The Devil's Chord: The conspiracy to open the portal of consciousness and mystery of the octave

Originally posted by UncleV

If we're going to take this route, dismissing simple, easily understood words like 'second' and 'hertz' and turning them into complicated and unclear concepts just for the sake of it then I'm going to have to insist that 90% of the words you use are null and void. Ratios can no longer be used, neither can 'phase' or 'amplitude' because nearly everything you utter can be broken down into some complicated blather. How can one measure anything if we don't set some simple standards? Mention harmonics? Nope sorry, why? Because how do you define harmonics without using frequency or time standards? You can vaguely allude to them but you can not define them otherwise.

Yeah as I mentioned earlier it is not proven that the Pythagoreans ever used a monochord string to determine their harmonics. I was asked - how were the Perfect Fifth and Perfect Fourth ratios determined in nonwestern cultures if they are not using visual measurements. I then gave the example of the blow flutes made from bamboo and indeed it is the "aeulos" flutes that are considered to be the original basis for building the scale on the Perfect Fifth/Perfect Fourth harmonics.

So the issue is listening to the overtones and realizing they are harmonic and then finding the simplest means of making the instrument -- but more importantly it needs to be realized that the instrument a musician plays is an extension of the energy of the person playing the instrument. This is the true secret of real music -- not all the current modern techno-fetish math measurement stuff. The jing or electrochemical energy is expressed through sound and this creates the tingling frisson that activates the vagus nerve. I'm saying it's the high overtones as ultrasound then creating subharmonics as the ELF waves of the heart. But since it's nonlinear it keeps going eternally -- the music listens to us.

So yeah I'm talking about deep mind control that needs to question the most simplest concepts we are taught -- when I was taught that C to G is 2:3 and G to C is 3:4 in my piano performance music theory class - suddenly this created a mystery for me. Logically is it not commutative - and so I knew something strange was going on. I knew from my listening piano performance experience that it is the "push/pull" of the Fifth/Fourth to the octave -- that there is an inherent tension and that this is also the secret of Blues music - which is based on the 1-4-5 chords.

So then I was shown by my other music teacher -- the U of MN professor -- that if you silently press a higher harmonic and then strike the lower harmonic then the higher harmonic will ring out "magically" on its own. So this is about the one note having inherent subharmonics and higher harmonics and how this is an eternal process that is nonlinear.

This is directly tied to the nonlinear relationship of the Solar (electromagnetic) and Lunar (electrochemical) calendars and its directly tied to how we can not say where sound ends or begins due to time-frequency uncertainty. When I was shown this secret "magic" harmonics -- my music teacher then said -- well these overtones have to be compromised and averaged out to make the Western scale. My reaction was -- why?

Through natural overtones we do not get every note in our western scale but using it for one root note gives us major thirds, fifths, octaves from which to build the next batch. This is neither western or eastern. It just is and unfortunately for you, it uses hertz/seconds to provide us with this information.

Right -- I'm saying forget all that and just rely on the 1-4-5 intervals as is found in the music samples from the book Sounding the Depths -- Listen through these 75 audio music examples -- they are all based on the intuitive 1-4-5 overtones without the need of Hertz



So from that very simple intuitive music for 90% of human history that has been next to wiped out by genocidal left-brain dominant control freak males -- or basically chimpanzees -- we can still find beautiful music with no Hertz and also the amazing secret of how to create healing light energy from music -- trance music that creates electromagnetic healing love energy for peaceful human society. It's very very simple but the left brain has to be put down and the right brain of music listening needs to be embraced. Yes we are inundated with Western music mind control -- Western music is a materialistic subset of the natural perfect Fifth/octave/Perfect Fourth yin-yang-Emptiness truth of reality.

reply to post by fulllotusqigong


You need to listen to this in it's entirety if you truly want to liberate yourself. It is the ultimate expression of Truth through music and has been responsible for a number of well documented spontaneous enlightenings.

vimeo.com...

The ultimate secret is revealed around 2:08 . I've said enough. But listen and you will understand. Those with ears will hear.

Peace!

For all those interested in hearing the tritone chord just listen to the opening of the song "Blind" by the metal band Korn. it's used all through out the song. you can't miss it. not a fan of the band just pointing out where you can hear a tritone in a song.

I was told that the tritone is usually avoided because it's mathematically dissonant (out of phase) with the tonic or root note of the chord and it's octave. So much like a siren it rubs us the wrong way because our brains want order. the chord is unstable and doesn't resolve well in the key, there for our brain hates the chord because it doesn't fit the pattern.

As for the conspiracy I'm staying away from it. to me it's just fun with math. Humans also don't like the sound of buzzsaws either because they are so dissonant. no mystery that over the last few hundred years the chord is frowned upon by the music theory crowd. is is a crappy chord for almost all uses.

Now don't get the tritone confused with an augmented chord or a sharp 4 or the lydian mode. although they use the tri tone they don't usually play the root the #4 and the octave together in a closed voicing because it sounds like crap. if left some room to breath the #4 adds a little momentum to the musical line and has a beneficial usage.

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation

The image you post is spatial - music is in time not space -- again C to G is 2:3 and G to C is 3:4 -- any musician knows that the G to C interval is a Perfect Fourth -- not a Perfect Fifth. Nice try though.

So you are leaving out the "bait and switch" -- The frequency has to be greater than one or else the algebraic equation does not work to get the geometric mean. So as I stated 2/3x is the subharmonic of C to G as 3/2. 2/3x is then DOUBLED -- even though 3/2 is the frequency as the inverse of wavelength -- 2/3x is NOT the frequency as the inverse of wavelength because it has to be doubled as 4/3x as C to F the Perfect Fourth. So if you use the same C -- the 2/3x as F to C and the same C is 3/2x as C to G.

2/3 is F to C

3/2 is G to C.

Noncommutative.

So now I've shown that by doubling -- in violation of the law of Pythagoras that wavelength is inverse to frequency -- then you get 4/3x as the Perfect Fourth. So based on that "bait and switch" error to convert the subharmonic of C to G into F to C -- then 2/3x should be G to C since it's actually the subharmonic of C to G. But it's not -- it's F to C as the Perfect Fourth. So for the very same reason that F to C is 2/3x and C to F is 4/3x -- the same C -- then G to C is 4/3 and C to G is 2/3. Yes it violates the Law of Pythagoras because C to G is a higher frequency interval then G to C when using the same C -- so the frequency value should be higher -- but it's not it's 2/3 whereas G to C is 4/3.

This is my whole point -- it is a "bait and switch" by using the subharmonic instead of the frequency as inverse of wavelength. That's why it is noncommutative.

Professor Michael Hudson concurs: “The worst problem in tuning occurs in the interval of three whole tones, e.g., between C and F#/Gb in the “natural” untempered methods of tuning. If the ratio of the octave is 2:1, then the ratio of C to F# represents the square root of two — an irrational number. (Burkert [1972:441] notes that the harmonic mean discovered in the context of Pythagorean music theory has a major use precisely in approximating the square root.)”

O.K. so the harmonic mean was used to create the irrational number as the Devil's Interval.

The irrational number relies on the commutative property to be solved. The irrational number goes against the natural Perfect Fifth/Perfect Fourth noncommutative harmonics.

The irrational number continues infinitely never repeating and so it models chaos mathematics which is commutative.

The rational number as the Infinite Spiral of Fifths is based on the harmonic series which diverges and it's noncommutative so it is inherently entangled as the quantum infinite potential as consciousness -- it is the secret portal to consciousness.

The figures for the thirds are most easily derived by the arithmetic or harmonic means of the fifth, just as a harmonic framework is derived from means within the octave.213

213 Stefan Hagel, Ancient Greek Music: A New Technical History (Cambridge University Press, 2009), p.
177 footnote and p. 179.

So the 5/4 "JUST" third is NOT Pythagorean. I'm talking about just the 1-4-5 intervals. Hertz as the natural overtones assumes a "divide and average" Solar calendar means geometric -- "containment" of infinity.

When it's contended that the Pythagoreans recognized the harmonic mean (2AB)/A + B, the geometric mean (a square root) and the arithmetic mean (A + B)/2 there must be the correction that in fact these means were the innovation of Archytas to create the Greek Miracle. “Similarly, in Fragment 2, Archytas is clearly taking over the three means from his predecessors, although he renames one of them and adds his own additional characterization of each mean.”228 Or as Professor Luigi Borzacchini describes it in the Greek ratios: “the arithmetic mean, a-b=b-c, the geometric a:b=b:c, and the harmonic or subcontrary a-b:a = b-c:c.”229

12:6 as the octave with 9 as the arithmetic mean or 12:9:6, giving the perfect fourth music interval or 12:9 as 4:3 and the perfect fifth music interval as 9:6 or 3:2.

Dr. Alan C. Bowen reveals how Archytas developed these means from Pythagorean harmonics in his article “The Minor Sixth (8:5) in Early Greek Harmonic Science,” The American Journal of Philology, 1978: “For it was during this time that scales of a double octave magnitude, i.e. the Greater Perfect System, were constructed to facilitate the analysis of melody.”

O.K. so Archytas used the "double octave" for his "bait and switch" trick -- by using a subharmonic in violation of the Law of Pythagoras of frequency as inverse to wavelength.

reply to post by DenyObfuscation

Any who doubt that the musical ratios are all of greater inequality, i.e., that the antecedent or first term in each is greater than the consequent or second term, should consult Archytas DK 47 B 2. This Fragment requires that the ratios be of this form if the assertions about the three means [arithmetic, harmonic and geometric] are to be true. Accordingly, the ratios assigned to the octave, fifth, fourth and minor sixth, must be 2:1, 3:2, 4:3 and 8:5, and not 1:2, 2:3, 3:4 and 5:8, respectively, as Mosshammer and others would have them. Indeed, there is early proof deriving from the Pythagorean school that intervals, such as the fifths, which are represented by superparticular [n + 1 : n] ratios cannot be partitioned into any number of equal subintervals because the terms of these ratios admit no number of geometric means….There is reason to believe that these were supplied by Archytas in the early fourth century B.C.233

233 Alan C. Bowen, "The Minor Sixth (8:5) in Early Greek Harmonic Science," The American Journal of
Philology, 1978.

Although the later Pythagoreans used the ratio 9/8 for tuning it must be emphasized the Orthodox Pythagoreans did not use 9/8, not in the sense of Archytas. Why? Because the ratio 9/4, reduced to 9/8, is not of the Pythagorean Tetrad based on the “orthodox” perfect fifth “Great Dragon Tuning.” As Professor Andre Barbera exposes: Orthodox Pythagorean theory recognizes five consonances: fourth, fifth, octave, twelfth, and double octave; and these are represented by the multiple and superparticular ratios [n + 1 : n] from the tetrad. The number 8 obviously does not belong to the tetrad.235

235 André Barbera, "The Consonant Eleventh and the Expansion of the Musical Tetractys: A Study of
Ancient Pythagoreanism," Journal of Music Theory, 1984.

Barbera does note that Archytas used the Babylonian tetrachord, an extension of the tetrad, 6:8::9:12 whereby 8 is the harmonic mean and 9 is the arithmetic mean between 6 and 12 with the above changed meanings as discussed.236 So 1, 4/3, 3/2, 2 were converted to 6:8:9:12. So 8 x 9 = 72 (harmonic mean x arithmetic mean = geometric mean squared) and the square root of 72 in simplified radical form is 6 times the square root of 2 – or the equal-tempered logarithmic tritone music interval, the 6th semitone of the 12 note scale aka the Devil’s Interval. In other words 9/8, the major 2nd music interval, cubed, is the square root of two as the most dissonant music interval of the Western logarithmic scale.

236 The 11th music interval is 8:3 or an octave plus a perfect fourth or the “epimeric” form [n + m]/n; where m is greater than 1 and neither equal to nor a multiple or n. Lawrence Michael Zbikowski, Conceptualizing music: cognitive structure, theory, and analysis (Oxford University Press US, 2002), p. 13.

So by using the double octave to use the subharmonic of the Perfect Fifth as the Perfect Fourth -- converting C to G to F to C and then doubling it as 4/3 to C to F, the Perfect Fourth -- this process relied on the squaring of the Perfect Fifth to 9/4 which is then halved to 9/8 as the major second.

The Orthodox Pythagoreans just used the Tetrad -- they did not use doubling as squaring. The Orthodox Pythagoreans just used the 1-4-5 intervals as complementary opposites without the commutative property for the algebraic equation to get the square root of two.

also don't get too hung up on cathedrals having sonic properties to eliminate certain frequencies. at every sound check the engineer is doing the same thing but electronically. all rooms and shapes have acoustic qualities both good and bad. their dimensions are mathematical fractions of certain sound frequencies. you get a standing wave which makes the music sound muddy or overbearing on one frequency. for some instruments it augments either it's good or bad sound qualities. SO the engineer finds those frequencies and dials them back so the mix will sound OK. I'm sure some churches have been built to eliminate the offending frequencies in respect to the instruments likely to be played in them (organs, human voices etc...) No conspiracy they were just doing a good job building a church.

ALso. don't get hung up on the math regarding temperings of the scales we use. westerners use a less exact (mathematically) ratio between one note to the next in the diatonic system because it sounds better to our western ears. the folks from india and that region have a much more mathematically precise scale tempering but we don't use it over here as much because we think it sounds like crap. so not using certain frequencies is just speculation and opinion and probably most likely not some conspiracy to control humanities consciousness. some of us don't even listen to music so hows it supposed to take over the worlds conciousness. it's a crappy tool there are more direct ways to control people than through music alone. Yes music can help to manipulate people but so can news stories, movies, books, poems, religion, etc...

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
also don't get too hung up on cathedrals having sonic properties to eliminate certain frequencies. at every sound check the engineer is doing the same thing but electronically. all rooms and shapes have acoustic qualities both good and bad. their dimensions are mathematical fractions of certain sound frequencies. you get a standing wave which makes the music sound muddy or overbearing on one frequency. for some instruments it augments either it's good or bad sound qualities. SO the engineer finds those frequencies and dials them back so the mix will sound OK. I'm sure some churches have been built to eliminate the offending frequencies in respect to the instruments likely to be played in them (organs, human voices etc...) No conspiracy they were just doing a good job building a church.

ALso. don't get hung up on the math regarding temperings of the scales we use. westerners use a less exact (mathematically) ratio between one note to the next in the diatonic system because it sounds better to our western ears. the folks from india and that region have a much more mathematically precise scale tempering but we don't use it over here as much because we think it sounds like crap. so not using certain frequencies is just speculation and opinion and probably most likely not some conspiracy to control humanities consciousness. some of us don't even listen to music so hows it supposed to take over the worlds conciousness. it's a crappy tool there are more direct ways to control people than through music alone. Yes music can help to manipulate people but so can news stories, movies, books, poems, religion, etc...

O.K. I'm talking about phonons -- do sound engineers measure phonons? haha.

I'm talking about macroquantum phonons as alchemy based on the time-frequency uncertainty principle -- so no sound engineers don't measure phonons:

Now, Vedral and colleagues have shown otherwise. The UK-Portugal-Austria team have calculated that an entangled state formed between the photons in a laser pulse and the phonons -- quantum mechanical vibrations of the crystal lattice -- in a mirror can persist at arbitrarily high temperatures. The physicists obtained their results by treating both the laser light and the mirror as simple quantum-mechanical harmonic oscillators. The photons and phonons interact via the so-called light pressure mechanism, in which photons bombarding the mirror exert a pressure on it because of mutual interactions. The pressure exerted on the mirror depends on the number of photons hitting it: the more photons in the laser, the more pressure they exert on the mirror and the more the mirror vibrates. Vedral and co-workers calculated that if they were to measure five photons in the light field, then there would be five phonons in the motion of the mirror; and if they measured ten photons, then that meant ten phonons, and so forth. This is typical of an entangled state but the difference in the new calculation is that it works for large systems too -- there are millions of photons in the laser beam and more than a billion atoms in the mirror.364

364 Belle Dumé, “Entanglement heats up,” PhysicsWeb, Feb 23, 2006.

As Vlatko Vedral states: “In the modern point of view, the world looks classical because the complex interactions that an object has with its surroundings conspire to conceal quantum effects from our view.”365

365 My emphasis, Vlatko Vedral, “Living in a Quantum World: Quantum mechanics is not just about tiny particles. It applies to things of all sizes: birds, plants and maybe even people,” Scientific American, June 2011.

Originally posted by rwfresh
reply to post by fulllotusqigong

 

You need to listen to this in it's entirety if you truly want to liberate yourself. It is the ultimate expression of Truth through music and has been responsible for a number of well documented spontaneous enlightenings.

vimeo.com...

The ultimate secret is revealed around 2:08 . I've said enough. But listen and you will understand. Those with ears will hear.

Peace!

I used to sit in full lotus in evangelical Christian "rock" cafes -- all the time. I find it hilarious. Thanks for sharing though. Yeah I would leave though when the Christian "rock" band showed up to do their thing -- crappy music. Then I also attended one of those evangelical suburban megachurches with the rock band -- also sad and twisted.

You know that Christian evangelicals with the CIA supplying weapons and drugs for genocidal warfare. A Jesus would have been so proud! haha.

Yeah as I mentioned earlier it is not proven that the Pythagoreans ever used a monochord string to determine their harmonics.

Didn't say he did, though it is attributed to him. Of course, that doesn't mean he did or did not. However, a string is a great example of learning about sound.

So then I was shown by my other music teacher -- the U of MN professor -- that if you silently press a higher harmonic and then strike the lower harmonic then the higher harmonic will ring out "magically" on its own. So this is about the one note having inherent subharmonics and higher harmonics and how this is an eternal process that is nonlinear.

What is sounds like you are talking about is sympathetic vibration. Which occurs best when one note shares some relation to another ie. same note, octave, fifth. I live this constantly in the room of instruments I dwell in. Quite nice actually.

Listen through these 75 audio music examples -- they are all based on the intuitive 1-4-5 overtones without the need of Hertz

we can still find beautiful music with no Hertz and also the amazing secret of how to create healing light energy from music

AHA! I figured it out! You don't know what hertz means! Music without hertz??? Silence. Were those audio samples silent? No? Every sound we hear contains hertz (clumsy but that's how you phrased it). Hertz, being the measurement of sound accepted by the entire world except for you. Please do some research, you are obviously a smart fella, but this takes the cake. Whether we hear it or not, it 'contains' hertz.

Analogy - here's a beautiful picture with no color. Unless it's clear, it has some color (please no quibbles about black/white being colors).

By the way, the fourth is not contain in the overtone series, oddly enough. Root, octave, fifth, major third, second, flat seventh.

Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
Truth is not put in words -- only through silence in meditation. Listening to the source of sound.

Maybe you're right.

Maybe we all need to shut up!

Just kidding.

Also, for the fourth (4th) time you have failed to answer this question. So I'll recap. PS, I'm not asking this to be a turd, I'm trying to sift through the woo woo to see where you are coming from.

So, for the third time - do you agree that an octave is an exact doubling or halving of a root note?: YES/NO

PS. RWFRESH, that was just mean (the video link - Shine)

Originally posted by UncleV

AHA! I figured it out! You don't know what hertz means! Music without hertz??? Silence. Were those audio samples silent? No? Every sound we hear contains hertz (clumsy but that's how you phrased it). Hertz, being the measurement of sound accepted by the entire world except for you. Please do some research, you are obviously a smart fella, but this takes the cake. Whether we hear it or not, it 'contains' hertz.

Analogy - here's a beautiful picture with no color. Unless it's clear, it has some color (please no quibbles about black/white being colors).

By the way, the fourth is not contain in the overtone series, oddly enough. Root, octave, fifth, major third, second, flat seventh.

Right -- the fourth is created through a mathematical "divide and average" geometric means -- sound is not contained by geometry.

the Just Third is also created through the same symmetric "divide and average" geometric means process -- using phonetic numbers and the commutative property.

O.K. so the subharmonic of the Fifth is converted to the Fourth in violation of the Inverse of frequency as Time -- the time-frequency uncertainty principle.

Hertz relied on symmetry. Not only do I know what Hertz is -- but I know that Hertz even rewrote Maxwell's equations into a symmetric form -- that's how obsessed Hertz was with geometric symmetry. haha.

Einstein stated that Maxwell's equations are not wrong but that the theory about the equations are wrong.

So Hertz inspired Einstein -- but when you take relativity there is a paradox -- as the frequency increases so too does the wavelength because time slows down or expands.

I'm stating that the subharmonics and overtones are nonlinear like relativity and this is only solved through the Law of Phase Harmony which states that when frequency is zero it is NOT SILENCE. haha. Frequency zero means infinite time which also means space is reversed as backwards time -- precognition.

I'm talking about the pilot wave as a information signal -- no energy -- as the secret source of sound -- consciousness. Before the use of converting sound to a "means" or "divide and average" symmetric measurement:

The sound of square roots

Take two strings, one sounding an octave higher than the other, so that their lengths are in the ratio 2:1. Then find the geometric ratio (also called the mean proportional) between these strings, the length x at which 2:x is the same proportion as x:1. This means that 2:x = x:1; cross-multiplying this gives x2 = 2. Thus, the “ratio” needed is √ 2:1 ≈ 1.414, in modern decimals. This is close to the dissonant interval called the tritone, which later was called the “devil in music,” namely the interval composed of three equal whole steps each of ratio 9:8. The tritone is thus 9:8 × 9:8 × 9:8 = 93:83 = 729:512 ≈ 1.424.

From M.I.T.'s the Scandal of the Irrational

So obviously the recording of nonwestern music is not the same as the actual nonwestern music -- which again is used as trance music to make healing electromagnetic light energy that bends spacetime as consciousness.

reply to post by UncleV


Do you have any thoughts about the "noncommutative" issue. I honestly don't get why noncommutative would even be mentioned when it comes to C to G and G to C. I'll go back to crossing my fingers in the hope he'll answer you're octave question.

Originally posted by UncleV
Also, for the fourth (4th) time you have failed to answer this question. So I'll recap. PS, I'm not asking this to be a turd, I'm trying to sift through the woo woo to see where you are coming from.

So, for the third time - do you agree that an octave is an exact doubling or halving of a root note?: YES/NO

PS. RWFRESH, that was just mean (the video link - Shine)

O.K. so if you take the subharmonic of C to G as 3/2x you get 2/3x which is called F to C since it's a Perfect Fourth -- not a Perfect Fifth. I mean it is a Perfect Fifth but not in terms of creating the actual frequency and wavelength -- I mean HERTZ scale.

Frequency - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency In SI units, the unit of frequency is the hertz (Hz), named after the German physicist Heinrich .... The wavelength is inversely proportional to the frequency, s

But wait shouldn't it be an OCTAVE if Denyobfuscation is correct? haha.

If it is commutative then it has to be G to G as the subharmonic of G -- as the octave. In other words -- as Denyobfuscation has repeated over and over.

3:2 is C to G and 2:3 is G to C. -- Same C. But NO -- not for the "Doe a Deer" Solfeggio scale. O.K. if you state they are just ratios - but we are talking about a subharmonic as a fraction -- 2/3 is the lower frequency -- it's not just the same interval as an inversion as DenyObfuscation wants to claim.

Nope -- 2/3 is F to C as the Perfect Fifth as the subharmonic -- so then strangely you get an octave as F to G.

Right? Because we double 2/3 as F to C to get 4/3 as C to F. So obviously 2 and 4 are an octave difference. A Perfect Fifth plus a Perfect Fourth is an octave.

But the subharmonic is from C to G -- not C to F. So again this is not a Hertz measurement since the subharmonic is not the frequency as the inverse of wavelength.

So the subharmonic is not creating equal octaves.

So the subharmonics and overtones are nonlinear -- and Number is inherently based on complementary opposites.

The octave never lines up with the Perfect Fifth and Perfect Fourth.

Hertz relied on symmetry....of course! Have you ever looked at a sound wave on an oscilloscope? Pretty symmetrical. You dance all around the issue. Hertz is a simple measurement of sound, please refrain from cluttering it up. It is a great tool to work with sound because it is tied to sound.

What you are doing is applying math, which you moan about is so bad in western music. But all I see are ratios. If you stopped cluttering up simple concepts you could use a tool like hertz to show us what you mean, instead of formulas!

Right -- the fourth is created through a mathematical "divide and average" geometric means -- sound is not contained by geometry. the Just Third is also created through the same symmetric "divide and average" geometric means process -- using phonetic numbers and the commutative property. O.K. so the subharmonic of the Fifth is converted to the Fourth in violation of the Inverse of frequency as Time -- the time-frequency uncertainty principle.

See, this is where your choosing to ignore what I've been trying to convey is getting us nowhere. Is it because, when faced with the natural proof I've offered your theory fails? Hell, couldn't say, 46 pages and most of us are still confused! The major third is not 'created through the same symmetric "divide and average" geometric means process -- using phonetic numbers and the commutative property', it is created in nature as the fourth order harmonic. The fifth is the second, the octave the first. It is so simple, I guess your tendency to overthink/complicate is getting in the way.

Now, I can prove this. When you say zero frequency is not silence but reversed time....well, not sure how you prove that. If a tree falls in the forest and makes no sound, is he a sapling?

DenyO, the feeling I get is that the issue has to do more with how we name our notes/general music theory, which I could totally get behind understanding if it were something so simple as "I figured out that G# should now be called Fred and that there are two more notes, W# and U"

Now, fifth time asking.....is an octave the exact doubling or halving of a given note?

Additional question for clarification (hahahaha, clarification) - when you say a note has subharmonics, are you suggesting there a frequencies below the fundamental that occur? Not cosmically but in the physical world you and I occupy?

Originally posted by UncleV
Hertz relied on symmetry....of course! Have you ever looked at a sound wave on an oscilloscope? Pretty symmetrical. You dance all around the issue. Hertz is a simple measurement of sound, please refrain from cluttering it up. It is a great tool to work with sound because it is tied to sound.

What you are doing is applying math, which you moan about is so bad in western music. But all I see are ratios. If you stopped cluttering up simple concepts you could use a tool like hertz to show us what you mean, instead of formulas!

Right -- the fourth is created through a mathematical "divide and average" geometric means -- sound is not contained by geometry. the Just Third is also created through the same symmetric "divide and average" geometric means process -- using phonetic numbers and the commutative property. O.K. so the subharmonic of the Fifth is converted to the Fourth in violation of the Inverse of frequency as Time -- the time-frequency uncertainty principle.

See, this is where your choosing to ignore what I've been trying to convey is getting us nowhere. Is it because, when faced with the natural proof I've offered your theory fails? Hell, couldn't say, 46 pages and most of us are still confused! The major third is not 'created through the same symmetric "divide and average" geometric means process -- using phonetic numbers and the commutative property', it is created in nature as the fourth order harmonic. The fifth is the second, the octave the first. It is so simple, I guess your tendency to overthink/complicate is getting in the way.

Now, I can prove this. When you say zero frequency is not silence but reversed time....well, not sure how you prove that. If a tree falls in the forest and makes no sound, is he a sapling?

DenyO, the feeling I get is that the issue has to do more with how we name our notes/general music theory, which I could totally get behind understanding if it were something so simple as "I figured out that G# should now be called Fred and that there are two more notes, W# and U"

Now, fifth time asking.....is an octave the exact doubling or halving of a given note?

Additional question for clarification (hahahaha, clarification) - when you say a note has subharmonics, are you suggesting there a frequencies below the fundamental that occur? Not cosmically but in the physical world you and I occupy?

]


O.K. so you say use Hertz as overtones! Then you say - -the Perfect Fourth is not an overtone!

But you admit that frequency is the inverse of wavelength as Hertz right?

So if you have a frequency of 3/2 as the Perfect Fifth then what is the wavelength as Time?

2/3 as the Perfect Fourth.

Why is a subharmonic of the Perfect Fifth a Perfect Fourth while there are no Perfect Fourth overtone harmonics? haha. Why is 2/3 called F to C instead of C to G as the subharmonic of C to G, the frequency 3/2?

Because it is noncommutative that's why.

It is the time-frequency uncertainty principle in its most basic form and it is not symmetric.

O.K. so a double octave string has to be from zero to four correct? Because a zero to 2 length string is not a "squaring"? 1 x 1 is 1. So 1 plus 1 is the octave but the string length is one half for the octave of 1. In other words only by a "squaring" and not "doubling" of the wavelength octaves does Hertz work as a measurment.

So, according to you since there's no Perfect Fourth overtones as Hertz, then a frequency of 2/3 is not allowed by Hertz because it is a subharmonic as the Perfect Fourth whereas 2/3 is the Hertz time wavelength of the 3/2 frequency of the Perfect Fifth.

Why isn't the frequency 2/3 instead of 3/2 on the Hertz frequency page?

The figures for the thirds are most easily derived by the arithmetic or harmonic means of the fifth, just as a harmonic framework is derived from means within the octave.213

213 Stefan Hagel, Ancient Greek Music: A New Technical History (Cambridge University Press, 2009), p.
177 footnote and p. 179.

It's sad that I have to repeat myself -- I posted that to Denyobfuscation.

The Just Third as 5/4 is derived from a "divide and average" means equations.

The overtone series assumes a symmetric value of number. The time-frequency uncertainty means that Hertz was wrong -- number is asymmetric.

When Pythagoras divided the octave he discovered the ratios for fourth and fifth; and these, 3/2 and 4/3, are superparticular.

So that means there inversion is not rational. It's not just a Hertz inversion. 2/3 is the wavelength of 3/2 -- but 2/3 is the Perfect Fourth frequency -- not the wavelength. So it's not a Hertz rational inversion.

From Archytas' writings this might well be expected, for it was he who renamed the subcontrary mean harmonic because of its use in music, and he is responsible for the proof that no supraparticular ratio can be divided into equal rational parts. (9

That means that Archytas converted the asymmetric noncommutative value of time and frequency into a symmetric commutative value.

The Musical System of Archytas

reply to post by fulllotusqigong

But wait shouldn't it be an OCTAVE if Denyobfuscation is correct? haha.

Not based on anything I've said.

If it is commutative then it has to be G to G as the subharmonic of G -- as the octave. In other words -- as Denyobfuscation has repeated over and over.

Show the quote.

3:2 is C to G and 2:3 is G to C. -- Same C. But NO -- not for the "Doe a Deer" Solfeggio scale. O.K. if you state they are just ratios - but we are talking about a subharmonic as a fraction -- 2/3 is the lower frequency -- it's not just the same interval as an inversion as DenyObfuscation wants to claim.

You obviously don't get my very simple point.

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by fulllotusqigong

 

But wait shouldn't it be an OCTAVE if Denyobfuscation is correct? haha.

Not based on anything I've said.

If it is commutative then it has to be G to G as the subharmonic of G -- as the octave. In other words -- as Denyobfuscation has repeated over and over.

Show the quote.

3:2 is C to G and 2:3 is G to C. -- Same C. But NO -- not for the "Doe a Deer" Solfeggio scale. O.K. if you state they are just ratios - but we are talking about a subharmonic as a fraction -- 2/3 is the lower frequency -- it's not just the same interval as an inversion as DenyObfuscation wants to claim.

You obviously don't get my very simple point.

As already pointed out in the context of HFQPOs (Abramowicz & Klu´zniak, 2003), a subharmonic (at half the fundamental frequency) is a hallmark of non-linear interactions. The presence of subharmonics is a frequency domain manifestation of period doubling.

In most cases, more than one subharmonic is present. This is a result of the strong nonlinearity of oscillations, which generates harmonics of the main frequency (at 2 f , 3 f , etc.), but also odd multiples of the subharmonic (at 3/2 f , 5/2 f , etc.).

So the subharmonic of 3/2 C to G overtone is nonlinear - it's not commutative.
Period doubling and non-linear resonance in the black hole candidate IGR J17091-3624 ?

1. An example is 4/3, which defines the interval we call the fourth, DO-FA. 1/3 is the third subharmonic of a series projected downward from the 1. Since 3 is an odd number, it is the 1 that is transposed by octaves, to 4.

O.K. so here we have the 2/3x F to C doubled to 4/3x as C to F -- but now it's presented as 1/3 as the third subharmonic of ONE -- not the subharmonic of 3/2 as C to G.

The musical distances are identical, and of course the intervals are inverted (3/1 gives SOL, while 1/3, its inverse, gives FA). The two sets of harmonics are complementary, and the multiplication of any harmonic interval by the corresponding subharmonic intervals always gives 1/1 (3/2 x 2/3 = 3/3= 1/1, for example).

All musical intervals, a higher note with a lower note, come about in one of the following three ways: 1. As the relationship between an ascending harmonic and the nearest 1 below as the lower note. Examples are 2/1 (the octave), 3/2 (the fifth), 5/4 (the perfect third). Mathematically, this can be expressed simply as h/1, where h is any positive whole number, and where the denominator is 1 or any of its octaves--2,4,8, etc. 2. As the relationship between a higher note corresponding to 1 or one of its octaves and descending harmonic of this1 above. Mathematically, this can be expressed as 1/h, where a note corresponding to 1 is the higher note, and the lower note corresponds to a harmonic projected downward from this 1. An example is 4/3, which defines the interval we call the fourth, DO-FA. 1/3 is the third subharmonic of a series projected downward from the 1. Since 3 is an odd number, it is the 1 that is transposed by octaves, to 4.

So it's very strange - since the subharmonic as 1/3 of ONE -- is an odd number therefore the ONE has to be transposed to a FOUR as 4/3. haha.

I find this logic hilarious. Once again the nonlinear noncommutative relation of the subharmonic to frequency/wavelength inversion is covered-up

So first we are told they are a commutative inversion -- 3/1 is the harmonic and 1/3 is the subharmonic. That is commutative.

Then we are told they are complementary since 3/1 is SOL the perfect Fifth and 1/3 is FA the Perfect Fourth. O.K. but again if 3/1 is the Perfect Fifth then why is 1/3 the Perfect Fourth? If they are inversions of each other they why are they different geometric phonetic symbol values? Because they are noncommutative.

O.K. but then we are told since 3 is an odd number the 1 has to be quadrupled to 4 in order to get the proper musical note of FA as 4/3.

O.K. if that's true then why didn't it have to happen to the harmonic of 3/1 since 3 is an odd number there as well?

haha. Total inconsistency. Total cover-up. If that was true then the "one" of 3/1 would also have to be quadrupled. Or something right?

and the nearest 1 below as the lower note.

Oops -- their explanation is totally illogical -- so they quadruple the 1/3 of the subharmonic -- into 4/3 and it's not the "nearest one below" -- it's not a doubling of one or an even number.

Again this proves my point that the octave is not a doubling but a squaring based on the "divide and average" harmonic means.

This proves that the octave is directly tied to the noncommutative, nonlinear value of the Perfect Fifth and Perfect Fourth.

Bring it down an octave (multiply by 1/2) so you can keep building your scale. Well … (3/2)*(1/2) = 3/4 is the inverse of 4/3, an interval with a great deal of consonance. When you completely build the scale, the ratio 4/3 turns out to be the fourth interval in the series of eight that make up an octave. Thus the name fourth. The fifth and the fourth are inversions of one another in an octave. They are the only intervals that work out this way. That makes them special, in my mind, but the adjective that was ascibed to them was perfect. Thus the intervals 4/3 and 3/2 are called the perfect fourth and perfect fifth, respectively.

O.K. so now we have the frequency 3/2 which is then lowered an octave so it equals 3/4 frequency as the Perfect Fourth. Notice nothing about subharmonics here! Only 1/2 is the wavelength of the octave as the frequency. So clearly 3/2 is the frequency as the Perfect Fifth.

So in the normal explanation -- using the "divide and average" means for harmonics -- the subharmonic of the Perfect Fifth is completely ignored. Instead the frequency is multplied by the wavelength of the octave. But that implies that the wavelength of 2/3 is the inverse of the Perfect Fifth frequency -- yet we've already been told that 2/3 is the subharmonic of the Perfect Fifth frequency 3/2 -- not the wavelength -- and the 2/3 subharmonic is F to C -- not C to G. haha.

So clearly there is a "bait and switch" cover up between the difference of frequency as Hertz and music intervals as musical notes. So first the explantion starts out on Hertz frequencies as musical notes and then it's stated:

Did I say music was based on notes? That's not true. Real music is based on intervals (the ratio of two notes) with high degrees of consonance (shared harmonics).

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by fulllotusqigong

 

But wait shouldn't it be an OCTAVE if Denyobfuscation is correct? haha.

Not based on anything I've said.

If it is commutative then it has to be G to G as the subharmonic of G -- as the octave. In other words -- as Denyobfuscation has repeated over and over.

Show the quote.

3:2 is C to G and 2:3 is G to C. -- Same C. But NO -- not for the "Doe a Deer" Solfeggio scale. O.K. if you state they are just ratios - but we are talking about a subharmonic as a fraction -- 2/3 is the lower frequency -- it's not just the same interval as an inversion as DenyObfuscation wants to claim.

You obviously don't get my very simple point.

What is the octave of the note G?

G.

What is the frequency of the note G?

3/2

What is the frequency of G 3/2 times an octave 1/2?

3/4

What is the octave lower than G as 3/4?

F.

Why is 3/2 as G times the octave 1/2 = 3/4 as F?

Because 3/4 inverted as 4/3 is the Perfect Fourth music interval.

haha.

That's noncommutative -- the octave lower than G is F.

If octaves are important for reasons that extend beyond just overlap of harmonics, then the doubleoctave should sound more similar than the twelfth.

Why do octaves sound the same? xaq pitkow spring 2000 Preliminary Qualifying Exam for Harvard Biophysics

This argument suggests there should exist a measurable asymmetry in octave perception: a note should sound more like its subharmonics than like its harmonics.

The interpretation is that a note an octave above the interfering tone sounds like the interfering tone itself — which is the real note’s subharmonic octave — and thus serves to interfere; a note an octave below the interfering tone sounds less like the interfering tone — it is distinguished by having more harmonics present — and interferes less. Furthermore, a single frequency can elicit a subharmonic percept if noise is present (Houtgast 1976), which the current hypothesis explains as noise tending to increase the random neural firing background and increasing the probability of superthreshold coincidence detection of subharmonic periodicities.

We want to examine whether notes of a double-octave are perceptually more or less similar than those of a twelfth.

Similarly, it is a central assumption in music theory that all octaves function equivalently in harmony; it is a supposedly innate attribute of a frequency ratio of 2:1, the simplest possible nontrivial relationship. Beyond such numerical mysticism, no satisfactory theoretical reason for all-octave equivalence has ever been given. I directly challenge this assumption. Instead, I propose that octave equivalence, in the strong alloctave sense required by music theory, is only a by-product of tradition and training but does have its solid foundation in a weaker near-octave equivalence, which may be caused by stochastic subharmonic mistakes in the firings of periodicity detectors in the laminae of our brainstem inferior colliculus.

It's funny how discussing and thinking about this all actually has nothing to do with music. You know.. actual music that has sound. What the hell are you people talking about? hahahahaha