anyone get into harmonics?

H

houseofthesun

New member
anyone here gotten into the harmonic scale and played around with missing fundamentals, ( creating a 3rd note from 2 other notes ). the one i love and love to do with the guitar is create a bass note from 2 notes past the 12 freet.

so has anyone one found this either by reading some science books ( quantum phisics ) or just found it on a guitar.

actually has anyone found this with another instrument appart from the guitar?

and with the harmonic scale has anyone noticed the patterns they see, the ones iv seen so far is its the major scale which is very interesting how the major scale is so natural, which brings a thought into my head right now that since the harmonic scale is really just what happens when 1 note is struck then the stricking of one note is the sound of the major scale. also the pattern where it folds over and really keeps repeating its self.


i would love to know of anyone els has investigated these sides to music theory, i know there not taught in the music schools, and alot of people have no idea about any of this, even guys that teach music theory alot of the time wont move this far into theory and alot of people just find it easier to say its not real. i also understand soem people will be thinking its just some crackpot kid making things up in his head and has no idea what his on about, sorry to dissapoint but i do understand what im saying and going on about but would like it if someone ells did aswell. there has to be someone out there that has looked into this, i cant go on for eva talking these theorys ideas and experiments thru my own head.


whats that do i hear insanity calling.
 
I'll admit I'm lost here, and I know a decent amount of theory. What exactly do you mean by harmonic scales. You're obviously not talking about the harmonic minor? Are you refering to guitar harmonics where you lightly tap a string above a fret to produce a harmonic tone? BTW, it's not quantum physics.
 
Wow! I'm interested in hearing more, houseofthesun!

Please tell us more!

I, too, and fairly well-versed in music theory and theoretical physics, but this sounds new to me. More info!

-Hoax
 
"What exactly do you mean by harmonic scales"

i mean pretty much what i said the harmonic scale, there is a scale that has not been touched on.

"Are you refering to guitar harmonics where you lightly tap a string above a fret to produce a harmonic tone? BTW, it's not quantum physics."

lol nah man its not just hitting the harmonics on the guitar close but it goes further than that alot further.
and i dont think you should be too quick to say its not quantum phisics, when you dont know what im talking about, because once i explain this you will understand how quantum phisics works with in this. well if you understand quantum phisicis then you should allready know that quantum phisics will sit inside everything. ( i know very breif but will be explained later ).
have you heard of the missing fundamental? its big inside quantum phisics . have you heard the theory that if 2 cars crashed into each other in the quantum world more will come out than less, so 2 cars crash and out comes a truck a bus a train. this is talking about things like the missing fundamental.


yeah Cruel Hoax ill post up some more vital info about this, good to see you guys are interested, and it might look like ill have a few people to go further with investigations with which would be nice, there can sometmes be nothing better then hearing another opinion to something.

ill post it tomorrow.
heres the first 16 notes to the scale that goes for infinity.
this is for C and ill post up G aswell see if you can see any patterns inside this. and ill explain how i got to this later.


( just another thing alot of this has been tought to me by my dad yes he is another person of course i can talk to but sometimes he sh!ts me at times.)




ok here we go.

1 C G
2 C G
3 G D
4 C G
5 E B
6 G D
7 A# F
8 C G
9 D A
10 E B
11 F# C
12 G D
13 A E
14 A# F
15 B f#
16 C G

Now here the number represents the octave we are in, and of course the letter is the note, pretty much what you see is also what happens when 1 string has been struck you acually get the harmonic scale to create the note your ears hear, so with C in the second octave C repeats its self then in the 3rd octave a new note is introduced.
this stuff was also investigated by plato many years ago, i know at first this might sound weird and like crap , and alot of people will be convinced that when they hit a C thats all they are hearing nothing ells, so hate to break it to yas but our ears do more work with sound then we think.

ill leave it here for now and write up how to get the scale which will be better help in understanding it. you will need 1 guitar 1 chromatic tuner 1 peice of string paper and a pen.
or we could do it the way plato did and that is get a big bit of string and stretch it across a yard tied to 2 poles which one of the poles has a tuning peg to tighten the string, at this scale you will see how a string moves and you would be suprised to know that not the whole string moves there are parts of a string that stay still.
 
It's a good thing houseofthesun, but for me, and I speak as classically-trained composer, is too 'technical' from a physics point of view - mathematics is the language of music, physics is the process of music, in my opinion.

WAYYYYY too geeky a concept for me to get into in a full blown way to be able to write music that I enjoy writing without having to study quantum physics - which is of no use to composers, but more helpful to DSP Programmers and stuff like that.

However, valid points you are making, but for me, just a little heavy for me :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just as a rule of thumb, no one understands quantum physics. Not even the people who developed quantum physics understand it. It's more like you have a vague idea of it. I took a year of quantum physics in college to get my biochem degree. I got a B+ in the class, but did I understand it? No I didn't. I just had a better idea about it than most. Technically you're right, quantum physics is inside everything. However, in most cases to describe events in life, newtonian phsyics offers a resonable explanation. Quantum physics is used to explain phenomena at velocities close to the speed of light as well as on the atomic level where newtonian physics disintegrate. I haven't heard of the missing fundamental, but you did pique my interst, and I do see the relevence in describing what your expaining. I will look it up. Thank you for posting this by the way. This is very intersting.
 
houseofthesun said:
have you heard the theory that if 2 cars crashed into each other in the quantum world more will come out than less, so 2 cars crash and out comes a truck a bus a train.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't that violate the First Law of Thermodynamics?
 
it's not quantum physics... it's classical mechanics... you could even reduce it to basic math, actually

Pythagoras discovered back in the day (around 1200 BC or so... +- a few hundred years) by using a monochord (simply a single string streached along 2 points... think a single cello or guitar string) that if you divide it in half you get an octave higher, in 3rd you get a fifth above, etc... these are related to harmonics.

Harmonics, also known as the overtone series, are different frequencies that something (anything) vibrates at other than the pitch you hear...
so, if you set the monochord in motion, it will be vibrating with a wavelength of 1. the full length of the string, 2. half the length of the string, 3. 1/3rd the length of the string, 4. 1/4 the length of the string ... etc....
the different vibrations that occur other that the one that is the full length of the string are overtones, aka partials.

the overtone series goes something like this... (based off of A = 440Hz)

A1
A2
E2
A3
C#3
E3
etc...
(if you keep going up you'll very soon end up between notes)

if you'll notice the intervals go - 1 octave, then perfect 5th, perfect 4th, Major 3rd, minor 3rd
that is also one thing in common with western music history as far as tonality is concerned it began with harmonies using exclusively 5ths, then progressing to triads (A, C#, E is a major chord) and if you go further up the overtone series, you get 2nds, chromatic notes, and then micro-tones which music has already evolved into using.

the frequencies corresponding to notes follows a mathematical pattern. When you have a frequency of a note and want to transpose an octave, you multiply by 2 to go up an octave or divide to go down. to go up a second octave you multiply a second time by 2. So for example, A = 440Hz... an octave up is 880Hz one more octave up is 1760Hz, an octave down from 440Hz is 220Hz.

[quick expl. for better understanding - 1Hz = 1 cycle per second... or 1 vibration for every second]

To go up the overtone series, you just add it to itself. So, if we transpose A = 440 down 2 octaves, we get 110Hz (a number which is easy to use for this example)
so for the overtone series you get these numbers

A1 - 110
A2 - 220
E2 - 330
A3 - 440
C#3- 550
E3 - 660

etc

and now what we can do is also look at the notes and the intervals and the corresponding frequencies and find ratios.
remember we said the string also vibrates at 1/2 the length, 1/3 the length, etc?
the ratio A1:A2 is 1:2 (1/2)
A1:E2 is 1:3 (1/3)
A1:A3 is 1:4 etc...
and we can get A2:E2 (a perfect 5th) which is 2:3 and that is the ratio of all perfect 5ths as well

to the pythagoreans who first discovered all this, music was all about ratios. in fact music was a math, who's focus was ratios. (but then again everything to the Pythagoreans was math)


anyway... it's not a very organized explanation... I just spewed out everything I know... there's stuff I left out too, I know.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
and this relates alot to our system of tuning.

after doing this stuff with the monochord, pythagoras (the pythagoreans) devolped a system of tuning the notes of a scale. They went about it by starting with a note then tuning up by interval of a perfect 5th until every note was hit (ex: C-G, G-D, D-A, A-E, etc...Bb-F, F-C) and they'd tune the 5ths by using the ratio 2:3 as proven to be the ratio of a perfect 5th by use of the monochord. So, they did this, and once you cycle through every note, the last interval ends on the 1st one (in our example F-C). Well, once the got to the last note, it didn't correspond to the 1st one even though they were the same note. If you try to tune this way, you get an extra 26Hz (I think it's 26, maybe 34 or something close to it) left over. This extra bit is known as a "pythgorean comma".

So, they had to figure out a different way to tune and they had the octave divided up into 7 notes like we still do today, and kept the octaves in tune, then tuned the 5th note of the scale with the 2:3 ratio, and the 4th note (by way of going down a 5th instead of up) and I'm a little hazy on the specifics of the rest... they based the ratios over 12 and 9 (using 8:9, 6:12, 8:12 and 9:12
well I'm going a bit out of the scope of the original topic... but anyway to finish this up... around the 1600s it was decided (due I would say mostly to compositional reasons) that this tuning system wouldn't work any more and the reason being that you can't modulate to different keys... you can only tune for one key this way... so intervals were shifted, an octave is still an octave, a 5th is slightly flat, a Major 3rd is sharp and a minor 3rd is flat, etc... any way, a lot of different alternatives were thought up and when this happened Bach wrote his famous "24 Preludes and Fugues" to show off the fact that composers could now go through all 24 keys (major and minor) without having to retune the clavier.

um so yeah... that's one of the bigger applications for harmonics and using them is figuring out tuning systems.

Another is synthesis... every sound is effected by it's overtones, the timbre (quality... buzzy, smooth, nasal, etc...) of a sound is directly due to it's overtones and their relative intensities. But that's a huge topic in itself.
 
this very good to see people having some intrest in this.

ok first up i think i should clear up the problem with the quantum phisics.
I have put forth 2 things to look, which maybe i should have done 1 at a time.

as we know quantum phisics looks at things inside the atomic level, and fumbling on xtc good to see you have done quantum phisics so you should understand this.
what was first strongly related to Q P (quantum phisics lets just say Q P now as the shortcut ) is the missing fundamental experiment in music. creating a 3rd note from 2 other notes, the thing to look at with this is the fact that the third note created is a lot lower than the 2 original notes first played, this is what i have found and i do belive yet have not found yet is that it could work the other where to lower notes could create a higher note.

this was also looked at with the wholism ( not to shur for the correct name my memory slips me but will edit this with the correct name if this is wrong im pretty shur it is right and do understand and am sorry for the short explanation) experiment where the output is alot bigger than your input.

take the rolling stones where there were 4 guys that were not the best musos but you end up with what is known as one of the best rock and roll bands around, each on there own would get nowhere but each together make a great team.
and yes alot of stones fans will be saying but i bet keith could have done it on his own.

i have also got my dads interest in this again and we will go thru his files and then that will be the big report, for now i will just do some breif stuff.

i think we should look further into this but look at the harmonic scale first.
as i get excited with these things i forget things like the fact that what im reffering to as the harmonic scale is not actually called the harmonic scale which i understand will bring confusion,. there so far is no name for this investigation but my father and i named it the harmonic scale for our own refernce purpose because of it using the harmonics, as of yet it has no name so om sorry to cumfuse people by using the term so far without explaining the name problem. so if you were thinking of the harmonic minor scale i wasnt refering to this, sorry again for any problems there.

"Pythagoras discovered back in the day (around 1200 BC or so... +- a few hundred years) by using a monochord (simply a single string streached along 2 points... think a single cello or guitar string) that if you divide it in half you get an octave higher, in 3rd you get a fifth above, etc... these are related to harmonics."

well dj funkifize we look like were on the same page,the monochord is what im taliing about here once again sorry to leave out things i am a student with a want to learn so im sorry for not explaining everything perfectly very sorry as i know it can create confussion. but i have looked at socrates and platos experiments inside this. now if you recall i said to find this you will need 1 guitar 1 chromatic tuner 1 peice of string a pen and a paper. now that simple string across the 2 points as funk has said will be one of the guitar strings, what you do is take your peice of string and knot one point at the bridge and knot another at the nut so your peice of string is now that same length. as funk said if you know half the string the end should be at your 12th freet now hit that as you hit a harmonic on the guitar, now your tuner should tell you that its hearing an E ( if your tuner provides this information you should see that this note of E that we hear higher the tuner hears it an octave lower than the open E string which is interesting ) now if you fold the string into thirds you should find a B which is the the 3rd of E in your major scale, JAMES MCFAYDEN this is why i do belive composers could have an interest as i do compose my self you should find that this harmonic scale is directly related to the major scale this is a natural move.
now if you keep folding your string you will keep finding the next notes each fold is an octave up, and by the tuner each fold is actually an octave down so we are in a way moving in both directions at once ( now this is where we can start moving towards Q P, because the splitting of an atom is like the hit of one string, when you hit one string what is happening is the harmonic scale , so what happens inside the atom is also related to what happens inside this one string being struck, i hope i havnt lost anyone. i will also provide some quotes to my fathers research which should be very helpfull when we go further towards the Q P unerstanding of it all.
basically what happens inside the atom is also found to happen inside 1 vibrating string, once again very breif but hope it is understandable, and apoligise for my stupidty as a student of this study and not explaining this as best as i can, but the next post will be explaind better and will provide quotes.

right now with the harmonic scale i dont want to look at the quantum phisics side just as yet but more the patterns and genral way of finding this.

i will leave it there and in the next day now i will get my dad to get his files and we can put down the things he has found and will move alot more into detail as i am just brushing on things at the moment very loosly.

but i do think alot of people so far are missing the point that we can find the same answers thru many different ways.
we see that Pythagoras found this thru mathamatics a more genral way, which is good he is not incorrect but it has also been found in other ways which you cant dismiss. Socrates and Plato discoverd this by enlarging the scale of it ( im shure i have said this before but i think you missed it dj funk ) he took a string and streched it across two points and on one point he put a peg so he could tighten the strings, so now imagine it we have a massive guitar string , he plucked this string and then saw what happens when a string moves, at this scale he did you can actually see exactly or close to what happens and how a string moves, and how it doesnt move in places i must leave it here and will have to go more indepth to explain this better.


one last thing before we all start saying your wrong and your right we must remeber the fact the same answer can come from different ways what dj funk has found is another way and understanding of the harmonic scale and he looks at it above the level of quantum phisics you must realize and i realize that maybe so far i have not explaind my self clear enough but please bear with me as the next post should put things in more focus. yes with maths we can find these answers but with maths we cant move further than we can with Q P, what dj funk has found in his studys of this experiment is the same answers i have found we are both correct say funk please dont be so quick to dismiss the relationship of Q P and the harmonic scale, what had done there funk was find it in or on the A string . do the next steps look like this with what you have found.
1A 2A 3E 4A 5C# 6E 7G 8A 9B 10C# 11D 12E 13F# 14G 15G# 16A

please people remember that there are many ways to finding answers and that each way can show a different side to the story.

i will take more time with later posts and watch my spelling and grammer, insted of being excited and typeing with out really proofready as carefully as i should.

and i dont want to seem rude but can people that want to input into the disscussion reply and not people just saying there opinion on what they think is right or wrong with out investigations, i would like to keep this as a disscussion to exel learning and not throw insults around or just have the ignorant people saying nah its crap and thats it, if you are to say anyone is wrong please give an explanation because so far it lokks very interesting how no one is really wrong yet, theres just a bit of missunderstanding but we can get thru that.

thanx for the non ignorant input so far good to see a bunch of guys who also like to think its refreshing to see some intelligence on the net as i need some more information and good to see im getting replies and not insults for once for bringing yup a challening subject.
thank you
 
Last edited:
see, my problem with it, is it's nothing new, like I've mentioned to you in the past, Gyorgi Ligeti is a master of this 'harmonics' technique.

It is also part of the experimental language of Totalism (re: John Luther Adams et al)

Like I said,you have some valid points :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
houseofthesun said:
creating a 3rd note from 2 other notes, the thing to look at with this is the fact that the third note created is a lot lower than the 2 original notes first played, this is what i have found and i do belive yet have not found yet is that it could work the other where to lower notes could create a higher note.
Click to expand...

the lower note is what is known as a Tartini tone. Named after the guy who did a lot of research about it during the renaissance period. Turns out he wasn't the first to discover or research this phenomenon nor was his research correct. But he got it named after him. It's also known as "difference tones" because the lower pitch is the difference of the 2 frequencies of the original notes.
the specifics (which I won't mention here) can be found by searching "Tartini tone" on yahoo.


houseofthesun said:

i think we should look further into this but look at the harmonic scale first.
as i get excited with these things i forget things like the fact that what im reffering to as the harmonic scale is not actually called the harmonic scale which i understand will bring confusion,. there so far is no name for this investigation but my father and i named it the harmonic scale for our own refernce purpose because of it using the harmonics, as of yet it has no name so om sorry to cumfuse people by using the term so far without explaining the name problem. so if you were thinking of the harmonic minor scale i wasnt refering to this, sorry again for any problems there.

...

at your 12th freet now hit that as you hit a harmonic on the guitar, now your tuner should tell you that its hearing an E ( if your tuner provides this information you should see that this note of E that we hear higher the tuner hears it an octave lower than the open E string which is interesting ) now if you fold the string into thirds you should find a B which is the the 3rd of E in your major scale, JAMES MCFAYDEN this is why i do belive composers could have an interest as i do compose my self you should find that this harmonic scale is directly related to the major scale this is a natural move.
Click to expand...

this does have a name and it's called the "overtone series"... I thought maybe I was misunderstanding you, but from what you said here, I know you mean the overtone series.
it does come very close to the notes of the scale and like I said if you trace the harmonies from baroque music to current classical music, you'll see that intervals used over time goes up the overtone series as you go from early western art music to current contemporary art music.
However after the 6th overtone things get a little funky and the frequencies don't match up exactly with and note in our 12 tone system. Some do, but not all of them do. I actually calculated frequencies going up the overtone series and compared them to frequencies of notes and they get off after the 6th overtone.


when you say "because the splitting of an atom is like the hit of one string, when you hit one string what is happening is the harmonic scale , so what happens inside the atom is also related to what happens inside this one string being struck"
are you basically talking about string theory? Because the main basis of string theory is that the tiniest components of atoms are tiny vibrating "strings"


I'm not at all saying you're wrong... I was just posting a bunch of info that I know about the subject.
and the Plato and Soctrates method of finding the same thing... that's the same thing I was saying about Pythagoras. Its the same method.


houseofthesun said:

1A 2A 3E 4A 5C# 6E 7G 8A 9B 10C# 11D 12E 13F# 14G 15G# 16A
Click to expand...
this is what I meant a little earlier in this post... 7 isn't exactly a G it's like almost in between a G and a G#, and 15 is 20Hz sharp of a real G#. So the overtone series doesn't exactly match up. Just wanted to bring this up to clarify what I said earlier... not to argue what you posted here. In fact this is exactly the list I had when comparing the frequencies in the notes in the overtone series with the frequencies of a pythagorean tuned scale.


Now... talking about quantum physics... I still disagree that this area belongs under the topic of quantum physics.. I totally get your point relating it to quantum physics and I'm very much interested. In fact if your dad is willing to post his research or has it published online somewhere I'd be thrilled to read it. Maybe there is a way to calculate it via quantum physics, and I want to know if there is. I've been reading about and doing my own research on this topic... it's been my hobby this summer

But what I mean to say is the physical properties of a vibrating string is classical mechanics, not quantum physics. Like I said before I don't doubt you can apply quantum physics to it and do some excellent research with it.

Maybe I'm wrong, and I'll find out after reading more, including your fathers research... anyhow, I'm enjoying the discussion very much :)
 
I think you have a point, MaximalC. I think it says something about explosions on impact ; )

Surely stringed instruments are better for replicating this phenom but I have also noticed with some algorithms in various PC platforms, I can achieve a new field of sound by "stacking" notes. Some harmonic, some rough...

Has anyone studied the behavior of sounds or algorithms when heavily processeed with delays or echoes? I'd like to understand how to control the phase or oscillations a little better...
 
"Now... talking about quantum physics... I still disagree that this area belongs under the topic of quantum physics.. I totally get your point relating it to quantum physics and I'm very much interested. In fact if your dad is willing to post his research or has it published online somewhere I'd be thrilled to read it. Maybe there is a way to calculate it via quantum physics, and I want to know if there is. I've been reading about and doing my own research on this topic... it's been my hobby this summer"

sorry havnt posted in a bit iv been busy myself and so has my dad as he just got back from europe. i will get him to post it up soon as soon as he has some free time.

first i just want to try and clear up the quantum phisics thing again. yes getting the harmonic series the mono chord or what we shall call it, the methoeds we used was maths and not quantum phisics correct im sorry if i sounded like thats what i ment with quantum phisics. but yeah like i was saying what is happening inside the atom is also what is happening inside this harmonic series. when my dad posts it will be understood how, using this we can be inside 2 different keys at the same time and this is a strong relation with quantum phisics, 1 note can be givin 2 different numbers, in other words a chair will be a chair and a table at the same time it will depend on how we look at it. the further you go the more interesting it becomes and you realise music is moving in 2 ways all the time, and how the major and minor scales got mixed up and really are incorrect to what they where first looking for.
 
jeez, this post is outta control. i just wanted to toss my 2cents in. the tuning/ovetone series thing has already been covered, i guess.

Every instrument/sound has it's root in the overtone series. The clarinet gets it's characteristic woody sound from having every other overtone. similarly, if you make an "OOOO" sound, you are engaging different harmonics from the fundamental pitch than if you make an "EEEE" sound. Feed your voice into a spectrogram sometime to see what's going on. It's fascinating. As far as other instruments, all brass and woodwind instruments use the overtone series as a basic part of their function. A bugle, for a quick instance, has only one tube, and the air stream changes to shut off the lower harmonics when the bugler changes pitch. a bugle ONLY has a harmonic series to work with. On a saxophone, you can similarly play the first 7-8 pitches of the harmonic series on any note just by playing a low note and changing the air stream.

There are folks these days in classical music who work heavily with overtones, they are called SPECTRALISTS. most electronic music people are spectralists, too, and don't even know it:)

if you use a band pass filter on something to remove the fundamental, or use a vocoder, you doing spectral manipulation.
 
i'm sorry but i gotta agree on this one...

this is basic acoustics. the harmonic series is what defines timbre, what defines everything really. its why a guitar A440 doesn't sound like a violin A440. I don't really see the point of bringing in all the QP stuff and all that, its a really simple concept.

I'm surprised Fourier has not been mentioned in this topic either.

As far as the "2 notes creating a 3rd" or whatever it was...

In acoustic terms, say you have a bass guitar note. its all big and fat and tasty and deep. Then you play it on a crappy car stereo that can't hit a low bass note to save its life. You still hear what note its playing right? Even though its nowhere near hitting, say, a 35Htz note. You don't just hear silence when it goes and hits a low note. You are hearing the upper harmonics of that note, and because of the relationship (mathematically) to each other, your brain can fill in the missing fundamental and....it isn't actually there, you are not hearing it, its not "created" but your brain can interpret what the missing frequency is and give you the impression of that note.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
" I don't really see the point of bringing in all the QP stuff and all that, its a really simple concept. "

then you shouldnt argue against something that is not known to yourself.
first up if anyone has read what i have said yes this is the overtone and yes it can be looked at as a very simple concept. but what you seem not to understand is that after you have the chart, you then add QP into the equation.
now the part of being able to be in 2 keys at the same time is not simple if it was then wouldnt it be one of your first lessons in music theory as it is so easy and simple, there is so much more to the overtone series then you guys seem to imagine.
has anyone els drawn it up or am i the only one here to have drawn this up for more than one string and i have moved up 16 octaves so far, people you must understand that i think im the only one here that is looking at it in another way from being so strict yes ( my dad used maths to get the answers i used the string itself and not much maths at all really ) but in the end we have this table now the thing is once you have the table you then look into QP not before which alot of you seem hang up on thinking quantum phisics is how i got the table which it is not, but at the same time i could have used QP methoeds to get the same results for the table, remember what happens inside an atom is what happens inside the string ( the overtone ). that its self should spark thought that there can be more to this than what you guys think it is. dont be quick to judge or breakdown things before you have tried to understand it for yourself. draw up the chart as i have for each note then notice the patterns to begin with, before you go far you first have to understand there are patterns, and then the further you move up in octaves the more patterns and answers will reveal.



"As far as the "2 notes creating a 3rd" or whatever it was...

In acoustic terms, say you have a bass guitar note. its all big and fat and tasty and deep. Then you play it on a crappy car stereo that can't hit a low bass note to save its life. You still hear what note its playing right? Even though its nowhere near hitting, say, a 35Htz note. You don't just hear silence when it goes and hits a low note. You are hearing the upper harmonics of that note, and because of the relationship (mathematically) to each other, your brain can fill in the missing fundamental and....it isn't actually there, you are not hearing it, its not "created" but your brain can interpret what the missing frequency is and give you the impression of that note."

nah sorry but this is not what im reffering to here.
 
do you honestly think i was arguing against you? how do you figure?

all i'm saying is that its difficult to get the point of what you are saying....i've studied theory and acoustics extensively, and i a still having a hard time interpreting what you are saying....not that i can't grasp these concepts, but its difficult to decipher what you mean because of how you are describing this.

as far as application of the harmonic series to acoustics, i still don't see how it applies that well, because in acoustics, in any harmonic sound (as in a plucked or bowed string) you can't ever really hear above the 7th harmonic, because each successive harmonic decreases greatly in amplitude from the previous one (and increases greatly in pitch). Its rare to continue past the 7th harmonic and still be within the audible frequency range, let alone at an amplitude that is audible. So what I'm saying is, no matter how or what you are describing, how does this apply to anything? that is a question, to clarify, I am not disagreeing with you. I just fail to see the application of this to the audio world.

"but what you seem not to understand is that after you have the chart, you then add QP into the equation.
now the part of being able to be in 2 keys at the same time is not simple if it was then wouldnt it be one of your first lessons in music theory as it is so easy and simple, there is so much more to the overtone series then you guys seem to imagine. "

being in two keys at the same time...again how does what you are talking about apply to this? I understand what it means to be in two keys at the same time, and i understand the overtone series, yet i don't see how what you are talking about applies to it. further clarification maybe? I've read everything you've said and i don't think you've made your case very clear. sorry :)

you are so sure that we are writing you off and that we have such a closed view of this, and that you alone are enlightened and we fail to see "the light", but seriously, you aren't making an extremely clear, articulate case for this. And its slightly condescending to assume you know better and that "its not known to (me)". I'll go by the four years of study at NYU, jobs i've had with people like Luke Chadabe (if you don't know then I'm not the one who needs enlightening) and the engineers at Electric Lady Studios (jimi hendrix's studio). you may be 100% right, you just aren't articulating what you are talking about very well.

that isn't me judging at all, but don't get up in arms if people with possibly more experience than you disagree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top