"Like I said...
;-)
Seriously, I would be interested if they consulted with a serious player and educator-- Peter Erskine, Ed Soph, John Riley, Gary Chaffee-- or spent a couple of decades living with Pygmys. Thinking they know the right questions because they used to be music students or they play part time is a huge overreach. At least as the studies relate to playing music."
The scientific studies were related to human comprehension of time-it was NOT directed towards music. Music wasn't in their question-like I said the studies are only peripherally related to music because our comprehension and abilities in time keeping are important. I don't see the need for insults to scientist. A scientist doesn't have to have a faith to study religiosity or have cancer to research it. If scientists are studying music I'm sure they are asking the right questions because that's what they've been trained to do-much as your point about keeping time. Hey thanks for asking about music Todd. I looked on Pubmed some 22,000 I got to go read now -dang you LOL. I never knew there was music psychology. I thought this was pretty interesting and I think supports you.
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 29;13(6):e0199604. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0199604. eCollection 2018.
Groove in drum patterns as a function of both rhythmic properties and listeners' attitudes.
Senn O1, Kilchenmann L1, Bechtold T1, Hoesl F1.
Author information
Abstract
Music psychology defines groove as humans' pleasureable urge to move their body in synchrony with music. Past research has found that rhythmic syncopation, event density, beat salience, and rhythmic variability are positively associated with groove. This exploratory study investigates the groove effect of 248 reconstructed drum patterns from different popular music styles (pop, rock, funk, heavy metal, rock'n'roll, hip hop, soul, R&B). It aims at identifying factors that might be relevant for groove and worth investigating in a controlled setting in the future. Drum patterns of eight bars duration, chosen from 248 popular music tracks, have been transcribed and audio reconstructions have been created on the basis of sound samples. During an online listening experiment, 665 participants rated the reconstructions a total of 8,329 times using a groove questionnaire. Results show that, among 15 tested variables, syncopation (R2 = 0.010) and event density (R2 = 0.011) were positively associated with the groove ratings. These effects were stronger in participants who were music professionals, compared to amateur musicians or mere listeners. A categorisation of the stimuli according to structural aspects was also associated with groove (R2 = 0.018). Beat salience, residual microtiming and rhythmic variability showed no effect on the groove ratings. Participants' familiarity with a drum pattern had a positive influence on the groove ratings (η2 = 0.051). The largest isolated effect was measured for participants' style bias (R2 = 0.123): groove ratings tended to be high if participants had the impression that the drum pattern belonged to a style they liked. Combined, the effects of style bias and familiarity (R2 = 0.152) exceeded the other effects as predictors for groove by a wide margin. We conclude that listeners' taste, musical biographies and expertise have a strong effect on their groove experience. This motivates groove research not to focus on the music alone, but to take the listeners into account as well. " Weird paper. Enhanced auditory evoked potentials in musicians: A review of recent findings." sounds interesting too.
Now remember too science is a process it never "proves" anything so takes forever to get anywhere.