RE: [tuning] infinity again

Neil Haverstick wrote,

>For example, on the
>"tuning@eartha.mills.edu" CD, Carter Scholz says about his piece..."uses
>the first 128 tones of the harmonic series." Now, unless I am missing
>something, humans cannot hear frequencies that high up...can they?

If the fundamental is in the bass register (which, as I recall, it was),
sure we can. It's only 7 octaves up. We can hear about 10 octaves in total.

>And in Danielou's book, "Music and
>the Power of Sound," he speaks of cycles of hundreds and thousands of
>5ths...surely, these are not in the range of human hearing.

There's nothing wrong with replacing some ascending fifths with descending
fourths -- 4/3 is about as "natural" as 3/2 -- to keep it all within one
octave. This would be in line with Danielou's meaning -- he doesn't see
"fourths" as any less special than "fifths".

neil
what if you had a harmonic series based on 1 hz as a fundamental? the 53rd harmonic would be audible would it not?
I think that you are too tied to this theoretical "concept" of harmonic series as being something extending off into space (which it does) but one need'nt start said series at 440 or 261 whatever.... I use a fundamental of 64 hz and have'n really used stuff beyond the 31 but octave equivalence does not negate or lessen the effect of the harmonic.
pagano

At Thu, 20 Apr 2000 12:48:03 -0600, you wrote:
>
> Perhaps I am not as articulate as I would like..let me try to say
>again what I am feeling about sound and perception. For example, on the
>"tuning@eartha.mills.edu" CD, Carter Scholz says about his piece.."uses
>the first 128 tones of the harmonic series." Now, unless I am missing
>something, humans cannot hear frequencies that high up..can they? As I
>said, I don't know the physical limits of tonal perception, where the
>cutoff point is (and of course, it is surely a matter open to
>discussion)..but, our sense organs are limited by our physical
>construction as humans. My point is, when folks talk about those high
>harmonics, or stacking 5ths to the 34th or 53rd..we can't really hear
>the REAL pitch..it is a mathematical representation of that pitch,
>brought down into the range of our hearing. For example, I have tuned
>one of my fretless guitars to 1/1, 5/4, 3/2, 7/4, 35/32, and
>21/16..but, the string tuned to 35/32 is not at the actual frequency of
>the 35th harmonic; it is much lower. And in Danielou's book, "Music and
>the Power of Sound," he speaks of cycles of hundreds and thousands of
>5ths..surely, these are not in the range of human hearing. And, of
>course, those sorts of concepts make me wonder, where ARE those sounds
>in the Universe? What are they doing up there, and are there beings in
>the Universe who CAN hear them?
> My point? That theory and reality are often not the same thing in
>music..just as an equal temperament is a representation of pure
>pitches, not the actually perfect tones, so music that speaks of using
>those really high harmonics is not really using those actual
>harmonics..they cannot be heard, as far as I know, by human beings. I
>apologize for my lack of math/scientific expertise..I tend to operate
>more from an intuitive base of ideas and reasoning. I hope this post
>makes more clear my point..
>I am certainly open to learning more about the limits of perception. It
>does seem, though, that humans do, indeed, have limits, as far as
>vision, hearing, smell, etc. And, on the other hand, perhaps there are
>ways to extend/expand on those limits, through techniques such as
>meditation..which, of course, is another wide open area for discussion.
>Which is the great thing about this list..there's a bunch of
>interesting folks here, with viewpoints that are guaranteed to make one
>think and stretch one's own concepts..Hstick
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Good friends, school spirit, hair-dos you'd like to forget.
>Classmates.com has them all. And with 4.4 million alumni already
>registered, there's a good chance you'll find your friends here:
>http://click.egroups.com/1/2886/1/_/239029/_/956256389/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
>email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@egroups.com - join the tuning group.
> tuning-unsubscribe@egroups.com - unsubscribe from the tuning group.
> tuning-nomail@egroups.com - put your email message delivery on hold for the tuning group.
> tuning-digest@egroups.com - change your subscription to daily digest mode.
> tuning-normal@egroups.com - change your subscription to individual emails.
>
>
>
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Access your e-mail anywhere, at any time.
Get your FREE BellSouth Web Mail account today!
http://webmail.bellsouth.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

neil
what if you had a harmonic series based on 1 hz as a fundamental? the 53rd harmonic would be audible would it not?
I think that you are too tied to this theoretical "concept" of harmonic series as being something extending off into space (which it does) but one need'nt start said series at 440 or 261 whatever.... I use a fundamental of 64 hz and have'n really used stuff beyond the 31 but octave equivalence does not negate or lessen the effect of the harmonic.
pagano

At Thu, 20 Apr 2000 12:48:03 -0600, you wrote:
>
> Perhaps I am not as articulate as I would like..let me try to say
>again what I am feeling about sound and perception. For example, on the
>"tuning@eartha.mills.edu" CD, Carter Scholz says about his piece.."uses
>the first 128 tones of the harmonic series." Now, unless I am missing
>something, humans cannot hear frequencies that high up..can they? As I
>said, I don't know the physical limits of tonal perception, where the
>cutoff point is (and of course, it is surely a matter open to
>discussion)..but, our sense organs are limited by our physical
>construction as humans. My point is, when folks talk about those high
>harmonics, or stacking 5ths to the 34th or 53rd..we can't really hear
>the REAL pitch..it is a mathematical representation of that pitch,
>brought down into the range of our hearing. For example, I have tuned
>one of my fretless guitars to 1/1, 5/4, 3/2, 7/4, 35/32, and
>21/16..but, the string tuned to 35/32 is not at the actual frequency of
>the 35th harmonic; it is much lower. And in Danielou's book, "Music and
>the Power of Sound," he speaks of cycles of hundreds and thousands of
>5ths..surely, these are not in the range of human hearing. And, of
>course, those sorts of concepts make me wonder, where ARE those sounds
>in the Universe? What are they doing up there, and are there beings in
>the Universe who CAN hear them?
> My point? That theory and reality are often not the same thing in
>music..just as an equal temperament is a representation of pure
>pitches, not the actually perfect tones, so music that speaks of using
>those really high harmonics is not really using those actual
>harmonics..they cannot be heard, as far as I know, by human beings. I
>apologize for my lack of math/scientific expertise..I tend to operate
>more from an intuitive base of ideas and reasoning. I hope this post
>makes more clear my point..
>I am certainly open to learning more about the limits of perception. It
>does seem, though, that humans do, indeed, have limits, as far as
>vision, hearing, smell, etc. And, on the other hand, perhaps there are
>ways to extend/expand on those limits, through techniques such as
>meditation..which, of course, is another wide open area for discussion.
>Which is the great thing about this list..there's a bunch of
>interesting folks here, with viewpoints that are guaranteed to make one
>think and stretch one's own concepts..Hstick
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Good friends, school spirit, hair-dos you'd like to forget.
>Classmates.com has them all. And with 4.4 million alumni already
>registered, there's a good chance you'll find your friends here:
>http://click.egroups.com/1/2886/1/_/239029/_/956256389/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
>email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@egroups.com - join the tuning group.
> tuning-unsubscribe@egroups.com - unsubscribe from the tuning group.
> tuning-nomail@egroups.com - put your email message delivery on hold for the tuning group.
> tuning-digest@egroups.com - change your subscription to daily digest mode.
> tuning-normal@egroups.com - change your subscription to individual emails.
>
>
>
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Access your e-mail anywhere, at any time.
Get your FREE BellSouth Web Mail account today!
http://webmail.bellsouth.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

>but octave equivalence does not negate or lessen the effect of the
harmonic.

Well, I think it lessens it slightly, but I agree that using a nice low
fundamental allows you to get dozens of audible harmonics without using
octave transposition. Though this is what Scholz did and what Tuvan throat
singers do, it's not the norm among most JI composers, where the pitches
tend to be a/b where a and b are small integers but b is not necessarily 1
or even a power of 2.

My sentiments exactly, though I'd like to paraphrase and give an analogy.
In my opinion (it's always good to start things with "in my opinion" because
then they're never wrong :) .), pitch is like potential in electronics.
Absolute potential doesn't matter, only the difference in potiental. By the
same token, absolute pitch doesn't matter, only the ratio between pitches.
(People with "perfect pitch", who are decidedly real, must have a "reference
pitch" they can sing in their heads or something.)

Stay tuned,
Keenan

"neil
what if you had a harmonic series based on 1 hz as a fundamental? the 53rd
harmonic would be audible would it not?
I think that you are too tied to this theoretical "concept" of harmonic
series as being something extending off into space (which it does) but one
need'nt start said series at 440 or 261 whatever.... I use a fundamental of
64 hz and have'n really used stuff beyond the 31 but octave equivalence does
not negate or lessen the effect of the harmonic.
pagano"

Keenan wrote,

>In my opinion (it's always good to start things with "in my opinion"
because
>then they're never wrong :) .), pitch is like potential in electronics.
>Absolute potential doesn't matter, only the difference in potiental. By the
>same token, absolute pitch doesn't matter, only the ratio between pitches.

That's a convenient simplification good enough for comparing chords, etc.,
but we know that certain invervals that are muddy or dissonant in a low or
middle register will sound clear and consonant in a middle or high register.
Examples are 6:5 and 9:7, respectively.

What a strange bunch of criticism tonight. In my opinion folks criticize so
easily I doubt they could sleep in peace. But then intellectual ego is more
profitable than accurate research. Just an opinion. MCB

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul H. Erlich <PERLICH@ACADIAN-ASSET.COM>
To: 'tuning@egroups.com' <tuning@egroups.com>
Date: Thursday, April 20, 2000 9:00 PM
Subject: RE: Re:[tuning] infinity again

>Keenan wrote,
>
>>In my opinion (it's always good to start things with "in my opinion"
>because
>>then they're never wrong :) .), pitch is like potential in electronics.
>>Absolute potential doesn't matter, only the difference in potiental. By
the
>>same token, absolute pitch doesn't matter, only the ratio between pitches.
>
>That's a convenient simplification good enough for comparing chords, etc.,
>but we know that certain invervals that are muddy or dissonant in a low or
>middle register will sound clear and consonant in a middle or high
register.
>Examples are 6:5 and 9:7, respectively.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>High rates giving you headaches? The 0% APR Introductory Rate from
>Capital One. 9.9% Fixed thereafter!
>http://click.egroups.com/1/3010/1/_/239029/_/956289618/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
>email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@egroups.com - join the tuning group.
> tuning-unsubscribe@egroups.com - unsubscribe from the tuning group.
> tuning-nomail@egroups.com - put your email message delivery on hold for
the tuning group.
> tuning-digest@egroups.com - change your subscription to daily digest
mode.
> tuning-normal@egroups.com - change your subscription to individual
emails.
>
>

>>but octave equivalence does not negate or lessen the effect of the
>>harmonic.
>
>Well, I think it lessens it slightly, but I agree that using a nice low
>fundamental allows you to get dozens of audible harmonics without using
>octave transposition. Though this is what Scholz did and what Tuvan throat
>singers do, it's not the norm among most JI composers ...

You are saying Tuvan throat singers produce notes that are harmonics
transposed down one or more octaves? Can you expound?

********************************************************
John J. Thaden, Ph.D., Research Biochemist, Instructor
Department of Geriatrics (501) 257-5583
U. Arkansas for Medical Sciences FAX: (501) 257-4822
mailing & shipping address: jjthaden@flash.net
Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System
Research-LR151 (Room GB103 or GC124)
4300 West 7th Street
Little Rock AR 72205 USA
*******************************************************