# data[].attributes.body
Multiple studies have shown that, no matter the musical training,  any particular harmonization is instantaneously parsed by the brain on two main levels: cognitively and emotionally.  Much of the way that music is perceived the brain in these two ways is driven by expectation and the idioms which we are familiar with. This is due to the fact that our brain will create and solidify neural pathways based on perceptual anticipatory processes that we are exposed to in our cultural musical norms (Bigand, 2006). However, violations of the expectations of Western tonal music were found to generate specific and distinct electric responses in the human brain and often were found to have a negative reaction from the listener (Leino et al, 2007).

# data[].attributes.body
Recent studies in cognitive music theory have suggested that there is a difference in how trained musicians perceive complex harmony as opposed to non trained musicians. In this study, I hope to build upon the existing studies and literature to form a deeper understanding of how this perception differs and, more specifically, how differences in harmony can be ‘felt’ by everyone and particularly those without the language to describe what may be happening. Through this research, I would hope to further the understanding of how harmony (and especially complex harmony) is perceived by a listener who does not have the ability to understand it on a theoretical level, only a felt and intuitive level.

# data[].attributes.body
To develop the criteria for the participants, I composed a simple and brief (8 bar), diatonic melody with six levels of harmonization:

1. Monophonic texture

2. Simple Diatonic Texture (I, IV and V chords)

3. Seventh Chords (all chords extended to the seventh)

4. Extended Chords (all chords are taken out to the 9th or 13th)

5. Non-Diatonic Harmonization (a harmonization which recontextualizes the melody as non-chord tones)

6. Non-Functional Harmonization (a harmonization with distinctly dissonant and non-functional harmony)

Participants were played each example in order of least to most harmonically complex and asked a short questionnaire in between each one to determine what differences they hear within the music, if any. The questions are as follows

1.  How would you describe this piece of music in a few short words? (E.g. Tense, Pleasant, Melodious, Discordant etc)

2. What differences do you hear between this example and the one directly preceding it? (Do not answer for the first example)

3. Do you enjoy this example better or worse than the ones preceding it? Please elaborate on your answer to the best of your ability.

# data[].attributes.body
In reviewing all of the results, it seems to become clear that while the layperson does enjoy more complex harmonization to a certain degree, there is both a upper limit to the degree of complexity that can be had while not alienating the listener and a degree past which the listener might “feel” a difference but cannot cognitively or cogently express what that difference is. The majority of listeners, in the course of this study, seemed to be in agreement that the thicker the chord (while it fit diatonically with the melody) the prettier it was perceived to be, leading me to the conclusion that it is worthwhile for composers or arrangers to thicken chords for a perceptible difference to the layperson listener without alienation for the most part. However, the further one delves into non-diatonic harmony, the more niche the music seemingly becomes, furthering the risk of turning away many listeners, especially if the means of harmonization (such as using an incredibly familiar melody) is overly obvious to the listener and goes against what they may be expecting.