The reason for continuing to flog the topic of musical harmonics is a psychoacoustic aspect to this in perceiving sound which may not physically be there. The premise is the mind hears the second and third harmonics so strongly that it infers the existence of the fundamental note which defines them. But that fundamental was not actually played.
Prepare for some heavy reading but it's not all that arduous. Do expect good graphics on what harmonics look like relative to each other and this should provide good confirmation a note is not just one vibration or frequency. (Music of India: PSYCHOACOUSTICS OF THE MUSICAL PITCH OF TABLA)
This introduces some major strangeness to music as the psychoacoustic contribution to sound is independent of vibration. Physics is left out on the doormat with this thinking. We probably won't go too far in pursuit of understanding audio perception but we accept the reality of something which needs to be understood. The question is fascinating as how does the mind hear a sound which could not possibly have been real because the player muted it on the instrument and it's necessarily muted so the musician gets the desired sound ... but then your mind adds the fundamental into it anyway.
Again the interested student is invited to pursue this further and again that student is advised as to the potential for winding up dribbling on yourself. The mind knows nothing of harmonics so how can it possibly know what the fundamental should be. Tally ho, matey.
The mind adds information to things regularly. We add things to what we see, what hear, etc and it's not uncommon. Many optical illusions play on the phenomenon and there is intrigue in discovering one really can see things which are not actually there but deducing what that means may take a little longer.
A related phenomenon is eyewitnesses suck in a courtroom and the reason is they often get it wrong. It's not simply that they forget but rather we don't see the same things, even though it is the shared objective reality. It's different depending on who looks. This goes to poetry or deep philosophy, neither of which will be on the plate tonight.
The reason for raising the topic is the interest in the idea we add things to music which are not there but what really floats my balloon is when I wonder, man, what else do we add to it without realizing it. This thought is worth a bowl by itself. When I listen to "Supper's Ready," how much of what I hear isn't really there.
(Ed: say, fadda. Can God make a rock so heavy that he, himself, cannot lift it?)
It's more than Cheech and Chong to me, even though that was Carlin's bit, as it extends to how much of what I hear in my own music ... isn't really there.
(Ed: no, you didn't take too much acid and you're not going to die but you are playing Schrödinger's Cat with music)
The cat is NOT dead!
We need to be careful with this one in the same way it's important to resist electronicalomania as that's when you get so fascinated by the musical technology that you do nothing but screw around with all the incredible combinations of things you can make. It's easily possible to do this even for extremely-talented people and the result is nothing ever comes of it. The matter is absolutely fascinating but it's not necessarily all that productive. Must be careful with that.
Note: I have not been careful with that and I must get a picture without a flash so you can see the lights on the floor in the Rockhouse. In the dark it looks like you're flying into New York City.
Prepare for some heavy reading but it's not all that arduous. Do expect good graphics on what harmonics look like relative to each other and this should provide good confirmation a note is not just one vibration or frequency. (Music of India: PSYCHOACOUSTICS OF THE MUSICAL PITCH OF TABLA)
This introduces some major strangeness to music as the psychoacoustic contribution to sound is independent of vibration. Physics is left out on the doormat with this thinking. We probably won't go too far in pursuit of understanding audio perception but we accept the reality of something which needs to be understood. The question is fascinating as how does the mind hear a sound which could not possibly have been real because the player muted it on the instrument and it's necessarily muted so the musician gets the desired sound ... but then your mind adds the fundamental into it anyway.
Again the interested student is invited to pursue this further and again that student is advised as to the potential for winding up dribbling on yourself. The mind knows nothing of harmonics so how can it possibly know what the fundamental should be. Tally ho, matey.
The mind adds information to things regularly. We add things to what we see, what hear, etc and it's not uncommon. Many optical illusions play on the phenomenon and there is intrigue in discovering one really can see things which are not actually there but deducing what that means may take a little longer.
A related phenomenon is eyewitnesses suck in a courtroom and the reason is they often get it wrong. It's not simply that they forget but rather we don't see the same things, even though it is the shared objective reality. It's different depending on who looks. This goes to poetry or deep philosophy, neither of which will be on the plate tonight.
The reason for raising the topic is the interest in the idea we add things to music which are not there but what really floats my balloon is when I wonder, man, what else do we add to it without realizing it. This thought is worth a bowl by itself. When I listen to "Supper's Ready," how much of what I hear isn't really there.
(Ed: say, fadda. Can God make a rock so heavy that he, himself, cannot lift it?)
It's more than Cheech and Chong to me, even though that was Carlin's bit, as it extends to how much of what I hear in my own music ... isn't really there.
(Ed: no, you didn't take too much acid and you're not going to die but you are playing Schrödinger's Cat with music)
The cat is NOT dead!
We need to be careful with this one in the same way it's important to resist electronicalomania as that's when you get so fascinated by the musical technology that you do nothing but screw around with all the incredible combinations of things you can make. It's easily possible to do this even for extremely-talented people and the result is nothing ever comes of it. The matter is absolutely fascinating but it's not necessarily all that productive. Must be careful with that.
Note: I have not been careful with that and I must get a picture without a flash so you can see the lights on the floor in the Rockhouse. In the dark it looks like you're flying into New York City.
No comments:
Post a Comment