part of an ongoing research by
whatmusicreallyis.com
Every musical ratio, written as a fraction of two integer (rational, whole) numbers, has at least nine different and non-exclusive meanings. With other words, every ratio can be interpreted in nine different ways, and these interpretations do not cancel each other. Every meaning remains true, no matter how you look at it.
The number nine represents the understanding I have so far; there might be more interpretations of which I’m not aware at the moment.
How the tone was generated: Dual Harmonic Genesis (double non-exclusive meaning).
All Tones Are Really Overtones: |
All Tones Are Really Undertones: |
TO DO: use extra data, optimize and set alt tag
TO DO: use extra data, optimize and set alt tag
These examples serve as model for the genesys of any ratio, including those having 1 above or/and below the fraction bar. When the number 1 is present in a ratio, it never represents the absolute fundamental 1, but the undertone 1 or overtone 1 of that series.
TO DO: reformulate.
The ratio is undertone 1 of overtone 2 (of fundamental 1) or overtone 2 of undertone 1 (of fundamental 1), because 1 ×2 ÷1 = 1 ÷1 ×2 = . Can you figure out the harmonic genesys of ratio ?
The ratio is undertone 1 of overtone 1 (of fundamental 1) or overtone 1 of undertone 1 (of fundamental 1), because 1 ×1 ÷1 = 1 ÷1 ×1 = .
No matter how we might look at it, every musical fraction represents the harmonic genesis of a tone and is written as a ratio between an overtone, over the fraction bar, and an undertone, under the fraction bar, implied (but not depicted) as related to the absolute fundamental 1.
Harmonic interval: the sonic (aural, acoustic) distance (space, remoteness) between any two harmonics from the same series (whether descending or ascending).
a) Where (in the harmonic series) is the source of the ratio (to the left or right of / lower or higher than the fulcrum) and
b) what the size of it is (larger or smaller than 1).
Before trying to interpret ratios as sonic distances, we first must be able to tell which harmonic series is the source of the sonic distance. The two options are the ascending and descending series.
|
|
| If the number above the fraction bar (numerator) is smaller than the one below it (denominator), the sonic distance belongs to the descending series. |
If the number above the fraction bar (numerator) is bigger than the one below it (denominator), the sonic distance belongs to the ascending series. |
Every musical fraction represents the harmonic interval,
or sonic distance, between any two harmonics −
either of the ascending or the descending series,
and is written as a ratio between them.
When looking at a vertical number line and think about ascending harmonics, the natural progression of these starts from the bottom up. So for example, when talking about supra-harmonics 2 and 3 in this context, we read first 2, and then 3. This is the exact same order in which the numbers of the vertical fraction should be read, when interpreted as sonic distance: from the bottom up. is the sonic distance between harmonics 2 and 3 of the ascending series.
When considering the descending series, the natural progression on the vertical line is from the top down. So for example, when talking about sub-harmonics 2 and 3 in this context, we read first 2, and then 3. This is the exact same order in which the numbers of the vertical fraction should be read, when interpreted as sonic distance: from top to bottom. is the sonic distance between harmonics 2 and 3 of the descending series.
where the visual element is discarded and only numbers are kept together with a small line signifying the ticks on the number line, squeezed together.
We know that is implied as related to the absolute fundamental 1 (because this ratio is in fact 1 ×3 ÷2 or 1 ÷2 ×3) with other words, there can be no without a 1. So in interpreting as a sonic distance (or interval) means that the sonic distance between and is the same as the sonic distance between harmonics 2 and 3.
The same sentence makes more sense when written with horizontal ratios: the sonic distance between 1|1 and 2|3 is the same as the sonic distance between harmonics 2 and 3.
Yet another way of saying the same thing with different words is: the new ratio(s) represent the sonic distance between the second and third harmonics, having as starting point the fundamental.
doesn't necessarily have to be consecutive harmonics
How to generate it physically (on musical instruments)
in inverted form, the length of string or pipe and formula for dividing it: #/№ = №/#
? formula is based on #1 above
- divide the string and bow the other end.
String lengths / intervals and oscillating frequencies / harmonic genesis exhibit a reciprocal relationship, that is, the top and bottom numbers involved in the fractions switch places.
TO DO: ALL images alt text
Every musical fraction represents,
in its inverted form
(or read from the bottom up),
the length of physical oscillator
(like string or air inside pipe)
used to produce that tone.
bla bla
TO DO: change colors?
an incomplete imaginary piano. It is imaginary because it has never been built, although the possibility of building it is absolutely real, and incomplete because only some of the keys have tuned strings.
What does it sound like
About frequency as an attribute of anything cyclical
ANY RATIO IS A FREQUENCY - it measures HOW MANY TIMES a certain event takes place in the same UNIT (=1) of time. Above fraction bar: cycles (or repetitions); below fraction bar: time units.
3/2 = 3 cycles in 2 time units, which is 1,5 cycles in 1 time unit.
2/3 = 2 cycles in 3 time units, which is 0,666 cycles in 1 time unit.
The oscillating frequency of that tone: f=x/x.
the ratio between the oscillating frequency of the fundamental to the frequency of an overtone to the frequency of an undertone: 1 ×3 ÷2 is one cycle per unit of time, spun 3 times faster then 2 times slower - both in the same amount of time.
the ratio between: the number of oscillations (or vibrations, or cycles or repetitions) performed by the musical entity, and the amount of time it takes to perform them.
or how many times it vibrates faster/slower than the (implied) fundamental
draw 0,66 and 1,33 on the blue helix?
add time axis label (what about other axis?)
description: 3/2
The new simple tone performs 1,5 (one and a half) oscillations for every 1 of the fundamental. Another way to write 1,5 is , or simply , meaning that the new simple tone performs 3 oscillations in the same amount of time the fundamental needs to reach 2, developing a periodicity recognized instantly by the acoustic processing centers inside the brain.
draw 1,33 on the red helix
description: 2/3
add time axis label (what about other axis?)
The new simple tone performs 0,6 (repeating pattern of decimals) oscillations for every 1 of the fundamental. Another way to write 0,6 is , meaning that the new simple tone performs 2 oscillations in the same amount of time the fundamental needs to reach 3, developing a periodicity recognized instantly by the acoustic processing centers inside the brain.
what does a negative exponent mean? Negative seconds means going back in time! If going forward grows by a scaling factor, going backwards should shrink by it.
2^(-1) = 1/(2^1)
The sentence means “1 second ago, we were at half our current amount (1/2^1)”.
http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-exponents-why-does-00-1/
That's because 2^1 means “after 1 second, we will be at double our current amount”
EVERY FRACTION REPRESENTS A RATIO BETWEEN MOVEMENT AND TIME, AND DEFINES FREQUENCY.
Yet another one:
The fundamental alignment of resonant harmonics (generating two reciprocal child series)
The alignment between the (ascending & descending) harmonics of that tone, and those of the implied fundamental
to optimize
CONCLUSION:
1. musical fractions written as
ascending progression or archaic ratios
(describing also accurately
sonic distances between ascending harmonics)
describe sub-harmonic alignment
in this exact form.
2. musical fractions written as
descending progression
(describing also accurately
sonic distances between descending harmonics)
describe supra-harmonic alignment
in this exact form.
3. The place where harmonics coincide
is the begining of a new series in the same direction,
whose complete harmonic series will coincide
with harmonics of all initial sonic entities.
every number can be considered a scaled version of 1
http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-intuitive-guide-to-exponential-functions-e/
scalar waves refer to harmonic cycles or the periodically occuring patterns of movement which define resonance: vibration in usion, or at a scaled/harmonic frequency. both terms, “scaling” and “harmony” imply natural laws of relationships mathematically based on whole/rational/integer numbers.
learning to count is learning to add. it is physical.
learning to sing is learning to multiply. it is metaphysical. becoming
learning to listen is learning to exponentiate. it is. being
Rhythm is the pulse of music.
Somewhat similar to the wave-particle duality theory, so is the tone-rhythm duality a mere perceptual one. This doesn't change the fact that rhythm comes from the descending harmonic series (sub-harmonic unde-rtones), while pitch from the ascending harmonic series (supra-harmonic over-tones). More details about this soon.
A ratio is a beat, when played at low frequencies. A beat turns into a tone when played at high frequencies.
The beat is the precursor of tone. Play a constant beat at a higher frequency (scale it) and it will become a tone. If the beat is composed of at least 2 simultaneous patterns, then raising the entire system in frequency, thus keeping the ratio between the components constant (scaling it), will sound a harmonic sonic distance (or interval) in the hearing range.
A clear demonstration of this is under preparation. Until it is ready, check out this video:
This spectrogram shows a three over two polyrhythm being sped up into the audible range
where the polyrhythm becomes a 2|3 Harmonic Sonic Distance.
Sorry for the western music theory nomenclature; it seems the title of the clip cannot be removed from the player. "Fifth" is a very confusing term which shouldn't be used at all in music. Unfortunately, it became entrenched in musician's minds and there's no way of freeing them from it. Rest assured, I will keep my promise and COMPLETELY AVOID such confusing and irrelevant terminology. The What Music Really İs Manual shall remain free from such historical accidents and culturally defined misaprehensions, in order to trully have an universal book suited for the needs of the free-thinking 3rd Millennium Musician.
Frequency is proportional to the square root of the tension.
The speed of propagation of sonic energy in a string is proportional to the square root of the tension of the string and inversely proportional to the square root of the linear density of the string. (source: wiki)
Frequency is inversely proportional to the square root of the string thickness (diameter or 2 x radius).
tables here
| undertones / sub-harmonics | absolute fundamental | overtones / supra-harmonics | |||||
| Harmonic | 27 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 9 | 27 |
| Division/Multiplication | ÷27 | ÷9 | ÷3 | 1 | ×3 | ×9 | ×27 |
| Fractions | 1/27 | 1/9 | 1/3 | 1/1 | 3/1 | 9/1 | 27/1 |
| Interpretation | 1÷27 | ||||||
| Exponents | 3⁻³ | 3⁻² | 3⁻¹ | 3⁰ | 3⁺¹ | 3⁺² | 3⁺³ |
| Monzos (5-limit) | |||||||
| Fractions & Exponents | 1/3³ | 1/3² | 1/3 | 1/1 | 3/1 | 3²/1 | 3³/1 |
| Decimals | 0,037 | 0,1 | 0,3 | 1 | 3,0 | 9,0 | 27,0 |
| Percent | 3,703% | 11,1% | 33,3% | 100% | 300% | 900% | 2700% |
Besides the archaic forms of music having an upper fundamental and a descending scale, a peculiar way of employing numbers has been preserved from the beginning of written history, which has been used to convey an ancient form of harmonic knowledge. The secret language of ratios encoded in this kind of mathematics should not be limited to the interpretation of physical properties of sound and the laws of acoustics alone.
It seems like our ancestors made exclusive use of integer numbers to express any tuning (sequence of ratios), and – an important fact overlooked by many scholars – these numbers are all harmonics from the harmonic series.
Let’s take half of our previous arbitrary-chosen tuning as a first example. The ratios can also be written, using unsimplified fractions, as which then become 3 4 5 6 by overlooking the common number below the fraction bar (denominator), which is the fundamental tone of the set. In the above example, this fundamental is the third undertone. Mathematicians skip the second step and reach directly the result by calculating the least common denominator of the series and discarding it.
If however we are faced with a sequence of rational numbers from which we want to deduce the ratios, the series 3 4 5 6 can be written as fractions by dividing every member by the first, resulting in the set whose simplified version is .
The resulting series of numbers 3 to 6 is not, and should not be interpreted as because in this way, even though the acoustical and mathematical relation between tones remains the same, the starting point or fundamental of the series is different. For the above set the fundamental is the absolute fundamental of the master set, , while in the proper interpretation giving the ratios (no matter if simplified or not) the fundamental is the third undertone .
DISABLED
Given this reciprocal set of seemingly irregular integers, we can find out the ratios or how the numbers relate to one another by:
Simplifying the fractions is optional. The reverse process is simple, and turns any tuning system of ratios into a seemingly irregular sequence of integers by finding the least common denominator.
TO DO: update picture to complement text below like in
wmri_ex_scholar_18_archaic_ratios_ex.svg
Since the numbers below the fraction bar (denominators) are overlooked when considering the set of large integers as ascending, while those above the fraction bar (numerators) are overlooked when the set is considered descending, the end result from both operations is the same – at least so it seems. The difference between ascending and descending is given by the direction in which the numbers are written.
In order to fully understand that, we must give up all preconceived notions according to which writing has to be in a certain direction like for example left to right, from the top down. Imagine writing each letter of each word from right to left, beginning from the bottom of the page and continuing with each new row upwards. The fact that we use one certain convention, is just… a convention. It has no relevance.
That is why, no matter the language in which this work is translated and no matter the direction in which the words proceed on paper, the ascending harmonic series will always be written small-to-large numbers from left to right (as in 1 → ∞), while the descending the opposite way: small-to-large numbers from right to left (as in ∞ ← 1).
Last updated: 16 january 2017
