back to list

a quick experiment in harpsichord overtones

🔗Brad Lehman <bpl@umich.edu>

2/20/2008 5:33:41 PM

Last night a colleague and I tried a quick experiment with an
excellent Willard Martin Italian harpsichord, brass strung. This was
another expert listener: a full-time professional violinist with
plenty of experience as an organ-pipe voicer.

We went through the lowest half dozen notes, holding them as long as
possible and listening to as many overtones as possible. We could
both pick out the roots, major 3rds, and 5ths easily all the way
up...but no septimals, even though we could hear the octaves and 5ths
clearly beyond that point where the 7th harmonic would have been
audible. We could both pick out the 12th harmonic (three octaves plus
a fifth) very easily. It was even clearer when I brought in the clean
unison of the second 8-foot register (listening to the "front 8" alone
first, then bringing in the "back 8"). The "front 8" as usual had
much stronger upper stuff in it than the more fundamental "back 8"
register, playing each alone; that's by design.

If there were much 7th in the tone on any of these notes, in either
register, it was being thoroughly drowned out by everything else.

Higher notes on the harpsichord sustain less than this, and their
highest harmonics get up there too high and too faint to be of much
use. No help or conflict from the septimal content there either, but
only some good strong octaves and 5ths and major 3rds all the way up.

I don't think this bodes well for those who would claim the beats of a
45/32 are obtrusive due to a conflict at the 7th harmonic, at least
not on this type of harpsichord. But again, just a quick informal
experiment to find out what two guys can hear under good circumstances
in a quiet room, on a top-quality harpsichord.

Brad Lehman

🔗Paul Poletti <paul@polettipiano.com>

2/20/2008 5:47:46 PM

>But again, just a quick informal
> experiment to find out what two guys can hear under good circumstances
> in a quiet room, on a top-quality harpsichord.

What's the point? Everything you do is but a quick informal experiment.

Don't trust it for a minute, Brad. Sorry. I often use 7ths as a tuning
tool on both fortepianos and harpsichords, especially in the brass
strung regions, were they are often quite strong. There is no
technical reason why they should be absent, unless the plucking point
is consistently 1/7th of the string length - highly unlikley.

I am beginning to think you are actually AFRAID any doing anything
verifiable, like making a recording of selfsame harpsichord notes and
posting it so that those of use who have gone to the minimum effort
(and believe me, these days it is hardly worth a farthing, neither in
time nor money) to acquire some spectral analysis software can
actually SEE what is going on instead of just trusting Brad's rather
peculiar hearing. Alternatively, you could go to the minimal effort of
acquiring some software yourself. You might learn something...

Ciao,

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@akjmusic.com>

2/20/2008 8:21:07 PM

Hi Brad,

It would be nice if you would record this stuff---many people here
would like to hear first hand what you are describing.

A good pair of flst frequency response binaural mics can be had for
$80. I can send you the link where I bought them online. Hook them
into a minidisc recorder, and you get an excellent account of 1st
person hearing.

Since you object to samples (I think rather irrationally, but I'll
give you the benefit of a doubt), you can prove all this that you are
talking about with 'bloom', etc. on an instrument you deem to be of
high quality, and that you have tuned yourself.

I remain a skeptic until such time, but am eager to hear what you
might produce. I happen to agree with Paul Poletti and others that all
else being equal, it's EASIER to hear temperaments and such
electronically, so I'm extremely dubious of claims that a given
listening test was unfair because it used samples.

On another note, I enjoyed you Bach performance on YouTube...I caught
a bit before I had to help my wife with my daughter last night.

-AKJ.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Brad Lehman" <bpl@...> wrote:
>
> Last night a colleague and I tried a quick experiment with an
> excellent Willard Martin Italian harpsichord, brass strung. This was
> another expert listener: a full-time professional violinist with
> plenty of experience as an organ-pipe voicer.
>
> We went through the lowest half dozen notes, holding them as long as
> possible and listening to as many overtones as possible. We could
> both pick out the roots, major 3rds, and 5ths easily all the way
> up...but no septimals, even though we could hear the octaves and 5ths
> clearly beyond that point where the 7th harmonic would have been
> audible. We could both pick out the 12th harmonic (three octaves plus
> a fifth) very easily. It was even clearer when I brought in the clean
> unison of the second 8-foot register (listening to the "front 8" alone
> first, then bringing in the "back 8"). The "front 8" as usual had
> much stronger upper stuff in it than the more fundamental "back 8"
> register, playing each alone; that's by design.
>
> If there were much 7th in the tone on any of these notes, in either
> register, it was being thoroughly drowned out by everything else.
>
> Higher notes on the harpsichord sustain less than this, and their
> highest harmonics get up there too high and too faint to be of much
> use. No help or conflict from the septimal content there either, but
> only some good strong octaves and 5ths and major 3rds all the way up.
>
> I don't think this bodes well for those who would claim the beats of a
> 45/32 are obtrusive due to a conflict at the 7th harmonic, at least
> not on this type of harpsichord. But again, just a quick informal
> experiment to find out what two guys can hear under good circumstances
> in a quiet room, on a top-quality harpsichord.
>
>
> Brad Lehman
>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@lumma.org>

2/20/2008 9:31:51 PM

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Brad Lehman" <bpl@...> wrote:
>
> Last night a colleague and I tried a quick experiment with an
> excellent Willard Martin Italian harpsichord, brass strung.

Willard is a friend of a friend, by the way. Even though
his shop is near my home town, I've never visited (sadly).

> I don't think this bodes well for those who would claim the beats
> of a 45/32 are obtrusive due to a conflict at the 7th harmonic,

Who's claiming that?

-Carl

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com>

2/20/2008 10:42:05 PM

As well as we are handing out compliments i was curious if Tom Dent is the same Thomas Dent that is sharing a piece on a project as Dan Wolf as seen in a recent Blog. Congratulations

Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
>
>
> Hi Brad,
>
> On another note, I enjoyed you Bach performance on YouTube...I caught
> a bit before I had to help my wife with my daughter last night.
>
> -AKJ.
>
>
> -- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/index.html>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main/index.asp> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

🔗Robert walker <robertwalker@robertinventor.com>

2/21/2008 5:04:44 PM

Hi there,

I sent this e-mail earlier this week but it didn't turn up because I sent it from the wrong e-mail address.

Brief summary: He suggested in the context calling it a birectified hexateron, and the hebdomekontany could be called a trirectified octexon perhaps, following his greek naming system for n-dimensional cells.

One could call the birectified hexateron a dodecateron if one was discussing other "teron"s such as the named dodecaterons including the uniform polytopes - truncated hexateron and rectified hexateron, where it would be distinguished by not being one of the other named dodecaterons. In the context of my wikipedia article he thought that calling it a birectified hexateron was more appropriate.

He was asking about the figures at the end of the paper, Kraig. I said I didn't know what they were - and to get in touch with you if he wanted to know more. Impressive to look at - were they done by hand?

BTW I just added CPS sets to my Virtual Flower program (not yet uploaded but will do in a day or two for anyone who wants to try it out). For instance you can now show a dekany in 4D and watch it turning around with its 3D projection changing shape as it goes. Later I hope to add in sound as well. It shouldn't be that hard to do - that you click on a face - to play the triad - thought that maybe I'd do it so that if you click anywhere on the face then the relative volumes of the three notes depend on where you click it.

Maybe even that if you then slide the mouse around on the face, then the volumes of the notes change depending on proximity of the mouse to the vertex (using the channel volume controller). And note switches off when you lift the mouse again. Or like Dave Keenan's tumbling dekany, could do so that when you click on a note, it sustains for a predetermined amount of time, and volume then changes as the shape spins around in 3D, so could do it so that user can add notes to the result by clicking on them. Etc., have lots of ideas, and it may not be that hard to do, as I have most of the bits in place, just need a bit of time to work on it, maybe in a week or two.

Robert
Robert (Walker)

http://www.robertinventor.com

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com>

2/21/2008 5:23:25 PM

Erv worked as a draftsman so all his diagrams were done by him. I think the only exception were the horograms which he did on a cad system. thanks for the info.

🔗Tom Dent <stringph@gmail.com>

2/22/2008 7:38:34 AM

Brad's recounted experience is perfectly easy to believe (I find it
hard to pick out *any* individual harmonics in many harpsichord
notes!) - but I don't know what it could possibly have to do with the
question.

Why didn't you actually try listening to intervals?

You know, many people have difficulty picking out the 3rd/4th/5th
harmonics within a single note, but they can hear the beating of a
tempered 4th or 3rd perfectly well.

I didn't say anywhere that the beats of 45/32 were 'obtrusive' ... I
would prefer a slightly more objective statement, that the beats are
in many cases clearly audible, just as are those of other tempered
intervals like (say) 1/4-comma fifths or ET major, and can easily be
eliminated by adjusting the interval.

This statement is proven by pointing your browser here:

/tuning/files/sphaerenklang/tritonesfeb08.mp3

The result 'bodes' excellently, thank you.
~~~T~~~

> > I don't think this bodes well for those who would claim the beats of a
> > 45/32 are obtrusive due to a conflict at the 7th harmonic, at least
> > not on this type of harpsichord. (...)
> >
> > Brad Lehman
> >

🔗Brad Lehman <bpl@umich.edu>

2/22/2008 8:16:43 AM

Yes Tom, I've listened to your sample, three days in a row (after
first subscribing to the other group to get the file). It's clear
enough that there's beating in it at the place where you put your
microphone. And did you read my own posting about the way the 45/32
perception on harpsichord depends so much on exactly where the head
(or microphone?) is, forward/backward and side to side?

As for "did I actually try listening to intervals" on that Martin
Italian harpsichord I described, of course I did! I had just tuned
the whole thing by ear less than an hour earlier. I also set up a
couple of 45/32 on it in the middle register, before that, and heard
zero beats in them...depending where I was sitting.

Brad Lehman

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Dent" <stringph@...> wrote:
>
>
> Brad's recounted experience is perfectly easy to believe (I find it
> hard to pick out *any* individual harmonics in many harpsichord
> notes!) - but I don't know what it could possibly have to do with
the
> question.
>
> Why didn't you actually try listening to intervals?
>
> You know, many people have difficulty picking out the 3rd/4th/5th
> harmonics within a single note, but they can hear the beating of a
> tempered 4th or 3rd perfectly well.
>
> I didn't say anywhere that the beats of 45/32 were 'obtrusive' ... I
> would prefer a slightly more objective statement, that the beats are
> in many cases clearly audible, just as are those of other tempered
> intervals like (say) 1/4-comma fifths or ET major, and can easily be
> eliminated by adjusting the interval.
>
> This statement is proven by pointing your browser here:
>
>
/tuning/files/sphaerenklang/
tritonesfeb08.mp3
>
> The result 'bodes' excellently, thank you.
> ~~~T~~~
>
> > > I don't think this bodes well for those who would claim the
beats of a
> > > 45/32 are obtrusive due to a conflict at the 7th harmonic, at
least
> > > not on this type of harpsichord. (...)
> > >
> > > Brad Lehman
> > >
>

🔗Tom Dent <stringph@gmail.com>

2/23/2008 2:00:15 PM

Well, no-one needed to listen to it more than twice, but it's nice to
know someone has bothered. (It's in the 'tuning-files' group because
of lack of file space here, of course...)

So did the magic feeling of 45/32-purity appear, or not?

And does the clear beating make previous statements about the lack of
7th harmonic in harpsichords (which ones exactly was never clear)
inoperative?

To be precise, I used a small electronic recording device with two
microphones a few inches apart placed just above and outside the
middle of the bentside. It would be an odd coincidence if both
microphones happened to be within special planes where the particular
important harmonics have cancellations. I also heard the beats while
playing, more or less as strongly as they appear in the recording.

Anyway, I don't want to get involved in semantic wrigglings of the
kind 'OK it might beat for you and your microphone but it doesn't beat
when I hold my head at that particular angle with the lid in such and
such a position' (etc etc). An accidental cancellation of sound waves
is just that: accidental. It may happen for both ears of one player at
one instrument, but it's unlikely to happen for many others, or for
the audience.

We know you can get the beats in any tempered interval to vanish by
choosing particular timbres. (Italian harpsichords do have pretty
idiosyncratic harmonic spectra.) Probably you can do so too by putting
your head in particular positions, if the sources of sound are
localized. But this doesn't tell us anything about the interval
itself, or even the interval-played-on-harpsichords-in-general.
Yes, there are special circumstances in which you may not be able to
hear any beats in a 45/32 (or 141/100, or 71/50, or whatever) played
on a harpsichord. But so what? There are very many situations in which
the beats of a tempered 7/5 *are* clearly audible.

This is what reasonable people mean when they say that tempered
intervals beat. It doesn't mean they must beat with every timbre in
every possible acoustic situation.

But enough of this. I've (re)discovered a new - for me - just
diminished 5th.
I wonder if anyone can guess what it is: the hint is that it's just a
little narrower than 64/45. The further hint is that it is actually
tunable by elimination of beats, though it's somewhat tough. Curiously
enough, I don't find its inversion as an aug4 to be audibly just.
~~~T~~~

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Brad Lehman" <bpl@...> wrote:
>
> Yes Tom, I've listened to your sample, three days in a row (after
> first subscribing to the other group to get the file). It's clear
> enough that there's beating in it at the place where you put your
> microphone. And did you read my own posting about the way the 45/32
> perception on harpsichord depends so much on exactly where the head
> (or microphone?) is, forward/backward and side to side?
>
> As for "did I actually try listening to intervals" on that Martin
> Italian harpsichord I described, of course I did! I had just tuned
> the whole thing by ear less than an hour earlier. I also set up a
> couple of 45/32 on it in the middle register, before that, and heard
> zero beats in them...depending where I was sitting.
>
> Brad Lehman
>

🔗Ozan Yarman <ozanyarman@ozanyarman.com>

2/23/2008 3:40:23 PM

Is it 17/12 or 24/17?

Oz.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Dent" <stringph@gmail.com>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 24 ï¿½ubat 2008 Pazar 0:00
Subject: [tuning] Re: a quick experiment in harpsichord overtones

>
> Well, no-one needed to listen to it more than twice, but it's nice to
> know someone has bothered. (It's in the 'tuning-files' group because
> of lack of file space here, of course...)
>
> So did the magic feeling of 45/32-purity appear, or not?
>
> And does the clear beating make previous statements about the lack of
> 7th harmonic in harpsichords (which ones exactly was never clear)
> inoperative?
>
> To be precise, I used a small electronic recording device with two
> microphones a few inches apart placed just above and outside the
> middle of the bentside. It would be an odd coincidence if both
> microphones happened to be within special planes where the particular
> important harmonics have cancellations. I also heard the beats while
> playing, more or less as strongly as they appear in the recording.
>
> Anyway, I don't want to get involved in semantic wrigglings of the
> kind 'OK it might beat for you and your microphone but it doesn't beat
> when I hold my head at that particular angle with the lid in such and
> such a position' (etc etc). An accidental cancellation of sound waves
> is just that: accidental. It may happen for both ears of one player at
> one instrument, but it's unlikely to happen for many others, or for
> the audience.
>
> We know you can get the beats in any tempered interval to vanish by
> choosing particular timbres. (Italian harpsichords do have pretty
> idiosyncratic harmonic spectra.) Probably you can do so too by putting
> your head in particular positions, if the sources of sound are
> localized. But this doesn't tell us anything about the interval
> itself, or even the interval-played-on-harpsichords-in-general.
> Yes, there are special circumstances in which you may not be able to
> hear any beats in a 45/32 (or 141/100, or 71/50, or whatever) played
> on a harpsichord. But so what? There are very many situations in which
> the beats of a tempered 7/5 *are* clearly audible.
>
> This is what reasonable people mean when they say that tempered
> intervals beat. It doesn't mean they must beat with every timbre in
> every possible acoustic situation.
>
> But enough of this. I've (re)discovered a new - for me - just
> diminished 5th.
> I wonder if anyone can guess what it is: the hint is that it's just a
> little narrower than 64/45. The further hint is that it is actually
> tunable by elimination of beats, though it's somewhat tough. Curiously
> enough, I don't find its inversion as an aug4 to be audibly just.
> ~~~T~~~
>
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Brad Lehman" <bpl@...> wrote:
> >
> > Yes Tom, I've listened to your sample, three days in a row (after
> > first subscribing to the other group to get the file). It's clear
> > enough that there's beating in it at the place where you put your
> > microphone. And did you read my own posting about the way the 45/32
> > perception on harpsichord depends so much on exactly where the head
> > (or microphone?) is, forward/backward and side to side?
> >
> > As for "did I actually try listening to intervals" on that Martin
> > Italian harpsichord I described, of course I did! I had just tuned
> > the whole thing by ear less than an hour earlier. I also set up a
> > couple of 45/32 on it in the middle register, before that, and heard
> > zero beats in them...depending where I was sitting.
> >
> > Brad Lehman
> >
>