Although there is growing evidence that breathing is modulated by various motor and cognitive activities, the nature of breathing in musical performance has been little explored. The present study examined the temporal breath pattern in piano performance, aiming to elucidate how breath timing is related to musical organization/events and performance. In the experiments, the respiration of 15 professional and amateur pianists, playing 10 music excerpts in total (from four-octave C major scale, Hanon's exercise, J. S. Bach's Invention, Mozart's Sonatas, and Debussy's Clair de lune), was monitored by capnography. The relationship between breathing and musical characteristics was analyzed. Five major results were obtained. (1) Mean breath interval was shortened for excerpts in faster tempi. (2) Fluctuation of breath intervals was reduced for the pieces for finger exercise and those in faster tempi. Pianists showing large within-trial fluctuation also exhibited large inter-excerpt difference. (3) Inter-trial consistency of the breath patterns depended on the excerpts. Consistency was generally reduced for the excerpts that could be performed mechanically (i.e., pieces for finger exercise), but interestingly, one third of the participant showed consistent patterns for the simple scale, correlated with the ascending/descending sequences. (4) Pianists tended to exhale just after the music onsets, inhale at the rests, and inhibit inhale during the slur parts. There was correlation between breathing pattern and two-voice polyphonic structure for several participants. (5) Respiratory patterns were notably different among the pianists. Every pianist showed his or her own characteristic features commonly for various musical works. These findings suggest that breathing in piano performance depends not only on musical parameters and organization written in the score but also some pianist-dependent factors which might be ingrained to individual pianists.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,811,101
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,722
of 7,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,539
of 365,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#141
of 167 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,170 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 365,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 167 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
