How well can you hear shapes? Test your musical - visual symbolic intelligence!
Many creative musicians “hear” shapes when they listen to music. I’ve labeled the ability to do this logically as associative musical visual intelligence, or “amvi” for short. This flash-based test attempts to quantify one’s ability to represent musical phrases as shapes. It’s a challenging test to complete successfully, but the logic throughout the test is consistent. For instance, here are two example answer choices for a musical phrase:
The actual musical phrase consists of two short repeated elements: first played by one instrument (black), then a second instrument (red). There is also a third instrument whose pitch direction is going up throughout the phrase (blue arrow). Therefore, the symbol on the right would be correct. If the pitch direction of the third instrument were downwards, then the symbol on the left would be correct.
Give it a try yourself, and of course I welcome your feedback.
Hi Jake, this is entirely a different test
Some took me more than 10 replays before i answer
Good one !
This test made a lot of sense after the 1st few questions. This is how I visualize music as I create my own or perform it. Enjoyed it!
This test was fascinating to me. As an architect, I think I had some advantage that comes from recognizing patterns and sequence. I especially enjoyed the layering of patterns in this test. I play guitar, but have no particular training. The test felt very natural to me. I seemed to know instinctively what to do. Thanks!
Fascinating! I’ll come back.
A fascinating test! Have you tested to see if people with a musical education or professional musicians do better than “regular folk”?
WE
i couldnt save my results, how sad
WOW, i am a music lover, but not a musician. yet i scored 95% probably could have done better without the beer buzz. it seemed very obvious to me the shape of the music. thanks for the insight. mykle
Bravo… great apps!
This wikipedia entry may interest you…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearing_the_shape_of_a_drum
I managed to score 19 out of twenty despite not having touched an instrument since fifth grade. Since the page claims that excellent musicians should have trouble making it to 80%, what would this mean?
this was a very interesting, fun test. I am a graphic designer, so expected to do well on it ( I got a 70 overall).
I’m 16 and I got 90%. Do I get a cookie?
Hi,
I thought it was a fun test to do but it didn’t really test anything musically, it was just a code and what you could hear, you then just translated the musical features to the shape and colour code.
in my opinion, this has little to do with actual synesthesia. it’s more about rationally matching two distinct entities. it’s pure logic. not much different from reading notation.
95% because I misclicked once
Hi,
great test but too easy. I got 80% but i’ m 16 years old an not an great musician.
greetings
maximilian
Weird,… took me 5 minutes and had all right, very obvious and easy… and I can’t play a single instrument…
i just did the test and only needed 1 replay throughout the whole thing and got 95%…
I really enjoyed all of these tests–thank you! Please put me on a mailing list for any further tests.
Hi, I am a german conductor and scored 100%. Especially with the replay function, the test is too easy in my eyes!
I concur with Alex and Emma, and this is speaking as someone with very definite music-based synaesthetic moments. As far as I can tell, you have arbitrarily assigned a square as a base-shape, and all that the test measures is whether you can detect deviations from the base-melody (chosen to be represented by you as a square) or pitch (arrows, fairly meaningless symbol), as well as keeping track of one or more melodies. I would be shocked if any trained musician COULDN’T do this; as a former music major, it was not much more than an easier version of my ear-training tests. It certainly had nothing to do with my synaesthesia, which actually hampered my ability to do the test at more than one point: you had a RED square assigned to note-values that were CLEARLY brown-black-green, and a TRIANGLE assigned to a pattern that was at best a star, and honestly required three dimensions. Being faced with that, it was on one occasion difficult to try to parse the arbitrary and meaningless symbol-set provided by the test.
Interesting, but ultimately useless for what you’re actually talking about, as far as I can tell.
Very nice test I had fun! But I am not sure about the reliability for testing. I took two turns. In the first one I got around 70 % and the second, when I really had understood the meaning of all figures, I got 100 %. This means, that you may easily train the test, if your skills are ok.
I made 100% without any problems. I had to play some of the results 2-3 times, but after that it was quite clear. And no, actually i’m a technic freak, not a musician…
Nonsense!
Why is a score of 50% normal if the avarage score is 72% ?
I thought I’d be special for scoring 95%, but it sure doesn’t look like I am from reading these comments. Maybe you should change the percentage ratings at the end, as to how high a score is considered “world class,” or make it a more difficult test? Just a thought.
By the way, I’m a synaesthete, and I agree- this test has nothing to do with actual synaesthesia. However, I don’t get the feeling that is what Mr. Mandell meant. I think he was suggesting that- like a synaesthete- many creative people employ multiple senses to help memorize and process, and to come at their work or project from more than one angle. The difference is, a synaesthete doesn’t really do it “on purpose.”
Nice test, some symbols would make very intuitive plugin-instrument-interfaces. Got 90% first try, and even though I am a professional musician I would never think of myself as “world class”. You might want to make it more difficult.
Original idea, I liked it very much. I like music but I am mediocre in music and/or geometrics. Still, I got 100% in the first attempt. I think it would be great to have more difficult levels but with the same idea behind!
Hi,
this test was very nice, but too easy! Got 100% at first try.
I am computer scientist and trained in associating anything with “units”. Music is a hobby, but I am not trained enough to work out chords or intervals.
I’m looking forward to level 2.
Hi,
myself and my colleagues took this test. Mark and Dieter got 80%, Jeremy got 90% and I got 100%. I would regard them as exceptional people however I would not consider them world-class performers like me. Interestingly this is how the test judged them also….
In conclusion: a very accurate test
A pre-test question is required. It took me a couple tries before “getting it.” After that, it was easy but my results were skewed.
Interesting test, though I’d agree it’s too easy for the interpretation of the results at the end. I’m singing in a choir which certainly did help in the test, but I’m far from being professionally trained (scored at 95%, one mistake). This rather tests one’s ability to abstract auditorial input into a visual system.
HI, I study neuropsychology and cognitive neuroscience, and I found this really interesting!, but it should have much more (a whole lot more) items to gain some consistency …, but it’s funny though..
I didn’t get it at first, but as soon as I understood I got them all right on the first try. I agree that a pre-test is a must
i, too, felt that this test is quite easy. i only made one mistake even though i did not notice the replay function before the last few questions. i think anyone with average musical and intellectual skills should manage this easily.
the pre-test is not required as you can only see how well people really can abstract from sounds to signs if the do it prima vista.
I’m not sure I understand what the “sub-scores” mean … for example, I got 20 out of 20 correct, but my “contour discrimination” score was 95.2% …
Very easy once I got the hang of it. After the first question or two, once I knew what it was looking for. Interesting concept though.
Hello:
In past I have done some research on tele-documentary film as an education instrument. What in your experience, if any, might be the relations of sound and actual sophisticated graphics, that is, filmic representations (ie, not as simple and symbolic as yours in the test), but such as that of film rationale? Remember that my guiding theme or principles are documentary and educational fim.
Hence. can one be design-specific to another, in order that both build more consistent educational pieces, insofar as rational and cognitive perception?
Been so is true, are there rules that you may suggest as conducive to this blend, flow or confluence, therefore being hopefully holistic?
Is there something else that you may suggest of your experience that may shed some light on this subject?
Your educated opinion is appreciated and will be adequately considered if I ever write more on the subject.
Incidentally, I am published in Portuguese in Brazilian periodics and in www.bocc.ubi.pt/.
Thank you for your attention.
Geraldo A. Lobato Franco, PhD
that was fun and interesting. thanks! i have never knowingly visualized musical phrases in that fashion before but found your approach almost immediately accessible and interesting. i fear i might have learned more from you than you did from my incremental statistic. i also notice your score categories indicate a measurable impact from the replay button, and a time component, don’t they? cool.
best wishes.
I think I did badly on the tonedeaf test because I could hardly remember any of the tunes so it was more like guessing,
, I think I’ll try the pitch one again and try to get down to 0.375, I couldn’t hear that difference at all. I think I’m going to give up on the tone deaf one though it’s too hard for me 
I got to 0.75Hz on the other test probably because I learnt the violin growing up. Fun tests
I really enjoyed this test. I got the first few questions, wrong, then learned to close my eyes and LISTEN instead of trying to see, and it took off after that.
Fascinating work - thanks for sharing it with us. I’ll definitely have a look at the other tests.
Gill, Edinburgh
This site rocks! Tests are terrific! These tests have 2 important goals for me: Neurobics (quite important for my brain) and test my musical intelligence !!
I agree with MerryArwen. I had trouble with the visual abstractions that were being used - it seemed more like a code (red means this, triangle means that) but if the object is just to encode the music with the abstractions, a key should have been provided.
As someone with synaesthetic tendencies, the shapes and colors used totally conflict with my own visualizations of the sounds. Simple lines and shapes just don’t “sound” like anything to me. I hear the musical samples with all kinds of colors (rarely red or black) and much more complex shapes than the ones used. I found myself tending to the more complex shapes (nested triangles, etc) regardless of whether they would be the “right” answer.
Very interesting - I guess I’m not totally tone deaf after all. I’ve always been good with language nuances, but not music. So, I did better on the visual test than the first test. Thanks!
This test is defintely too easy. I scored 100% first time. and with all the other tests I scored really badly. I haven’t studied any kind of music except recorder in primary school and I sucked at that. This must have nothing to do with musical ability and more to do with logic.
I am going to get my 6 year old to do this test now.
It was fascinating though. I am not bagging the test, I just think it has nothing to do with musical intelligence.
I brutally failed this test. I feel like it’s an excellent communicator of right-left synthesis in the brain. To perform well in this test, you must be able to use concrete musical images in the brain and apply them to abstract, logical symbols.
I am studying to be a singer and play piano, both skills that I have developing later in life. As a musician, I personally have a great amount of difficulty visualizing myself or my body (very important for technique) while singing or playing piano.
It would be easier for me to write out these pieces in musical notation while listening to them or singing them back to you. The shapes mean nothing to me, and I find the association frustrating and futile. I can remember almost every musical piece in the test. I can’t remember any of the sets of symbols. They’ve all become so much mental junk.
I have to say that I found it an interesting test, but I don’t see how it’s connected to what you describe as amvi. I do see sounds as colours and shapes, but what I see bears no resemblance to the things depicted in the test whatsoever. I spent the first couple of questions learning how *you* were representing each sound, rather than how they “look” to me, and then the rest of the test was simply matching the sounds to how I thought that you would represent them.
If anything, it represents the logical, pattern-matching parts of IQ tests. As a test of how well I could decode your cypher, it’s good. As a test for synaesthesia, I don’t think it works. I have never, ever “seen” a sound as a square, let alone a whole melody as one. And none of the sounds you used were either black or red to my ears.
I thin the test may say something about you, but I’m not remotely convinced that my result says much about me.