Primates And Music ?

[Guest]

Thanks for all the warm Welcomes

 

I've been quite busy reading as of late. Of recent interest to me is a topic that I would like to perhaps peruse. In June I will be spending most of my time on my deck recovering from knee surgery,  I would really like to contribute to this forums knowledge base if I may. I am an accomplished musician having performed and taught  at a fairly high level although sadly,this is not currently my day job. Therefore, I would like to research and hopefully offer some kind of hypothesis in regards to primates and music. There seems to be some recent research that may be of value to us.

 

Seems to me running through the woods banging on trees and trying a range of vocals may not be the best way to communicate with a shy and elusive creature. 

 

Would this be a topic of interest?

 

Being I newbie, I did a search and found no prior topics on this regard.

Please let me know if I missed something.

 

Thoughts Please.

 

Mesingw

 

[Guest lightheart]

Great topic, mesingw. Welcome to the forum. I welcome your input.

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

IMO music definitely couldn't hurt, and as some reports suggest, it may actually help. What I believe is that music can help, but could sometimes hurt, one's chances of seeing a sasquatch. It helps sometimes because it draws them closer, piques their interest or whatever. But I say it could sometimes hurt because I don't believe that all sasquatch will be drawn in by something. If they hear music, they likely will associate it with humans, and simply vacate the area as the sounds get closer, if not beforehand. Not all sasquatch, but some. In my personal opinion I feel that those who are drawn in are the minority of the population, but then again, they could be watching people from the treeline or from afar and we would never know it. So drawing them in needs to have a distance ascribed to it I suppose. I feel there might often be a certain range, and when a human gets that close to a sasquatch, it will make some type of move. Or perhaps it has solely to do with whether they believe they can be seen.

 

I think the question becomes whether their curiosity is enough to overcome their avoidance instinct. Evidence suggests this is the case sometimes, but we don't know the state of mind of the individual sasquatch in any report. Perhaps their tendency to avoid humans can be overridden by intelligence, as I've hypothesized elsewhere, but perhaps it can also be overridden by them feeling secure, even in the presence of a human. Of course, that is intelligence as well, since they must realize there is no danger. Not all animals are capable of that if they haven't been domesticated.

 

But out of all the potential methods for having an encounter, there are two that I still hold in the highest esteem. Drawing them in is one of these. Even if it doesn't work too often, it still works sometimes, and I feel that this is likely better than traipsing around willy-nilly throughout some forest. When one person or group is attempting to have an encounter their odds are low. But the odds of any number of the human population having an encounter are high. So one could easily conclude that the traipsing method could work, but I feel this this is in error if applied to the individual or single group. So for you, drawing them in is probably your best bet. Unless you know the general area they are staying of course, down to say about 100 acres...or more if you have more time on your hands.

 

In that case, you simply walk around and look for any hint that the animals are around. The point is to provoke them by entering an area they don't want you to be. So instead of walking through an area, you must stay in a select area for at least an hour. Even that might not be long enough though. Ideally, I would say spending two days in a particular spot is key. What you are trying to do is get them to "warn" or force you off their turf. They likely are smart enough to know that humans only pass through most of the time, so they can afford to wait you out. But after a day or two, they may start to feel a bit more unnerved, and take matters into their own hands.

 

I said 100 acres because I assume that a single sitting would encompass about 5 acres, or that a sasquatch would not want a person within 300-400 yards of their "space," which is about the length of 5 acres in any direction from the epicenter, or campsite. So spending a day or two in a square of 5 acres, one could cover 100 acres in 20-40 days. Entering their turf is why I think sasquatch seem to "attack" or disrupt certain campsites at night. If they were just looking for food, there would be no real need to do what they have done in some instances. Unless they are attempting to drive the people from the camp so they can go through it, but I don't find that likely, because this tactic probably wouldn't work all that often. I wouldn't want to leave the tent if something was outside of it. I would figure that since it hadn't come in on the initial attack, it probably wasn't going to. 

 

Anyway, in a couple of months of periodically doing this, one could potentially hit on the spot where they animals are living. The downside of course is that the animals are migratory. Nobody knows how long they will stay in any particular place. The best evidence we have is that sasquatch seem to be seasonal, or more likely they are moving around because of the higher availability of food sources in certain areas during certain seasons. So it is all a gamble, and what works in one instance is not likely to work in another. Even if we understood these animals much more than we do, there would be no guarantee of being able to go out and find them at will.

 

So I believe these two methods are the best bet for a single researcher or small group, which will not split up. With a larger group, the latter method I mentioned might be more effective. I could talk about how music seems to affect humans emotionally, but we all know about that. But what many don't know is the affect of music on non-human primates. I remember a study done on a single chimp over time, as she aged, and she consistently liked consonant music over dissonant music. So the particular music you play will likely be important. Avoid any tunes that sound dissonant, or unstable. They played a lot of more classical or orchestral music for the chimp, so I wouldn't say that you would have to stick to simple progressions or anything, but I probably would. If you were just going to be playing say a guitar, I think a constant progression of chords in 4:4 time would be ideal, as opposed to something with a lot of subtle tonal variations. This is probably not what they mean by dissonant tones, but that is what I took it to mean. I don't have much knowledge of formal music though, lol.

 

What instrument you use might make a difference as well, unless you're just planning on playing music through speakers. In that case the choice of music is probably more important. I would use more formal music myself. I was thinking though, if the sasquatch can hear the music from a distance that doesn't allow you to see the animal, or if it is hiding, it could still satisfy its curiosity without exposing itself. So you want to make them come as close as possible to hear the music, but you want to be able to broadcast that something unusual is occurring for as long a distance as possible. I don't know how to remedy that negative.

It will probably be a trial and error type of thing. Ideally, one would want cameras set up all around the potential avenues of approach while the music plays from a center point, but most people don't have the means to outfit themselves in such a way. And hiding the cameras can be difficult, while maintaining a good viewing angle.

 

The point of this would be to eliminate the possibility of a sasquatch taking advantage of the pleasant music but remaining a good distance away, out of sight from the observer. As I ponder the idea in general I find that there are even more things that could be important, factors that would affect the outcome of such an experiment, but I feel that all of the downsides don't really matter. They matter, as one could increase their chances of having a sighting, but since one can never be certain, people just need to get out there and see what happens. That is probably the best advice I can give you or anyone else who wishes to have an encounter. Learn what you can about their behavior, or not, and just get out there. Thousands upon thousands of people have gotten lucky in the past, and anyone else can too. Increasing your odds wherever possible is something to look into as well. Pick a good area, an area that will give you greater potential to spot them if they're nearby. And if you have multiple areas open to you for this experiment, choose one based on sighting frequency, but also try to analyze whether there are a lot of humans moving in and out of the area.

 

Because if there are a large number of sightings, but a small number of people, that would be the area I would choose. A large number of sightings though is still good, even if there are a lot of people to have a sighting in that area. I guess what I'm saying is pick an area where you know bigfoots have been seen in the past. And if you don't like that idea because like lightning bigfoot never strikes the same place twice, see if you can figure out where the other animals are going. Look at topo maps near bigfoot sightings, and try to picture where a bigfoot might go. Good luck to you in whatever you decide to do, and I hope you have an encounter. The more witnesses the better.

[Guest]

I 've booked Benson Lake late sept, Huntsville, all alone , me and my horn and Zoom recorder. 

[LeafTalker]

That sounds like fun, Mesingw! I bet you'll stir up a lot of interest with your music. 

[JDL]

Mesingw, is your avatar, um, twerking?  If so, to which tune?

[Incorrigible1]

Thinking a certain Ohio gal will be along with an entire playlist of Dead tuneage.

 

I'd suggest Franklin's Tower along with the Weather Report Suite.

[Guest]

If Allison Krauss won't lure them in, nothing will.

 

Edited May 23, 2014 by Pteronarcyd

[Guest]

Not twerking, oops just threw up in my mouth

I just found this one interesting since my assumptions were that the big guys are only bipedal, I believe that isnt the case. 

My thought from what I've read is to imitate some known calls or communications through the instrument, I play euphonium which is a bottom end deep brass instrument one step up from a Tuba, it carries sound far with complex over and undertones, then perhaps some simple warm melodic selections.

Ode to a Sasquatch Opus 43

[the parkie]

JDL, you have twerking on the brain...I'm sure I remember you bringing it up before...

Are you a twerkaphile?!

[JDL]

Just teasing Mesingw.  I have brought it up before, Parkie.  Since the Miley Cyrus shocker (I was more or less unaware of the practice prior to that), I guess it has entered my lexicon as a means of getting people's attention.  Under other circumstances I've used it to get people to take action, i.e. if someone has acted in a passive manner and been taken advantage of, I've asked them if they plan to stay where they are and continue twerking, or take action and do something about it.  It's one of those images that jostles people out of their passive zone and gets them moving.

[Guest Stan Norton]

Gorillaz? The Monkees? 

[gigantor]

Good topic Measingw, I would think that unusual sounds in the woods will attract many curious animals.

[Guest]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXKDu6cdXLI

[Guest]

Hi Mesingw, I seem to recall reading an article about music for dogs a few years back. The researchers had made some music that they played at different speeds (?) tempo (?) I don't know the terms. Anyway the music was timed to their heart beats. So faster for them than our music for us. Perhaps this might work with bigfoot as well only in reverse. Longer, slower sounds. Be sure to let us know what comes of this even if nothing much. It's data.