Ghosttones 2

Okay Matt, apologies for misinterpreting your "nodes".

I agree that this is a term applied to the positions on the string.

Let's call the sounds we hear when we touch the string lightly,,
(which Matt calls "complex tones"):
"ghosttones" (for the sake of clarity).

>Matt: Are you talking about partials or complex tones?

Neither, I am calling them "ghosttones".

>Matt: Are you talking about an ideal string or a real string?

For an "ideal string" everything Just Intonation enthusiasts
claim may be totally true.

I feel that the "ideal string" is a purely intellectual
mechanism, which may have contributed to some of the paradoxes,
which I have encountered in the "harmonics only at integer
frequency ratios" logic.

[This may be part of the problem, that I am having expressing
my findings]

I am talking about the REAL (gets rusty from your sweat) string.

>Matt: Spelled Backus

Yes, Matt, I won't whine about that one. Maybe his/her ancestors
passed through Ellis Island.
(Immigration (INS) did my residency papers in London and at JFK)


>Gary: I think he'd prefer you to buy his book!

That would improve my bank balances, yet I shall (again)
attempt to explain it for those reluctant to search out the websites.

>Gary: deluding yourself........what our ears really understand.

The biology of our senses and human perception of physical
sound is beyond my thoughts on this matter.
I maintain that I have found a better mathematical model
to map "ghosttones"
The perceptual difference is in our perspective, rather than our
hearing mechanisms.
I consider this to be a question of "objective" reality (if such
an idea is possible).

>Gary: "harmonic" is already a mathematical term......

Hence the ambiguities are compounded and the integer frequency
ratios idea is re-enforced by the mathematical use of the term
"harmonic". To understand the essense of my findings we therefore
need to temporarily suspend the confusing use of the term.

Now back to the blind men describing the elephant.


Should I take the trunk end or the tail end?

As I expect to be dumped on by the JI people, I'll
take the appropriate position.

If you pluck and carefully watch a vibrating REAL string, you will
notice
how it moves.
(Holding it in front of a computer monitor, or TV screen
will strobe the effect)

Try viewing it from various points of view. Now try it whilst
touching
the string at various positions which produce audible "ghosttones".

What do you see? What do you hear?
Does it spin or oscillate back and forth?
How does it change shape when viewed along the string?
>From different angles?
What sort of shadow does it cast?
What happens when you geently touch it at the midpoint?
How does it beat against other notes fretted on other strings
at the same time?
How does it look when viewed frame by frame on film or video?
What happens when you place a small piece of paper on
unstruck strings as you sound a string?
a) Tuned to audible "ghosttone" frequencies?
b) As you tighten and loosen the unstuck string?
Does the pitch change during the duration of the vibrations?
What happens when it sets up another resonance?

Look, listen, observe.

Could the ghosttones be at positions other than the integer
frequency ratios?
How accurately can you measure them?
Is there a stable pitch?
How wide is the band of frequencies?
Where could you say the median falls?
Could the integer frequency ratios be approximations?
Can you "prove" that the integer frequencies ratios is the
only possible mathematical model to describe what you
observe?


Remember John Harrison did his observations and experiments
with monochords, in eighteenth century. Unfortunately his
remaining writings give little detail.


Charles Lucy.







lucy@hour.com
LucyTuning websites:

www.WonderlandInOrbit.com/projects/lullaby

ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/lullaby

Arc Angel Website:

http://www.gold.net/users/du27/index.html



Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Sun, 9 Feb 1997 03:08 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA30116; Sun, 9 Feb 1997 03:08:10 +0100
Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA30132
Received: from by ella.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
id SAA25663; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 18:06:22 -0800
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 18:06:22 -0800
Message-Id: <009AF96A0F26CED0.2146@vbv40.ezh.nl>
Errors-To: madole@mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@ella.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@ella.mills.edu