I don’t believe in equality for musicians

Marshall Chasin
October 9, 2012

Equality is an apple pie, motherhood-type word.  Everyone believes in equality but there is a shadowy underside to that word.  I could have titled this blog, “I don’t believe in equality for those who are disabled” as well, but this blog is about music and musicians.

Equality is the concept that all people are the same and should be treated the same.  So far, so good.  A person who requires a wheelchair to get around is now treated unequally as compared with someone else.  A person who is hard of hearing may require assistive listening and visual alerting devices to communicate and function optimally- this person who receives all of this technical support has now been treated differently than someone who has normal hearing.

I don’t believe in equality- that would mean that all people are treated the same.  I believe in equity.

Equity is a much more interesting word, and it is not a synonym for equality.  Equity means that everyone is treated the same, but every effort has been made to assist them in being on an equal footing as the next person.  Equity means clear and adequate public policy, laws, technical devices, and in short, whatever it takes to ensure that one person is as able as the next to function and compete in every-day life.  As an audiologist, I strive to ensure that my clients receive everything necessary to function as well as the next person.

Equity means that wheelchair ramps should be provided for those who require it.  Equality means that these people should not be given anything extra in order to function.  Equity means the provision of hearing aids, assistive listening devices, and aural rehabilitation strategies.  Equality means that hard of hearing people should not be given anything extra since it would “not be equal”.

The word “equality” has been hijacked by some socially irresponsible political movements to show that they believe in equality and equal rights.  It is merely a thinly veiled excuse to limit public funding and support for those who require it.  These movements are hiding behind this very important word.

One of the last bastions of equality is the symphony orchestra- all musicians of a certain high level caliber are treated the same.  But what about a professional musician who has repetitive strain injury? Or what about a clarinet player who sits just downwind of the piccolo or trumpet section and complains about tinnitus and a muffled feeling after every performance?

The symphony management would typically say, “sorry, why should you get any help that we are not giving to the cellists?  That would be unfair”.  The word equality comes with a list of less than stellar phrases- no “unfair” assistance; let’s treat everyone the same; it’s your fault if you have tinnitus; quit complaining,…

Equity is not fair, but it is just.  Equity is the first thing that any parent learns.  I often have said to my kids, “fair does not mean equal”.  Meredith may require us to drive her to gymnastics lessons half way across the city, whereas Shaun’s guitar teacher comes to the house.  Time expended, money spent, attention given, are all things that do, and should vary from child to child.  There are never two children who are identical or should be treated the same.

I don’t mean that professional musicians are like children, but in many symphony orchestra environments, they can be treated as such.

I look forward to the day when symphony orchestras practice equity.  Having said this, there are some stellar examples around the world, but all too frequently, occupational Darwinism- “survival of the fittest”- rears its ugly head.

Currently we have hearing aids with a so called “music program”.  In order to implement a hearing aid program that is better suited to music, one needs to push a button on the hearing aid or on a remote.  This is not a big issue, but in the vein of equity, why should musicians need to do this?  Why can’t the hearing aid do this automatically?  Why should the hard of hearing not have the same access as those with normal hearing function?

This is a minor example but underscores some subtle things that hard of hearing people have been putting up with.  Why should they have to push a button?  Normal hearing people don’t need to push any buttons.

The trick in any society, with any issue, is to move equity towards equality.   This may never be accomplished but ideally the difference between the two concepts should be so slight that it is seamless.  Technologies do exist today to accomplish some of these things and here is one example.

Current hearing aid technology performs modulation rate (and in some cases, depth) analysis.  This is typically part of a noise reduction algorithm.  If there is a low modulation rate, then it is most likely noise.  If the modulation rate is between about 4-6 Hz (the number of times one typically opens and closes their mouth during speech) then it is most likely speech.  And if it is in excess of 10 Hz (which is beyond the human vocal mechanism’s ability to generate) then it must be music or music-like.

Although a music program may be equitable, in order for it to be more equal, why can’t an algorithm be used that automatically switches to a music program when a high modulation rate is encountered?  Hearing aids do this in any event, so why not use what we already have to truly make the environment more equal, and not just equitable?

  1. Great article, Marshall! At first, reading it, I admit to struggling with the concept of difference between equality and equity. I found this example on the net, using the analogy of how a turkey may be carved up at at family’s dinner table. Equality would mean that everybody – father, mother and children – would get some turkey, and the same amount of turkey. Equity, on the other hand, would mean that they take the sensible option, and divide it according to their needs, i.e. larger sized pieces for the adult and smaller pieces for the children.

    But I wish ALL hearing health professionals would do as you do, when you say: “As an audiologist, I strive to ensure that my clients receive everything necessary to function as well as the next person.”

    Love it!

  2. Thanks for the nice post. Interesting idea that technology should meet the individual to the greatest extent possible, rather than the individual needing to take extra steps to work with technology. I have been skimming some of the audio engineering literature about sound classification, and it seems that modulation rate is an important feature for classification (as you mentioned). However, I’m having a hard time finding references about the modulation rate or modulation spectrum for music. Do you have any ideas for good references on this topic? Thanks!

Leave a Reply