[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index][
Author Index]
Re: music by numbers
>perhaps it does help to know how sound is generated, etc. but i state that
>it doesn't hurt to not know.
>
>ah, beer. makes the conversation much...more...zzzzzzzzzzz
>
>-jim
cheers. That's what I mean. Some people make beautiful music not bothered
by musical theory, some people spend a lifetime analyzing and theorizing
about cents and comma's (e.g. Harry Partch), and I am not interested in
discussing which way is best, in terms of ethics or esthaetics. To me it's
a matter of means to an end.
To illustrate my fascination for fysical patterns in sound generation I
will give an example. I am interested in sounds which vary not only in
pitch or volume but also in quality, like different vowels in vocals. A
wah
pedal does this for guitar. But how can I do this with an acoustical
instrument, without the help of electronics? For trumpet and trombone this
can be done with various damping devices, by which you actually
change fysical dimensions of the bell. I wanted to see if this can be
done
for a reed instrument. Acoustical theory helped me to devise a reed
instrument with a resonator for each note. The formant of each resonator
can still be altered by covering and uncovering the holes. Is this science
or music? Again, I don't mind how you call it; I'm just pleased with the
sounding result, quite different from any other instrument. And I am
fascinated by the fact that sounds can be visualised, in waveforms by
means
of an oscilloscope, or with spectral analysis. It effectively supports
understanding of acoustical theory, which in turn shows why certain
experiments work and others don't. It feeds my fantasies about sound
dissociated from their traditional propagators, the existing instruments.
It's just part of my toolbox.
By the way, numbers were implicit in music long before maths were
invented.
Anthropologists have found primitive societies where the concept of time
is
non-existent. But they did not find societies without music. And where
music is, there is rhythm, and scales, with fixed intervals. Obviously
musicians can play with scrutinous precision to the rhythms and scales
whether or not they are interested in visual representation. The fact is
that the musical mind loves to hear repetition in well-defined portions of
time and pitch. Musical theorists (e.g. Pythagoras) have analysed these
patterns and described them in terms of numbers, and in turn influenced
musical practice by refining and promoting their theory. This dialectical
process is of course still going on these days. Please note I am not
suggesting only theorists contribute to the development of music, I merely
state they can contribute to it.
Katja.