Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again

Not true: overtones are physical reality.

-----Original Message-----
From: David J. Finnamore <dfin@freewwweb.com>
To: tuning@egroups.com <tuning@egroups.com>
Date: Friday, April 21, 2000 9:27 AM
Subject: [tuning] Re: infinity again

>Neil Haverstick wrote:
>
>> 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?
>
>As you are speaking of them, they're not doing anything. They are not up
there. They're not even theys. That is to say, harmonic relationships
between tones have no existential being, rather they constitute an abstract
concept. Part of the confusion stems from the fact that English has no
ability to designate gender in plural pronouns, so we are
>forced to replace any plural noun with "they" and "them," unwittingly
implying real existence where there may be none.
>
>But there's a more subtle logical stumbling block, as well. Consider as an
analogy the problem arising from the use of the word "chance" in speaking of
the origins of the universe. Even scientists sometimes fall into this trap.
Chance has no being, it is merely a concept that we use for things whose
cause-effect relationship we don't understand;
>chance cannot "do" anything because it's only an abstract concept of human
invention, therefore it cannot have caused the Big Bang nor guided
evolutionary processes. Something caused it, we just don't know what. The
same is true of the set of harmonic relationships between tones: it's merely
a system of mathematical abstractions used to grasp the
>situation, but having no essence, no objective existence in the space-time
continuum, no ability to participate in causal activity.
>
>The question is, what may _I_ do with musical tones having various
relationships to each other, and how does a change in the scalar
relationships change my music's effect on the bodies, minds, and spirits of
my fellow man? And also, how am I affected by the music I choose to expose
myself to? How harmonic relationships pertain to these questions is
>still largely a mystery. Thus, I applaud Mark C.'s involvement in
attempting to unravel it.
>
>There may or may not be mystical connections between real musical tones and
real cosmological vibrations. In fact, there may or may not be physical
relationships between them. Most of the great civilizations of ancient
times believed that one or both kinds of relationships existed and were
important to music. Cosmological vibrations are not very
>well understood; they may or may not have nearly harmonic relationships
among themselves. But we must be careful to distinguish between actual
vibrations and the concepts we use to describe them. Intuition will not
help you here; only clear reasoning will keep you on track.
>
>
>
>> 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.
>
>As some have already made strides toward pointing out, almost any
arbitrarily chosen set of harmonic relationships, however high in the
series, may potentially be intoned and "heard" by humans. At the time of
their intonation, they become actual harmonics of an implied fundamental
tone; this fundamental may well be below the range of human hearing.
>Whether it is or not may have musical meaning in some contexts, but if it
is, that does not invalidate the harmonicity of the relationships. The real
existence of an implied fundamental may be seen in the wavelength of the
combined waveform. So in a sense, the opposite of your point of view is
true: by putting tones in a given harmonic relationship,
>you create a fundamental tone.
>
>There are two other matters, both of which have been discussed extensively
in this forum, which impinge upon this subject: 1) how small an interval the
human ear can discern, and 2) how high a harmonic relationship can be
discerned _as such_ by the human auditory apparatus. The former seems to
have an objective, if complex, answer. The latter seems
>to be almost entirely a subjective matter of musical context. But
certainly, our inability to hear frequencies above about 15k to 30k Hz does
not interfere with our ability to hear high harmonic relationships, nor to
put them to good musical use. And none of this is to say that we may not
put non-harmonically related tones to good musical use.
>
>--
>David J. Finnamore
>Nashville, TN, USA
>http://members.xoom.com/dfinn.1
>--
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Enjoy the award-winning journalism of The New York Times with
>convenient home delivery. And for a limited time, get 50% off for the
>first 8 weeks by subscribing. Pay by credit card and receive an
>additional 4 weeks at this low introductory rate.
>http://click.egroups.com/1/3102/1/_/239029/_/956334446/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>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.
>
>

🔗Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>

I have been lurking for a while but I just have to respond to this.
What are you guys talking about?
Anyone who knows anything about physics knows that sound waves can't travel through space, this discussion is based on an impossibility to begin with.

>From: "David J. Finnamore" <dfin@freewwweb.com>
>Reply-To: tuning@egroups.com
>To: tuning@egroups.com
>Subject: [tuning] Re: infinity again
>Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 11:27:08 -0500
>
>Neil Haverstick wrote:
>
> > 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?
>
>As you are speaking of them, they're not doing anything. They are not up >there. They're not even theys. That is to say, harmonic relationships >between tones have no existential being, rather they constitute an abstract >concept. Part of the confusion stems from the fact that English has no >ability to designate gender in plural pronouns, so we are
>forced to replace any plural noun with "they" and "them," unwittingly >implying real existence where there may be none.
>
>But there's a more subtle logical stumbling block, as well. Consider as an >analogy the problem arising from the use of the word "chance" in speaking >of the origins of the universe. Even scientists sometimes fall into this >trap. Chance has no being, it is merely a concept that we use for things >whose cause-effect relationship we don't understand;
>chance cannot "do" anything because it's only an abstract concept of human >invention, therefore it cannot have caused the Big Bang nor guided >evolutionary processes. Something caused it, we just don't know what. The >same is true of the set of harmonic relationships between tones: it's >merely a system of mathematical abstractions used to grasp the
>situation, but having no essence, no objective existence in the space-time >continuum, no ability to participate in causal activity.
>
>The question is, what may _I_ do with musical tones having various >relationships to each other, and how does a change in the scalar >relationships change my music's effect on the bodies, minds, and spirits of >my fellow man? And also, how am I affected by the music I choose to expose >myself to? How harmonic relationships pertain to these questions is
>still largely a mystery. Thus, I applaud Mark C.'s involvement in >attempting to unravel it.
>
>There may or may not be mystical connections between real musical tones and >real cosmological vibrations. In fact, there may or may not be physical >relationships between them. Most of the great civilizations of ancient >times believed that one or both kinds of relationships existed and were >important to music. Cosmological vibrations are not very
>well understood; they may or may not have nearly harmonic relationships >among themselves. But we must be careful to distinguish between actual >vibrations and the concepts we use to describe them. Intuition will not >help you here; only clear reasoning will keep you on track.
>
>
>
> > 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.
>
>As some have already made strides toward pointing out, almost any >arbitrarily chosen set of harmonic relationships, however high in the >series, may potentially be intoned and "heard" by humans. At the time of >their intonation, they become actual harmonics of an implied fundamental >tone; this fundamental may well be below the range of human hearing.
>Whether it is or not may have musical meaning in some contexts, but if it >is, that does not invalidate the harmonicity of the relationships. The >real existence of an implied fundamental may be seen in the wavelength of >the combined waveform. So in a sense, the opposite of your point of view >is true: by putting tones in a given harmonic relationship,
>you create a fundamental tone.
>
>There are two other matters, both of which have been discussed extensively >in this forum, which impinge upon this subject: 1) how small an interval >the human ear can discern, and 2) how high a harmonic relationship can be >discerned _as such_ by the human auditory apparatus. The former seems to >have an objective, if complex, answer. The latter seems
>to be almost entirely a subjective matter of musical context. But >certainly, our inability to hear frequencies above about 15k to 30k Hz does >not interfere with our ability to hear high harmonic relationships, nor to >put them to good musical use. And none of this is to say that we may not >put non-harmonically related tones to good musical use.
>
>--
>David J. Finnamore
>Nashville, TN, USA
>http://members.xoom.com/dfinn.1
>--
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Enjoy the award-winning journalism of The New York Times with
>convenient home delivery. And for a limited time, get 50% off for the
>first 8 weeks by subscribing. Pay by credit card and receive an
>additional 4 weeks at this low introductory rate.
>http://click.egroups.com/1/3102/1/_/239029/_/956334446/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>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.
>
>

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

🔗mark c <ahsom@rockisland.com>

since you are in physics you could se that the harmonic ratios are
translatable to other frequency spectrums.

-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>
To: tuning@egroups.com <tuning@egroups.com>
Date: Friday, April 21, 2000 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again

>I have been lurking for a while but I just have to respond to this.
>What are you guys talking about?
>Anyone who knows anything about physics knows that sound waves can't travel
>through space, this discussion is based on an impossibility to begin with.
>
>
>
>>From: "David J. Finnamore" <dfin@freewwweb.com>
>>Reply-To: tuning@egroups.com
>>To: tuning@egroups.com
>>Subject: [tuning] Re: infinity again
>>Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 11:27:08 -0500
>>
>>Neil Haverstick wrote:
>>
>> > 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?
>>
>>As you are speaking of them, they're not doing anything. They are not up
>>there. They're not even theys. That is to say, harmonic relationships
>>between tones have no existential being, rather they constitute an
abstract
>>concept. Part of the confusion stems from the fact that English has no
>>ability to designate gender in plural pronouns, so we are
>>forced to replace any plural noun with "they" and "them," unwittingly
>>implying real existence where there may be none.
>>
>>But there's a more subtle logical stumbling block, as well. Consider as
an
>>analogy the problem arising from the use of the word "chance" in speaking
>>of the origins of the universe. Even scientists sometimes fall into this
>>trap. Chance has no being, it is merely a concept that we use for things
>>whose cause-effect relationship we don't understand;
>>chance cannot "do" anything because it's only an abstract concept of human
>>invention, therefore it cannot have caused the Big Bang nor guided
>>evolutionary processes. Something caused it, we just don't know what.
The
>>same is true of the set of harmonic relationships between tones: it's
>>merely a system of mathematical abstractions used to grasp the
>>situation, but having no essence, no objective existence in the space-time
>>continuum, no ability to participate in causal activity.
>>
>>The question is, what may _I_ do with musical tones having various
>>relationships to each other, and how does a change in the scalar
>>relationships change my music's effect on the bodies, minds, and spirits
of
>>my fellow man? And also, how am I affected by the music I choose to
expose
>>myself to? How harmonic relationships pertain to these questions is
>>still largely a mystery. Thus, I applaud Mark C.'s involvement in
>>attempting to unravel it.
>>
>>There may or may not be mystical connections between real musical tones
and
>>real cosmological vibrations. In fact, there may or may not be physical
>>relationships between them. Most of the great civilizations of ancient
>>times believed that one or both kinds of relationships existed and were
>>important to music. Cosmological vibrations are not very
>>well understood; they may or may not have nearly harmonic relationships
>>among themselves. But we must be careful to distinguish between actual
>>vibrations and the concepts we use to describe them. Intuition will not
>>help you here; only clear reasoning will keep you on track.
>>
>>
>>
>> > 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.
>>
>>As some have already made strides toward pointing out, almost any
>>arbitrarily chosen set of harmonic relationships, however high in the
>>series, may potentially be intoned and "heard" by humans. At the time of
>>their intonation, they become actual harmonics of an implied fundamental
>>tone; this fundamental may well be below the range of human hearing.
>>Whether it is or not may have musical meaning in some contexts, but if it
>>is, that does not invalidate the harmonicity of the relationships. The
>>real existence of an implied fundamental may be seen in the wavelength of
>>the combined waveform. So in a sense, the opposite of your point of view
>>is true: by putting tones in a given harmonic relationship,
>>you create a fundamental tone.
>>
>>There are two other matters, both of which have been discussed extensively
>>in this forum, which impinge upon this subject: 1) how small an interval
>>the human ear can discern, and 2) how high a harmonic relationship can be
>>discerned _as such_ by the human auditory apparatus. The former seems to
>>have an objective, if complex, answer. The latter seems
>>to be almost entirely a subjective matter of musical context. But
>>certainly, our inability to hear frequencies above about 15k to 30k Hz
does
>>not interfere with our ability to hear high harmonic relationships, nor to
>>put them to good musical use. And none of this is to say that we may not
>>put non-harmonically related tones to good musical use.
>>
>>--
>>David J. Finnamore
>>Nashville, TN, USA
>>http://members.xoom.com/dfinn.1
>>--
>>
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Enjoy the award-winning journalism of The New York Times with
>>convenient home delivery. And for a limited time, get 50% off for the
>>first 8 weeks by subscribing. Pay by credit card and receive an
>>additional 4 weeks at this low introductory rate.
>>http://click.egroups.com/1/3102/1/_/239029/_/956334446/
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>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.
>>
>>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Whatever happened to the class clown? Find out at Classmates.com,
>your online high school class reunion. With 4.4 million alumni
>already registered, there's a good chance you'll find him here:
>http://click.egroups.com/1/3140/1/_/239029/_/956349024/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>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.
>
>

🔗Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>

I thought YOU were leaving.

>From: "mark c" <ahsom@rockisland.com>
>Reply-To: tuning@egroups.com
>To: <tuning@egroups.com>
>Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again
>Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 14:50:52 -0700
>
>since you are in physics you could se that the harmonic ratios are
>translatable to other frequency spectrums.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>
>To: tuning@egroups.com <tuning@egroups.com>
>Date: Friday, April 21, 2000 1:30 PM
>Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again
>
>
> >I have been lurking for a while but I just have to respond to this.
> >What are you guys talking about?
> >Anyone who knows anything about physics knows that sound waves can't >travel
> >through space, this discussion is based on an impossibility to begin >with.
> >
> >
> >
> >>From: "David J. Finnamore" <dfin@freewwweb.com>
> >>Reply-To: tuning@egroups.com
> >>To: tuning@egroups.com
> >>Subject: [tuning] Re: infinity again
> >>Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 11:27:08 -0500
> >>
> >>Neil Haverstick wrote:
> >>
> >> > 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?
> >>
> >>As you are speaking of them, they're not doing anything. They are not >up
> >>there. They're not even theys. That is to say, harmonic relationships
> >>between tones have no existential being, rather they constitute an
>abstract
> >>concept. Part of the confusion stems from the fact that English has no
> >>ability to designate gender in plural pronouns, so we are
> >>forced to replace any plural noun with "they" and "them," unwittingly
> >>implying real existence where there may be none.
> >>
> >>But there's a more subtle logical stumbling block, as well. Consider as
>an
> >>analogy the problem arising from the use of the word "chance" in >speaking
> >>of the origins of the universe. Even scientists sometimes fall into >this
> >>trap. Chance has no being, it is merely a concept that we use for >things
> >>whose cause-effect relationship we don't understand;
> >>chance cannot "do" anything because it's only an abstract concept of >human
> >>invention, therefore it cannot have caused the Big Bang nor guided
> >>evolutionary processes. Something caused it, we just don't know what.
>The
> >>same is true of the set of harmonic relationships between tones: it's
> >>merely a system of mathematical abstractions used to grasp the
> >>situation, but having no essence, no objective existence in the >space-time
> >>continuum, no ability to participate in causal activity.
> >>
> >>The question is, what may _I_ do with musical tones having various
> >>relationships to each other, and how does a change in the scalar
> >>relationships change my music's effect on the bodies, minds, and spirits
>of
> >>my fellow man? And also, how am I affected by the music I choose to
>expose
> >>myself to? How harmonic relationships pertain to these questions is
> >>still largely a mystery. Thus, I applaud Mark C.'s involvement in
> >>attempting to unravel it.
> >>
> >>There may or may not be mystical connections between real musical tones
>and
> >>real cosmological vibrations. In fact, there may or may not be physical
> >>relationships between them. Most of the great civilizations of ancient
> >>times believed that one or both kinds of relationships existed and were
> >>important to music. Cosmological vibrations are not very
> >>well understood; they may or may not have nearly harmonic relationships
> >>among themselves. But we must be careful to distinguish between actual
> >>vibrations and the concepts we use to describe them. Intuition will not
> >>help you here; only clear reasoning will keep you on track.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > 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.
> >>
> >>As some have already made strides toward pointing out, almost any
> >>arbitrarily chosen set of harmonic relationships, however high in the
> >>series, may potentially be intoned and "heard" by humans. At the time >of
> >>their intonation, they become actual harmonics of an implied fundamental
> >>tone; this fundamental may well be below the range of human hearing.
> >>Whether it is or not may have musical meaning in some contexts, but if >it
> >>is, that does not invalidate the harmonicity of the relationships. The
> >>real existence of an implied fundamental may be seen in the wavelength >of
> >>the combined waveform. So in a sense, the opposite of your point of >view
> >>is true: by putting tones in a given harmonic relationship,
> >>you create a fundamental tone.
> >>
> >>There are two other matters, both of which have been discussed >extensively
> >>in this forum, which impinge upon this subject: 1) how small an interval
> >>the human ear can discern, and 2) how high a harmonic relationship can >be
> >>discerned _as such_ by the human auditory apparatus. The former seems >to
> >>have an objective, if complex, answer. The latter seems
> >>to be almost entirely a subjective matter of musical context. But
> >>certainly, our inability to hear frequencies above about 15k to 30k Hz
>does
> >>not interfere with our ability to hear high harmonic relationships, nor >to
> >>put them to good musical use. And none of this is to say that we may >not
> >>put non-harmonically related tones to good musical use.
> >>
> >>--
> >>David J. Finnamore
> >>Nashville, TN, USA
> >>http://members.xoom.com/dfinn.1
> >>--
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>Enjoy the award-winning journalism of The New York Times with
> >>convenient home delivery. And for a limited time, get 50% off for the
> >>first 8 weeks by subscribing. Pay by credit card and receive an
> >>additional 4 weeks at this low introductory rate.
> >>http://click.egroups.com/1/3102/1/_/239029/_/956334446/
> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>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.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >________________________________________________________________________
> >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >Whatever happened to the class clown? Find out at Classmates.com,
> >your online high school class reunion. With 4.4 million alumni
> >already registered, there's a good chance you'll find him here:
> >http://click.egroups.com/1/3140/1/_/239029/_/956349024/
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >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.
> >
> >
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Your high school sweetheart-where is he now? With 4.4 million alumni
>already registered at Classmates.com, there's a good chance you'll
>find her here. Visit your online high school class reunion at:
>http://click.egroups.com/1/3139/1/_/239029/_/956353853/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>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.
>
>

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

🔗mark c <ahsom@rockisland.com>

Am I gone now?

-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>
To: tuning@egroups.com <tuning@egroups.com>
Date: Friday, April 21, 2000 2:57 PM
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again

>
>I thought YOU were leaving.
>
>>From: "mark c" <ahsom@rockisland.com>
>>Reply-To: tuning@egroups.com
>>To: <tuning@egroups.com>
>>Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again
>>Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 14:50:52 -0700
>>
>>since you are in physics you could se that the harmonic ratios are
>>translatable to other frequency spectrums.
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>
>>To: tuning@egroups.com <tuning@egroups.com>
>>Date: Friday, April 21, 2000 1:30 PM
>>Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again
>>
>>
>> >I have been lurking for a while but I just have to respond to this.
>> >What are you guys talking about?
>> >Anyone who knows anything about physics knows that sound waves can't
>>travel
>> >through space, this discussion is based on an impossibility to begin
>>with.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>From: "David J. Finnamore" <dfin@freewwweb.com>
>> >>Reply-To: tuning@egroups.com
>> >>To: tuning@egroups.com
>> >>Subject: [tuning] Re: infinity again
>> >>Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 11:27:08 -0500
>> >>
>> >>Neil Haverstick wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > 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?
>> >>
>> >>As you are speaking of them, they're not doing anything. They are not
>>up
>> >>there. They're not even theys. That is to say, harmonic relationships
>> >>between tones have no existential being, rather they constitute an
>>abstract
>> >>concept. Part of the confusion stems from the fact that English has no
>> >>ability to designate gender in plural pronouns, so we are
>> >>forced to replace any plural noun with "they" and "them," unwittingly
>> >>implying real existence where there may be none.
>> >>
>> >>But there's a more subtle logical stumbling block, as well. Consider
as
>>an
>> >>analogy the problem arising from the use of the word "chance" in
>>speaking
>> >>of the origins of the universe. Even scientists sometimes fall into
>>this
>> >>trap. Chance has no being, it is merely a concept that we use for
>>things
>> >>whose cause-effect relationship we don't understand;
>> >>chance cannot "do" anything because it's only an abstract concept of
>>human
>> >>invention, therefore it cannot have caused the Big Bang nor guided
>> >>evolutionary processes. Something caused it, we just don't know what.
>>The
>> >>same is true of the set of harmonic relationships between tones: it's
>> >>merely a system of mathematical abstractions used to grasp the
>> >>situation, but having no essence, no objective existence in the
>>space-time
>> >>continuum, no ability to participate in causal activity.
>> >>
>> >>The question is, what may _I_ do with musical tones having various
>> >>relationships to each other, and how does a change in the scalar
>> >>relationships change my music's effect on the bodies, minds, and
spirits
>>of
>> >>my fellow man? And also, how am I affected by the music I choose to
>>expose
>> >>myself to? How harmonic relationships pertain to these questions is
>> >>still largely a mystery. Thus, I applaud Mark C.'s involvement in
>> >>attempting to unravel it.
>> >>
>> >>There may or may not be mystical connections between real musical tones
>>and
>> >>real cosmological vibrations. In fact, there may or may not be
physical
>> >>relationships between them. Most of the great civilizations of ancient
>> >>times believed that one or both kinds of relationships existed and were
>> >>important to music. Cosmological vibrations are not very
>> >>well understood; they may or may not have nearly harmonic relationships
>> >>among themselves. But we must be careful to distinguish between actual
>> >>vibrations and the concepts we use to describe them. Intuition will
not
>> >>help you here; only clear reasoning will keep you on track.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > 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.
>> >>
>> >>As some have already made strides toward pointing out, almost any
>> >>arbitrarily chosen set of harmonic relationships, however high in the
>> >>series, may potentially be intoned and "heard" by humans. At the time
>>of
>> >>their intonation, they become actual harmonics of an implied
fundamental
>> >>tone; this fundamental may well be below the range of human hearing.
>> >>Whether it is or not may have musical meaning in some contexts, but if
>>it
>> >>is, that does not invalidate the harmonicity of the relationships. The
>> >>real existence of an implied fundamental may be seen in the wavelength
>>of
>> >>the combined waveform. So in a sense, the opposite of your point of
>>view
>> >>is true: by putting tones in a given harmonic relationship,
>> >>you create a fundamental tone.
>> >>
>> >>There are two other matters, both of which have been discussed
>>extensively
>> >>in this forum, which impinge upon this subject: 1) how small an
interval
>> >>the human ear can discern, and 2) how high a harmonic relationship can
>>be
>> >>discerned _as such_ by the human auditory apparatus. The former seems
>>to
>> >>have an objective, if complex, answer. The latter seems
>> >>to be almost entirely a subjective matter of musical context. But
>> >>certainly, our inability to hear frequencies above about 15k to 30k Hz
>>does
>> >>not interfere with our ability to hear high harmonic relationships, nor
>>to
>> >>put them to good musical use. And none of this is to say that we may
>>not
>> >>put non-harmonically related tones to good musical use.
>> >>
>> >>--
>> >>David J. Finnamore
>> >>Nashville, TN, USA
>> >>http://members.xoom.com/dfinn.1
>> >>--
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>Enjoy the award-winning journalism of The New York Times with
>> >>convenient home delivery. And for a limited time, get 50% off for the
>> >>first 8 weeks by subscribing. Pay by credit card and receive an
>> >>additional 4 weeks at this low introductory rate.
>> >>http://click.egroups.com/1/3102/1/_/239029/_/956334446/
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >>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.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >________________________________________________________________________
>> >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>> >
>> >
>> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >Whatever happened to the class clown? Find out at Classmates.com,
>> >your online high school class reunion. With 4.4 million alumni
>> >already registered, there's a good chance you'll find him here:
>> >http://click.egroups.com/1/3140/1/_/239029/_/956349024/
>> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> >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.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Your high school sweetheart-where is he now? With 4.4 million alumni
>>already registered at Classmates.com, there's a good chance you'll
>>find her here. Visit your online high school class reunion at:
>>http://click.egroups.com/1/3139/1/_/239029/_/956353853/
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>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.
>>
>>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Your high school sweetheart-where is he now? With 4.4 million alumni
>already registered at Classmates.com, there's a good chance you'll
>find her here. Visit your online high school class reunion at:
>http://click.egroups.com/1/3139/1/_/239029/_/956354256/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>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.
>
>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com>

🔗Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>

🔗Rosati <dante@pop.interport.net>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com>

Frank Masucheda wrote:

> Is Anaphoria island a real place, or is it some Dungeons and Dragons pretend
> universe like so many of the people on this list seem to be living in?

Somehow, i feel the wolves after tasting of a little blood. and frustrating by the escape
of their game, our looking around in their own ranks to vent it out:)

maybe the idea of crucifixion is gettin' the blood flowin'

Frank!

I would best have to explain it to you as "Visionary Geography". All countries could be
argued are on some level "imaginary" because "borders" unless drawn over geophysical features
are not to be found outside of the "imaginary" construct in the mind. some astronauts have had
spiritual revelations out of not seeing borders. But I accept them as real as most do.I direct
you to the statements of Mircea Eliade, Father of Modern Anthropology, who brought his science
around to recognizing that all myths have to be considered real because the people who believe
them exist. Any other attitude is the imposition of one myth (the west with its "science"
being a myth of analysis) upon another. I have to accept Jesus as real also because i can
observe his workings , good or bad , in his followers
On another level, we accept many things as real not because we can see them but by the way
they cause things to be a certain way, like democracy, schizophrenia, equity, or how about
numbers, are they real. In the extreme case We could argue that music is a complete
fabrication of the mind/soul of man that other species of living things might find completely
without any meaning as a organized sonic experience.
In fact How do I know that Frank Masucheda is real outside of being able to

> Also, why do you call it the "north american" embassy?

For one reason we recognize the separate Native american tribes as separate nations. we deal
with some of these more often than Washington.

>
>
> >From: Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com>
> >Reply-To: tuning@egroups.com
> >To: tuning@egroups.com
> >Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again
> >Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 15:44:40 -0700
> >
> >Death is not
> >in not being able to communicate
> >but in no longer being able to be understood-Pasolini
> >
> >mark c wrote:
> >
> > > Am I gone now?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >-- Kraig Grady
> >North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
> >www.anaphoria.com
>

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

🔗johnlink@con2.com

🔗Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>

Ok Kraig. I can dig your vibe. I think...but I just wanted you to know that I am a Canadian and I really get sick of Americans misusing the name "North America" to mean U.S.A.
I think this is not what is happening here but anyway...who cares..
I can understand the concept of imaginary borders and all this existentialist mumbo-jumbo, like "what is real?" etc, but is Anaphoria Island actually an island, or is it an imaginary island too?
Do you live in los angeles and you have a moat around your house and call it a island? Do you wear a patch and have a parrot and say things like "shiver me timbers" at the people walking on the sidewalk past your house?

"Arr matey! Welcome to Anaphoria Island! Wheere there's buried treasure and rum for all!!"

I can't believe nobody has kicked me off of this list yet!

Kaeru

>From: Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com>
>Reply-To: tuning@egroups.com
>To: tuning@egroups.com
>Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again
>Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 19:15:58 -0700
>
>
>
>Frank Masucheda wrote:
>
> > Is Anaphoria island a real place, or is it some Dungeons and Dragons >pretend
> > universe like so many of the people on this list seem to be living in?
>
> Somehow, i feel the wolves after tasting of a little blood. and >frustrating by the escape
>of their game, our looking around in their own ranks to vent it out:)
>
>maybe the idea of crucifixion is gettin' the blood flowin'
>
>Frank!
>
> I would best have to explain it to you as "Visionary Geography". All >countries could be
>argued are on some level "imaginary" because "borders" unless drawn over >geophysical features
>are not to be found outside of the "imaginary" construct in the mind. some >astronauts have had
>spiritual revelations out of not seeing borders. But I accept them as real >as most do.I direct
>you to the statements of Mircea Eliade, Father of Modern Anthropology, who >brought his science
>around to recognizing that all myths have to be considered real because the >people who believe
>them exist. Any other attitude is the imposition of one myth (the west with >its "science"
>being a myth of analysis) upon another. I have to accept Jesus as real also >because i can
>observe his workings , good or bad , in his followers
> On another level, we accept many things as real not because we can see >them but by the way
>they cause things to be a certain way, like democracy, schizophrenia, >equity, or how about
>numbers, are they real. In the extreme case We could argue that music is a >complete
>fabrication of the mind/soul of man that other species of living things >might find completely
>without any meaning as a organized sonic experience.
> In fact How do I know that Frank Masucheda is real outside of being able >to
>
> > Also, why do you call it the "north american" embassy?
>
>For one reason we recognize the separate Native american tribes as separate >nations. we deal
>with some of these more often than Washington.
>
> >
> >
> > >From: Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com>
> > >Reply-To: tuning@egroups.com
> > >To: tuning@egroups.com
> > >Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again
> > >Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 15:44:40 -0700
> > >
> > >Death is not
> > >in not being able to communicate
> > >but in no longer being able to be understood-Pasolini
> > >
> > >mark c wrote:
> > >
> > > > Am I gone now?
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >-- Kraig Grady
> > >North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
> > >www.anaphoria.com
> >
>
>-- Kraig Grady
>North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
>www.anaphoria.com

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

Re: [tuning] Re: infinity again

🔗mark c <ahsom@rockisland.com>

🔗Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>

🔗mark c <ahsom@rockisland.com>

🔗Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>

🔗mark c <ahsom@rockisland.com>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com>

🔗Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>

🔗Rosati <dante@pop.interport.net>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com>

🔗johnlink@con2.com

🔗Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>

🔗Frank Masucheda <kaeruichiban@hotmail.com>

🔗Rosati <dante@pop.interport.net>

🔗David Beardsley <xouoxno@virtulink.com>

🔗ppagano@bellsouth.net

🔗dave@apprehension.internal.westphila.net