on or addresses itself to
a range of hearing types? Perhaps this opens up a new
possibility of bespoke music that is more than just the result of users
fiddling with EQ and is intrinsically designed for the individual listener’s
hearing abilities.