Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Chimps prefer consonant music

I am starting to believe that periodicity is the key to consonance. And I don't simply mean the harmonic series.
For example take the chord C F A C and compare it the C G C and notice C G C actually sounds less pleasant, like it's beating more deeply and the beating takes longer despite having intervals that are "lower" in the series (IE the 5th and 4th)...or, at least I get a strong impression from that chord that it's less pleasant.

And then you take things like snares which have grossly non-periodic waves, but have the noisy part played either soft enough or suddenly enough that it does not effect the periodicity of the harmonies played with other instruments around it.

And can you take otherwise dissonant and make parts of the waveforms cancel out at certain points either partially (IE one wave is +14 the other is -12 and the sum is 2) or completely (IE one wave is +15 the other is -15 and the sum is 0 IE silence) in such a way neither wave is periodic but the combination of the two is?

The chimp experiment seems to take perfect intervals and shift certain notes slightly IE a semi-tone off to make them dissonant...but that seems to assume there is only one model of consonance and that dissonance is simply how much something deviates from that model. And, I'm pretty sure...periodicity can be generated and rated in many other ways than just the harmonic series model (which seems to say an octave, 5th, and 4th should always sound better than any other three intervals which an octave...even though, again; to my ear C5 F5 A5 C6 sounds much cleaner and less pronounced in beating than C5 G5 C6).

Any thoughts?

-Michael

________________________________
From: Charles Lucy <lucy@...>
To: tuninggroup <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 1:57:23 PM
Subject: [tuning] Chimps prefer consonant music - whatever that maybe;-)

http://news. bbc.co.uk/ earth/hi/ earth_news/ newsid_8174000/ 8174534.stm

Charles Lucy
lucy@lucytune. com

- Promoting global harmony through LucyTuning -

for information on LucyTuning go to:
http://www.lucytune.com

For LucyTuned Lullabies go to:
http://www.lullabies.co.uk

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

LOL, hehe, yeah that's right the RIAA should market to chimps! :-D

Maybe they should produce songs using only the octaves as an interval composed with synthetic instruments with all overtones at exactly the intervals of the harmonic series where each partial going up is exponentially lower than the last. It would be (at least to them) "perfectly consonant music"; the chimps would eat it up! :-)

________________________________
From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 2:09:14 PM
Subject: Re: [tuning] Chimps prefer consonant music - whatever that maybe;-)

Perhaps the RIAA has found better market of drones to buy their factory goods.

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Charles Lucy <lucy@harmonics. com> wrote:

>
>http://news. bbc.co.uk/ earth/hi/ earth_news/ newsid_8174000/ 8174534.stm
>
>>Charles Lucy
>lucy@lucytune. com
>
>>- Promoting global harmony through LucyTuning -
>
>>for information on LucyTuning go to:
>http://www.lucytune.com
>
>>For LucyTuned Lullabies go to:
>http://www.lullabies.co.uk
>
>

🔗Chris <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗rick_ballan <rick_ballan@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
>
> Perhaps the RIAA has found better market of drones to buy their factory
> goods.

Yes and the same goes for pot plants too which apparently prefer Mozart to Motorhead. But the million dollar question is, who does the chimp prefer, the Beatles or the Stones?
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Charles Lucy <lucy@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8174000/8174534.stm
> >
> > Charles Lucy
> > lucy@... <lucy%40lucytune.com>
> >
> > - Promoting global harmony through LucyTuning -
> >
> > for information on LucyTuning go to:
> > http://www.lucytune.com
> >
> > For LucyTuned Lullabies go to:
> > http://www.lullabies.co.uk
> >
> >
> >
>

🔗Chris <chrisvaisvil@...>

Woah! This sounds like a govt grant to me!!!
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: "rick_ballan" <rick_ballan@yahoo.com.au>

Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2009 03:07:53
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [tuning] Re: Chimps prefer consonant music - whatever that maybe;-)

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
>
> Perhaps the RIAA has found better market of drones to buy their factory
> goods.

🔗rick_ballan <rick_ballan@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> I am starting to believe that periodicity is the key to consonance. And I don't simply mean the harmonic series.
> For example take the chord C F A C and compare it the C G C and notice C G C actually sounds less pleasant, like it's beating more deeply and the beating takes longer despite having intervals that are "lower" in the series (IE the 5th and 4th)...or, at least I get a strong impression from that chord that it's less pleasant.
>
> And then you take things like snares which have grossly non-periodic waves, but have the noisy part played either soft enough or suddenly enough that it does not effect the periodicity of the harmonies played with other instruments around it.
>
> And can you take otherwise dissonant and make parts of the waveforms cancel out at certain points either partially (IE one wave is +14 the other is -12 and the sum is 2) or completely (IE one wave is +15 the other is -15 and the sum is 0 IE silence) in such a way neither wave is periodic but the combination of the two is?
>
> The chimp experiment seems to take perfect intervals and shift certain notes slightly IE a semi-tone off to make them dissonant...but that seems to assume there is only one model of consonance and that dissonance is simply how much something deviates from that model. And, I'm pretty sure...periodicity can be generated and rated in many other ways than just the harmonic series model (which seems to say an octave, 5th, and 4th should always sound better than any other three intervals which an octave...even though, again; to my ear C5 F5 A5 C6 sounds much cleaner and less pronounced in beating than C5 G5 C6).
>
>
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> -Michael
>
>Hi Mike,

I think that periodicity, or near periodicity, explains tonality but not necessarily consonance/dissonance which must take into consideration beats, context and intentionality as well. For instance, depending on relative amplitudes etc we can have periodic waves which sound dissonant or out of place. However, since tonality helps to set-up that context then it is not altogether unrelated either. For eg, if two waves give an irrational ratio, then strictly speaking the resultant wave is aperiodic, its cycles never repeating exactly the same way twice. This too might help create dissonance, or might even 'be' dissonance. So periodicity is probably a necessary but insufficient condition for consonance. At any rate, the way I tend to think of it is that its a good starting point but like ANY theory, it won't ever replace the art of musical performance or composition which requires ever constant vigilance. Every moment of a performance or composition is like a new 'algorithm', if you catch my meaning.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Charles Lucy <lucy@...>
> To: tuninggroup <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 1:57:23 PM
> Subject: [tuning] Chimps prefer consonant music - whatever that maybe;-)
>
>
> http://news. bbc.co.uk/ earth/hi/ earth_news/ newsid_8174000/ 8174534.stm
>
> Charles Lucy
> lucy@lucytune. com
>
> - Promoting global harmony through LucyTuning -
>
> for information on LucyTuning go to:
> http://www.lucytune.com
>
> For LucyTuned Lullabies go to:
> http://www.lullabies.co.uk
>

Chimps prefer consonant music - whatever that maybe;-)

🔗Charles Lucy <lucy@...>

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

🔗Chris <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗rick_ballan <rick_ballan@...>

🔗Chris <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗rick_ballan <rick_ballan@...>