Harmonic Context in Ear Training (and the frustration of App Store reviews)

Being an Apple App Store developer is really a mixed bag. While it is streets ahead of other mobile platforms’ app stores in terms of platform consistency (which developers love), the market size, and audience for your apps, there are some deeply frustrating issues as well.

I want to briefly discuss one: the lack of two-way communication with users.

I’ll also look at some particular issues one user had with the RelativePitch app my company developed, around learning relative pitch with or without a harmonic context.

The App Store Review System

Users are free to write reviews of apps they download – and in my experience user reviews make an enormous difference to app sales. The App Store interface shows the most recent reviews of an app prominently, and having a negative review visible there can really impact sales.

What’s truly frustrating though is that developers have no way to respond to reviews, either publically or privately. We can’t email the users, and we can’t post a reply to their review. Some developers will respond within the app description text, but this isn’t scalable or particularly beneficial.

Sometimes a user will have misunderstood something, or somehow missed out on a large part of the app’s functionality. In a lot of cases this can be useful information: you can improve the app to aid the user’s understanding more in future. In other cases you just have to throw up your hands in the air and wonder what went wrong and whether the user spent even a couple of minutes trying to resolve their issue or looking at the help screens!

Once in a while there will be a review which puts me in a bad mood. Normally this is because they’re flaming the app without real justification – this inevitably affects the impression other potential customers get of the app, despite lacking substance.

And sometimes the reviewer raises interesting points which I disagree with, and I’m simply frustrated not to be able to respond.

Harmonic Context in Interval Training

One such reviewer appeared this week. They were kind enough to review both of our paid apps, leaving a 1-star rating and a strongly worded negative review for each. They raised some interesting points though, which I’d like to respond to here.

I’ve included the whole review below, and then again with my comments in-line.

I’m sure I’m breaking lots of important rules about online business and marketing by republishing a negative review and mentioning a competing product; but I think the points raised are worth discussing.

---

Subject: beautiful but crippled
Rating: ★
by KD Jones – Version 1.7 – Sep 29, 2010
An EXCELLENT, slick interface, with great usability.
Only problem is that there is no way to lock the intervals to a key, which is the only way to relate training like this to FUNCTIONAL harmony, which is the only way to get any musical meaning out of training like this. I’ve know many, many people who have gone all crazy with this kind of interval identification, only to find it doesn’t apply at all to any musical (harmonic) context. They can name any isolated interval on the spot and fast, buy they can’t tear apart or reproduce a melody for their life. Sad. (Some people get by this, I’ve know a couple, but they were naturally very talented or “trained by feel” so deeply that they weren’t affected by the disease of interval isolation. (Note that you CAN lock the intervals to a “root note,” but that’s very different from “key.”)
As I said, it’s sad, because the design is lovely and is marvolously usable. But it’s very overpriced for what it lacks. If had options for harmonic placement within keys (as “Do Re Mi” does with melody), it would become a killer. ‘Til then, there are infinitely better ways to spend the time, energy and dollars.
– KD Jones

---

Right then.

Having reminded myself not to take app reviews personally, I read it again.

An EXCELLENT, slick interface, with great usability.

So far, I’m liking this review!

Only problem is that there is no way to lock the intervals to a key, which is the only way to relate training like this to FUNCTIONAL harmony, which is the only way to get any musical meaning out of training like this.

And now I strongly disagree. In fact, I disagree with anybody who claims there is only one way to relate ear training to music, or one way to understand what you hear in music.

Now it will be clear from the first post on this site: I am not an expert in music theory. However, I am confident I understand enough to ensure my apps are always beneficial to students, and the overwhelmingly positive reviews for RelativePitch go a long way towards confirming that.

I appreciate that functional harmony is the standard framework for understanding most music. I also acknowledge that a lot of musicians will use this context-based understanding of pitch relationships to perform tasks like transcription. However, to claim it is the only way to do so, or that no other method can be beneficial is unreasonable and unrealistic.

However important functional harmonic analysis may be to modern music theory, the fact that it is a framework created after most Common Practice Period music had been composed makes it farcical to claim it is the only way to relate ear training to music.

I’ve know many, many people who have gone all crazy with this kind of interval identification, only to find it doesn’t apply at all to any musical (harmonic) context. They can name any isolated interval on the spot and fast, buy they can’t tear apart or reproduce a melody for their life. Sad. (Some people get by this, I’ve know a couple, but they were naturally very talented or “trained by feel” so deeply that they weren’t affected by the disease of interval isolation.

I partially agree with this. Simply learning intervals is a very abstract exercise. However, there are two key advantages to studying intervals in isolation:

• Improving your precision in judging pitch distances.
  To me, knowing whether an interval is called a “perfect fifth” or a “minor sixth” isn’t all that exciting. But being able to consistently and effortlessly tell the difference between a distance of 7 semitones and a distance of 8? That’s a pretty significant aural skill.
• You can extend the skill to use in a melodic context.
  This is exactly what our app “Step and a Half” does. I’ll respond to this reviewer’s comments on that in another post, but the point is this:
  A huge number of people who want to improve their ears do so by learning to recognise intervals. A lot of them then think “well, what now?” Connecting the abstract skill with a practical musical task (melody transcription) is a sensible next step.

Now I wouldn’t argue that either of these are a complete replacement for understanding musical context and the role of notes in a key. However, they are both very significant tools to add to your aural toolbox, and to ignore their benefits would be a great mistake.

On top of the user reviews which say that RelativePitch has helped them learn intervals, there have been many in which the user says explicitly that training intervals with the app has helped them with real-life musical tasks.

Let’s continue:

(Note that you CAN lock the intervals to a “root note,” but that’s very different from “key.”)

Agreed. The ‘anchoring’ of root note in RelativePitch is provided as an introductory difficulty level. It can, however, be used for elementary practice within a key. For example, some students have used it to practice playing back notes in a key on their instrument, by ear: if you set the root note to ‘C’, and select the intervals of a major scale, you can practice identifying notes within the C major scale.

As I said, it’s sad, because the design is lovely and is marvolously usable. But it’s very overpriced for what it lacks. If had options for harmonic placement within keys (as “Do Re Mi” does with melody), it would become a killer. ‘Til then, there are infinitely better ways to spend the time, energy and dollars.
– KD Jones

I’ll save my thoughts on iPhone app pricing for another day – suffice to say, I think any product which genuinely advances your musical skills is worth more than a few dollars.

It does irk me when people leave a 1-star review, and then say that if the app “only had feature XYZ” it would be perfect. In my opinion, a 1-star review is only reasonable if the app completely fails to perform its stated function. In this case, RelativePitch clearly lays out in its description what it does and what it’s for, and provides a free demo version for people to try it for themselves.

I can understand somebody objecting to RelativePitch because it doesn’t train the way they have in mind – but to leave a one-star review and claim that the app can be of no use to anybody is a little extreme!

So, a plea: If you buy an app and find it does what it sets out to well, but that in fact you wanted an app which does something else – please don’t just leave a heavy negative review. Anybody is entitled to request a refund on the App Store, so if you think an app is good but not right for you, that’s a much more reasonable solution.

What do you think?

Should students study intervals only in the framework of harmonic context, relative to a tonic?

Do you think the reviewer was justified, and I’m overreacting?

Have you ever left a 1-star review for an app? If so, what did it do to deserve it?