# Are you tone deaf?



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Take the test and find out!

I can apparently distinguish frequency differences of 0.875Hz with a tone at 500Hz, making me better than 98.7% of people! I have found my talent!


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Oh, a test. You must realize _Poley_, that the thread title is a standard insult among 'music-schmucks'.

Anyway, without taking the test I know I am not. I am constantly recognizing miss-hits in the shower.


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

'At 500 Hz you can reliably hear pitch differences of 1.0625 Hz, which means you did better than approximately 97.4% of people who took our test!'

Edit: I think this was a bit lucky. I doubt I can truly hear 1 Hz differences. I would say 4-5 Hz is more likely.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Oh, a test. You must realize _Poley_, that the thread title is a standard insult among 'music-schmucks'.


Which is precisely why I named the thread that. You are rather adept at pointing out the obvious.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

My wife (middle aged string musician) was at the 90% level. I (middle aged non-musician) was at the 76% level. The site does not give much information, but I suspect that musicians should be better on average than non-musicians and younger people may be better than older people.

@Polednice: Maybe you're a really good guesser?


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

mmsbls said:


> @Polednice: Maybe you're a really good guesser?


How dare you?! I have super-human pig hearing!


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

So this was a double test for me...pitch is fine and was before the test; just about perfect...patience, however, is not super high and so I never got to the end of the test because I could not stand it going nowhere.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

kv466 said:


> So this was a double test for me...pitch is fine and was before the test; just about perfect...patience, however, is not super high and so I never got to the end of the test because I could not stand it going nowhere.


Coward!


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Polednice said:


> Which is precisely why I named the thread that. You are rather adept at pointing out the obvious.


Well, OK. I just hadn't realized that you were a music-schmuck. On the basis of that information, perhaps you will be suitably impressed with my score - which is *so good *that anti-braggadocio prevents me from revealing it.

:tiphat:


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I can distinguish pitch better than 84.whatever percent of people who took it.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

86.3% was my score.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I'm surprised how sucky you all are.


----------



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

i have perfect pitch


----------



## pjang23 (Oct 8, 2009)

Managed to get 91%


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

DavidMahler said:


> i have perfect pitch


Cool story. But it has nothing to do with the test.


----------



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

clavichorder said:


> Cool story. But it has nothing to do with the test.


I scored a 99.7


----------



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

Wanted to see how accurate it was. 

Took it a second time. Got a 96.9

Took it a third time. Got a 99.1

Kinda weird


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Took the test a second time. Got 96%


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

got 111%. Don't ask how, I just did.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

regressivetransphobe said:


> got 111%. Don't ask how, I just did.


Glitch. :lol:


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Polednice said:


> How dare you?! I have super-human pig hearing!


Who's arguing?


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

DavidMahler said:


> Wanted to see how accurate it was.
> 
> Took it a second time. Got a 96.9
> 
> ...


Since the test is relatively short, the result can only be accurate to within some uncertainty. You're results are quite close although that would be expected since you're limited at the top end.

I originally scored 76% and retook the test to score 80%. That also seems fairly close. Violadude's two scores of 84 and 96 are probably outside the normal variation. Perhaps he concentrated more the second time so the first was not a true indication of his ability.

Assuming that people are giving their true scores (which I don't doubt) and that everyone who takes the test has posted their result (which I'm less certain about), the surprise is that everyone scored so high. There were eight people reporting with the lowest score close to 80% and the vast majority scoring 90% or more. If this is a true indication of TC members ability, it would suggest that people who listen to a lot of classical music have excellent pitch discrimination. The statistics are a bit low, but presumably listening to music (or maybe complex music) fine tunes one's pitch discrimination. Playing music probably has an effect as well.


----------



## Philip (Mar 22, 2011)

yeah... it's like these online IQ tests where everyone scores above 120. but, by definition, the average is supposed to be 100... 

however, this particular test might just indicate how much you've paid for your headphones or speakers.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Philip said:


> yeah... it's like these online IQ tests where everyone scores above 120. but, by definition, the average is supposed to be 100...
> 
> however, this particular test might just indicate how much you've paid for your headphones or speakers.


Test said use headphones. I used speakers. I rule!


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

At 500 Hz you can reliably hear pitch differences of 1.125 Hz, which means you did better than approximately 96.8% of people who took our test!


----------



## Praeludium (Oct 9, 2011)

At 500 Hz you can reliably hear pitch differences of 0.875 Hz, which means you did better than approximately 98.7% of people who took our test!



Hum that's cool but when will I be able to read a sheet music of a symphony like one would read the newspaper, and hear everything ? ):


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Praeludium said:


> At 500 Hz you can reliably hear pitch differences of 0.875 Hz, which means you did better than approximately 98.7% of people who took our test!
> 
> Hum that's cool but when will I be able to read a sheet music of a symphony like one would read the newspaper, and hear everything ? ):


2:21 PM, May 23rd of this year. A few hours later you will learn that you have won the Lottery.


----------



## eorrific (May 14, 2011)

Took the test twice. And the results are... 







and








Talk about being accurate. I'm taking another test.


----------



## eorrific (May 14, 2011)

This just somewhat boosted my confidence.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

At 500 Hz you can reliably hear pitch differences of 1.734375 Hz, which means you did better than approximately 90.4% of people who took our test!

I'm the best because mine has more numbers in it than yours.

p.s.: electronic beep boop noises give me a headache. thanks a lot poley, you pig ****.


----------

