Re: [tuning] Banaphshu -- please be less hasty lest you misunderstand

Dear Paul Erlich:
I am sorry you thought I was being hasty when i believe it is the well established
psychoacoustical science that is being hasty in it limited conclusions as what we can
perceive. I am only hasty in that what i can directly observe might take 100 years to get
around to prove or even ask the right question. the missing fundamental can easily be
explained via difference tones. We have be able to guess before hand sequences based on guide
tones without any problem at all. Wilson enjoys playing such sequences on an ORGAN to
illustrate that the ear can hear and process them. just as I have enjoyed playing nice big
sustained subharmonic chords on ORGANS as well as wood and metal. I am sorry your own
experience with this material is limited to the electronic medium.
[Paul Erlich, TD 738.6]
>
> I know George Kahrimanis will disagree with me, but I believe
> that chords which are expressed most simply as subharmonic series
> are only consonant insofar as the individual intervals are
> consonant, and there is no perception of unity through an
> octave-shifted common overtone or a Partchian "Numerary Nexus"
> or any such phenomenon. What is well-established in
> psychoacoustical science, however, is our nervous system's
> ability to process and simplify the sensation of chords
> which are expressed most simply as harmonic series -- the brain
> is able to supply a missing fundamental (we know it is the brain
> at work since the harmonics can be separated dichoically), and
> nonlinear combination tones will only reinforce whatever harmonic
> series is already implied.

"Paul H. Erlich" wrote:

> Banaphshu wrote,
>
> >To my ear, these are extremely consonant chords, much more than your
> western practice numerals would make you think.
>
> I would say that 7:9:11 and similar chords have some degree of
> _concordance_, and very much like styles of music (e.g., Partch) that
> incorporate them; however, I would say that they would not be accepted where
> augmented triads are written in a score of Gesualdo, Gluck, or Grieg.
>
> >. I also don't understand your "research" concerning the subharmonic chords
> for I have always heard them as consonant.
>
> OK . . . I hear them as consonant too, but only to the extent that the
> individual intervals are consonant . . . have you tried the examples that
> Daniel Wolf posted comparing the 4:5:6:7:9 and 1/9:1/7:1/6:1/5:1/4 chords?
> These chords contain exactly the same intervals, but with a timbre rich
> enough in harmonic partials, say a sustained trumpet sound, the subharmonic
> chord sounds more discordant (in my opinion, because of that "car horn" 7:9)
> than the harmonic chord -- in fact Joseph perceived the subharmonic chord
> followed by the harmonic chord as a powerful resolution.
>
> I suspect we may be basing our judgments on vastly different timbres -- in
> your case, metallophones or their wooden cousins perhaps?
>
> >harmonically based chords many times just blend into a timbre.
>
> Exactly. With metallophones and other types of instruments that are
> primarily a sine wave with weak, possibly inharmonic, overtones, and maybe
> some noise, a justly tuned otonal chord will blend into the sensation of a
> single note, even if the fundamental of that note is physically absent. With
> more complex timbres playing a "harmonically based" (otonal) chord, this
> fundamental sensation will be very strong and provide a sense of order that
> overwhelms the dissonance arising from any individual intervals. Play the
> mirror-image of that chord (the "subharmonic" or utonal version), and any
> dissonant intervals will noticeably spoil the consonance of the chord as a
> whole.
>
> >The problem must be with my ears as it is hard to imagine that science
> could be mistaken.
>
> I make references to "science" where I seek explanations for what I hear but
> what I hear always comes first. My opinions on this matter are based on
> extensive listening first, and then trying to understand what I hear in
> terms of what is understood about the ear and brain -- never the other way
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com

Banaphshu wrote: (a correction or two)

> We have been able to guess before hand sequences based on guide tones
> without any problem at all. Wilson enjoys playing such sequences on an
> ORGAN to illustrate that the ear can hear and process them. just as I
> have enjoyed playing nice big sustained subharmonic chords on ORGANS
> as well as wood and metal. I am sorry your own experience with this
> material is limited to the electronic medium.
> [Paul Erlich, TD 738.6]
>
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com