Re : High 3rd and "Can't Buy Me Love"

Jerry Eskelin wrote on 2 February:

> Darren Burgess posted:
>>
>>> Here is my analysis using spectrogram. I converted the MP3 to WAV. The
>>> error range is +/- 1.3 hertz. I have included the frequency range as the
>>> software does not identify precise frequencies. The first column indicates
>>> the frequency obtained at the center of each band. I attenuated the
>>> amplitude of the sample to narrow the frequency band.
>>>
>>> Frequency Range Atttenuation
>>> 262 htz 259-267 9 dec cant
>>> 337 332-340 18 dec by
>>> 405 402-407 18 dec me
>>>
>>> Looks like that third very close to 9/7! If anyone doubts the analysis, I
>>> will send screen shots justifying the frequencies I chose.
>
> Wim Hoogewerf responded:
>
>> Darren: my compliments for what seems to be a very precize analysis. I did
>> some strumming and singing, like Joe, with the record in my mind, but I
>> still didn't hear the E as being higher than usual. It felt more as if the C
>> was much lower.
>
> Wim, I'm interested in your analysis, but I have a few questions. Since the
> issue has to do with the intervalic relationship of C and E, how is C being
> lower different from E being higher? C is lower is relation to what, if not
> to E? Apparently, you agree that the interval is wider than "normal." Right?
I considered E and G being in tune with the fixed pitch instruments like
the guitar, strumming the E-minor chord immediatel after the first three
notes. So that's why I felt the C being low. Of course the interval is much
wider than "normal".
>
>> In fact the very first chord which comes in after the words
>> "Can't buy me" in is E minor and not C major.
>
> I don't see how the chord that follows the phrase could influence the tuning
> of the phrase in question. The end of the verse is solidly in C major, the
> more likely influence on the tuning of the phrase.
I played the E minor chord, than muted the sound, started singing and felt
that the C was attracted towards the B in this chord, almost like a
dissonant note. Is that impossible?
>> The first C ("Can't")
>> McCartney sings is may be attracted downwards to the B in the E minor chord
>> that follows. If we tune this C upwards from 262 to 270 Hz the C - E - G
>> triad would be a virtually perfect 4:5:6.
>
> But what would it be if we don't move the C? I think that is the issue.

I thought about that as well, but only after my post. I discovered that the
frequency of the C (262 Hertz), measured by Darren, was almost exactly the
frequency of the tempered C if the A was 440 Hertz, which we may presume. In
this way of course the C is normal, we do have a very high E and a G about a
quarter tone lower as "normal". Still there's not very much to conclude,
since there is no drone C-G.

I like the subject of measuring the intonation of melodies , especially when
they're sung by non-classical singers. There should be better examples than
"Can't buy me love".

--Wim

Wim wrote,

>In
>this way of course the C is normal, we do have a very high E and a G about
a
>quarter tone lower as "normal".

That should be, a G about a quarter tone higher than normal.

I wrote:
>>In
>>this way of course the C is normal, we do have a very high E and a G about
> a
>>quarter tone lower as "normal".
Paul wrote:
>
> That should be, a G about a quarter tone higher than normal.

Of course. Double mistake: "higher than" and not "lower as".

--Wim