Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!ils.nwu.edu!sandell From: sandell@ils.nwu.edu (Greg Sandell) Newsgroups: comp.music Subject: Re: Musical Frequencies Message-ID: <505@anaxagoras.ils.nwu.edu> Date: 21 Dec 90 17:38:13 GMT References: <35111@netnews.upenn.edu> Sender: news@ils.nwu.edu Reply-To: sandell@ils.nwu.edu (Greg Sandell) Followup-To: mercuri@grad1.cis.upenn.edu (Rebecca Mercuri Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences Lines: 30 In article <35111@netnews.upenn.edu>, mercuri@grad1.cis.upenn.edu (Rebecca Mercuri) writes: > jbovitz --- > > I'm sure that at least a half dozen people have informed you that although > your formula is "correct", it will sound like hell. Most instruments are > "stretch tuned" (higher in the high octaves, lower in the low octaves) to > accommodate for the nonlinearity in the hearing process. String players do > this "automatically" as they are playing. If you need more info (references > on this), get back to me. > > R. Mercuri Rebecca, I think you are criticizing too quickly. Whether the notes will sound "like hell" or not depends on what timbre is used to instantiate them. If you did your best to create a piano-like timbre while using this formula for your fundamental frequencies, yes, your listeners will note the attempt at imitation of a piano sound but find the pitches to sound flat in the high range...but mainly for associational reasons (i.e. when you hear a piano timbre, expect it to be accompanied by stretch tuning). If the sounds involved were merely sine tones, or an impoverished harmonic sound (like a square wave), I would think that the formulaic tuning would sound appropriate. Sound right to you? - Greg **************************************************************** * Greg Sandell (sandell@ils.nwu.edu) Evanston, IL USA * * Institute for the Learning Sciences, Northwestern University * ****************************************************************