[sdiy] Request brain dump on balanced lines -- harmonic numbering

[John L Marshall]

That was my list


Take care,
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific Northwest DIY Synthesizer meeting, July 20, 2002
See: www.sound-photo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Krooshof" <synthos at xs4all.nl>
To: <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 3:27 AM
Subject: Re: [sdiy] Request brain dump on balanced lines -- harmonic
numbering


> >Don Tillman wrote:
> >
> >>  Yes.  The first harmonic is the fundamental, the second harmonic is
> >>  twice the frequency, third harmonic is three times the frequency, etc.
>
> >Not true!
> Huh?
> I, for one, hear frequency as a linear thing (bogus remark).
> Seriously, if you look at frequency as a linear scale, the above is true.
> The frequencies, in Hertz, of a 100Hz tone are:
> 100, 200, 300, 400, 500 Hz etc.
>
>
> >1/2+1/3+1/5+1/7+1/11+1/13, 1 being the fundemental frequency.
> no, no, no. No, this isn't it. Revert to Pythagoras' insights.
>
> >Put musically and not taking into account equal temporment,
> Equal temperment is right out when discussing overtones.
>
> >Harm no.                        interval relation to previous harmonic
> You mean: overtone#.                     -----------------------------
> Or the numbers are + 1.
> I corrected to harm #.
> >1    fundemental
>
> >2                                   Oct (above the fundemental)
> >3                                   fifth
> >4                                   Fourth
> >5                                   Maj third
> >6                                   Min Third
> >7                                   Major 2nd. Err. this a lot is
> >closer to a minor third.
> >8                                   Minor 3rd  Err: closer to major
> >2nd. Due to the fact the previous harmonic
>                                                  is "off" a bit, the
> interval is a bit odd.
>                                                  This harmonic itself
> is three octaves above the fundamental.
> >9                                  Minor 2nd Err. Major 2nd
>
>
>   The questionmarks in Dons list are nice.
> >  11    three octaves + ??
> >  12    three octaves + fifth
> >  13    three octaves + ??
> These harmonics are out of key. Though I know a piano piece
> by Clarence Barlow that used these harmonics to 4 keys per octave.
> Halfway the piece got very enharmonic, UNTIL only those 4
> notes tones were played, it all gets together nicely, smoothly.
> He finished is "Ratio Book" recently. It's about ratios in music
> for harmony, timbre, rythm.
>
>
> >Say the word 'Cow"
> Start overtonesinging. It's nice. It's loud. It's soothing (for
> yourself at least).
> It's nicely annoying.
> It will make you understand filters and math.
> Tuvians understand it as a prism:
> As if you devide the light in to seperate colours, and play by
> choosing one colour to pass through.
>
>
> Dave
>
>
> Ps. Advice for survival at parties part 2:
> Should they tell you that you should live in harmony, tell them you
> are in 11 and 13,
> so still out of tune, though fundamentally correct.
> (advice one was: don't be harmonic, or you will, one day, crash on a
> nearby moon.
> point was proven by looking at saturnus)
> BTW: Harry has _the_ hippy solution for personal high frequency
instabilities.
>
> --