Anibal says:

I´ve read Levitin´s anterior book and it was great, and to me is really infantile in a forum like "Nature" to acussed one (a cognitive neuroscientist of music) of inmature tastes.

How can someone dare to judge the "food of neuroscience" of another one, without even tell why?

tom says:

I think the harshness of the review can be understood if you think about the presumed Nature audience --- academics who want to know about the academic quality of the book. This is not a review for the average reader of popular science, and so focuses less on how enjoyable the book is, more on how truthful. In this context it would seem fair enough to criticise any musicological effort that focussed exclusively on Western pop music. This is immature not in the sense that me still liking Metallica is immature, but in the sense that me trying to explain the effect of music on the brain only with reference to Metallica would be immature.

I agree that parts of the review are below the belt, but I am guessing that the reviewer feels passionately about the subject and resents what he sees as its trivialisation.

tom says:

And I should say, of course, that I haven't read the book so maybe the reviewer (and hence my take on his review) are completely mistaken, I just wanted to offer some sympathy for the position of outraged academic reviewer.

Anibal says:

Tom, because you are scientist then you are habituated to the business of publishing in "peer-review" process, and at the same time to judge other´s work, in other words, every scientist is simultaneously, juror and plaintiff, and because you have showed a very fine dexterity in reviewing other´s work you have convinced me about it.

But i still think that even if the book it is restricted to western music, the case to explain how our brains are tuned to emotions, cognitive proceses uderlying rhythm, melody, tempo etc. is not a trivialisation.
But of course i have not read the book, so...