Missing Fundamental

[waynel]

I am sorry I can't hear the videos sent now...
I have no headphones

Yes... and I say it again...
Play that C8 at 65 dB and the harmonics will reach...
8000 ? At what loudness level, please ?
10000? At what loudness...?
12000? At what level...?
You can go and say I played C8 and harmonics reached 100000000 Hz...so what ?
As long as your hearing allows you to distinguish the instruments involved, you are mostly done.

And what of a cymbal crash? Does it matter?
Feel free to disconnect your tweeters

 

[F1308]

And what of a cymbal crash? Does it matter?

Only if I hear them.

 

[F1308]

Only if I hear them.

Did Vivaldi use them most ?

 

[F1308]

And what of a cymbal crash? Does it matter?
Feel free to disconnect your tweeters

Still hearing till 15200 as per my hearing tests.
And since I paid for them...

But, look:
Three-way floorstanding loudspeaker. Drive-units: 1.06" × 1.31" High-Velocity Folded Ribbon (HVFR) tweeter, two 5.25" cone midrange units, three 5" × 9" woofers powered by an internal amplifier, four 7" × 10" planar passive radiators. Frequency range: 13Hz–35kHz. Nominal impedance: "compatible with 8 ohms." Sensitivity: 92dB/W/m. Recommended amplifier power: 20–650W. Built-in subwoofer amplifier: 1600W, class-D.

35000 !!!!
So I am selling the 15200/35000 range.
Are you interested...?
Be advised that as time passes by, I will be very well selling the 12000/15200 range.
At a discount if you get the 15200/35000 pack now.

 

[dasdoing]

You'll need some speakers to produce the waves.

You'll "feel" the depth.

@LTig

obvious. but I actualy asked what I said....do they sound lower then the others to you?

because

Detail at 53 seconds or so, the low note

View attachment 102536

on a linear scale the 49Hz-ish is allready much louder, now pass it through a equal-loudness contour filter to see what realy is loud there. it is not 16Hz. and that is what I "hear"...the overtones. (*)
what I am saying is that my brain doesn't magicly produce the quite fundamental louder like it was/is claimed

(*) obviously I can "concentrate hear" the deep tones. I am talking about how the overall tone sounds

 

[JIW]

For sure there is a correlation...
Depending very much on the type of instrument the music is played on, and the way it is make to sound (nature of the stroke; place struck; density, rigidity, elasticity; speed of the attack....temperature).
A rod which is free at both ends is reported to produce harmonics 1-2.7576-5.4041-13.3444.
Then comes pipes, open or closed, strings, horns, flutes, trumpets, bassoons....
Every single instrument is unique, even more as time passes by...

The question at hand was whether the piano produces sound at the fundamental frequencies and lower order harmonics of the tones in the lowest octave. This was raised by @LeftCoastTim's assertion that for the lowest octave the lowest frequency at which the piano produces sound is the 4th harmonic, i.e. 4 times the fundamental frequency, two octaves higher. For the lowest note on the Bösendorfer, C0 at 16.35 Hz for A440 tuning, that would be C2 at 65.41 Hz for A440 tuning and for the lowest note on a typical 88-key piano, A0 at 27.50 Hz for A440 tuning, that would be A2 at 110 Hz for A440 tuning.

The correlation I point out suggests (to me), that the piano producer sounds of lower frequencies. Whether those are at a high enough level to be audible as such (presuming such tones can indeed be heard) or can at least be sensed in another way is another question. Here the phenomenon of the missing fundamental may well play a role.

Also, compare the Bösendorfer to the organ posted and analysed earlier.

While the fundamental frequencies of the lowest tones of the organ are clearly visible, for the Bösendorfer, below 50 Hz, there seems to much less level produced and the frequencies produced seem much less distinct to the tone produced. One can maybe still trace the second harmonic from about 50 Hz down to about 30 Hz but below that, where the fundamental frequencies are, seems more like a wash.

 

[F1308]

The question at hand was whether the piano produces sound at the fundamental frequencies and lower order harmonics of the tones in the lowest octave. This was raised by @LeftCoastTim's assertion that for the lowest octave the lowest frequency at which the piano produces sound is the 4th harmonic, i.e. 4 times the fundamental frequency, two octaves higher. For the lowest note on the Bösendorfer, C0 at 16.35 Hz for A440 tuning, that would be C2 at 65.41 Hz for A440 tuning and for the lowest note on a typical 88-key piano, A0 at 27.50 Hz for A440 tuning, that would be A2 at 110 Hz for A440 tuning.

The correlation I point out suggests (to me), that the piano producer sounds of lower frequencies. Whether those are at a high enough level to be audible as such (presuming such tones can indeed be heard) or can at least be sensed in another way is another question. Here the phenomenon of the missing fundamental may well play a role.

Also, compare the Bösendorfer to the organ posted and analysed earlier.
View attachment 102622
View attachment 102623

While the fundamental frequencies of the lowest tones of the organ are clearly visible, for the Bösendorfer, below 50 Hz, there seems to much less level produced and the frequencies produced seem much less distinct to the tone produced. One can maybe still trace the second harmonic from about 50 Hz down to about 30 Hz but below that, where the fundamental frequencies are, seems more like a wash.

I can't hear it, and have a hard time believing that someone can.
do those 4 last pedals realy sound deeper then the above for someone?

It is so clear and beautiful in my Parrot Zik I cannot tell...
I had to raise the volume a bit more than my ordinary settings, but I easily heard the lowest pedal.
The rattling beats can even be counted...
And I am not talking of tempo, clearly not, but the frequency.
I paid a special interest in the tone played alone at 0:51...very nice indeed.

My Asus 5z also plays that tone easily through the onboard speaker.

As does any 5$ cheap earphone I managed to find around my home, mostly coming with every phone bought along the time, but one that came as a present with a cocoa can...Anyway it was 100% cocoa and that was truly the point: enjoying breakfast.

Hey, playing it through my Mythos ST for further testing I have discovered that placing the cup of milk up to one meter away from any of them there is no need for me to use a spoon to mix the cocoa powder in the milk !!!!

I could even play it in a loop and see what temperature the vibrations would make the milk to achieve, but I have no time now...

 

[Helicopter]

That‘s you and me. These are the freaks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_pitch

Unless you are talking about just one note in isolation with no harmonics or other notes as clues. Then yeah, they will tell you the frequency but they have no context to say the note and the tuning frequency for sure.

I have met them and they are very real.

Someone in my high school choir could do this. He wasn't an especially great singer either. The choir director would always have him start us off with a note for the warmup.

 

[F1308]

Someone in my high school choir could do this. He wasn't an especially great singer either. The choir director would always have him start us off with a note for the warmup.

Doing what?
Telling A4 when tuned to 440 or telling A4 when supposedly tuned to 392 to discover it was G4 at 440 ?

 

[andreasmaaan]

The prevalence of absolute pitch is actually quite high for (a) individuals whose musical training began at a very early age and (b) native speakers of tone languages (languages in which the pitch of a sound conveys meaning).

See for example this study, where the prevalence of absolute pitch was around 60% among native Mandarin speakers who commenced musical training at age 4-5 years and who went on to study music as adults (compared to around 15% among non-native speakers of a tone language with otherwise identical backgrounds).

The prevalence of absolute pitch among populations of non-tone language speakers at large is obviously far lower than this, but not as rare as is sometimes presumed, according to this study, for example.

A friend with absolute pitch gave me an interesting analogy: to her, hearing a song sung in the "wrong" key is like seeing grass that is bright blue, i.e. the wrongness of the pitch is obvious and absolutely immediate to her. And, just as we could see blue grass and say instantly and without conscious effort that it was blue, she can instantly and without conscious effort say in which "wrong" key a song is being sung.

 

[F1308]

The prevalence of absolute pitch is actually quite high for (a) individuals whose musical training began at a very early age and (b) native speakers of tone languages (languages in which the pitch of a sound conveys meaning).

See for example this study, where the prevalence of absolute pitch was around 60% among native Mandarin speakers who commenced musical training at age 4-5 years and who went on to study music as adults (compared to around 15% among non-native speakers of a tone language with otherwise identical backgrounds).

View attachment 102637

The prevalence of absolute pitch among populations of non-tone language speakers at large is obviously far lower than this, but not as rare as is sometimes presumed, according to this study, for example.

A friend with absolute pitch gave me an interesting analogy: to her, hearing a song sung in the "wrong" key is like seeing grass that is bright blue, i.e. the wrongness of the pitch is obvious and absolutely immediate to her. And, just as we could see blue grass and say instantly and without conscious effort that it was blue, she can instantly and without conscious effort say in which "wrong" key a song is being sung.

I know it does exit.
It is highly documented.
The point is how that is explained.
And what are we trying to identify.
When I was a child I could tell who was driving next to our home by the sound of their cars.
What does it mean ?
That I said it was a car making 345 Hz ?
A truck ringing 220 ?
No. I simply said: Peter is coming.
Or John is leaving.
Or daddy is here.
Nobody will be able to say G4 instead of A4, as the tuning pitch is changed, as said before.
It is a matter of understanding what we want to explain.
I understand you could become very well trained, thoroughly, on a single instrument, but that is like flying a jet: as of 2019, only 19 russian fighter pilots were allowed to land on russian aircraft carriers. 19. Just 19.
As soon as a little bit of anything changes, more practice is required.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Nobody will be able to say G4 instead of A4, as the tuning pitch is changed, as said before.
It is a matter of understanding what we want to explain.

I'm not sure I understand the argument here. If society as a whole decided that everything we had previously called "blue" was now going to be called "red" and vice-versa, this would not result in any change in the prevalence of colour blindness (although different words would now be used to describe the same colours).

 

[LTig]

@LTig

obvious. but I actualy asked what I said....do they sound lower then the others to you?

I don't hear the 16 Hz tone as a tone with pitch, just a kind of rythmic rattling (HD800 with bass EQ +11 dB @ 20 Hz).

 

[dasdoing]

we all have absolute pitch. it is just not trained. if we hear a song a thousand times we can say when it is in the wrong pitch.
with that beeing said, it seams that an adult can't train it to the point of identify notes.

 

[andreasmaaan]

if we hear a song a thousand times we can say when it is in the wrong pitch.

I very much doubt this is true for more than a subset of the population. Do you have any source for it?

 

[F1308]

I'm not sure I understand the argument here. If society as a whole decided that everything we had previously called "blue" was now going to be called "red" and vice-versa, this would not result in any change in the prevalence of colour blindness (although different words would now be used to describe the same colours).

Look, please:
I train you to identify a 440 Hz tone.
When I play it, you are to say: it is A4.
Good boy.
Now I play 392 and tell you is G4.
Very well.
Now we have to manage the tuning for a gig and have to match other instruments and tune for 392.
If I play A4, 392, you will have to say it is G4, as before, but it is not.
In this case, A4 and G4 match perfectly, but if we go to A0 you will hear that frequency for the very first time in your life.

 

[dasdoing]

I very much doubt this is true for more than a subset of the population. Do you have any source for it?

I don't, but your study proofs it is trained, no?

 

[F1308]

we all have absolute pitch. it is just not trained. if we hear a song a thousand times we can say when it is in the wrong pitch.
with that beeing said, it seams that an adult can't train it to the point of identify notes.

Correct !!!!
Great !!!!
You can have a nice time proving it with Bruce Springsteen STOLEN CAR.
You will find in YouTube easily.
The first version is ONE OCTAVE BELOW what he played years later.
To me, the first, an octave down, is the real thing since I understand the song as a mourning for his sung broken marriage.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Look, please:
I train you to identify a 440 Hz tone.
When I play it, you are to say: it is A4.
Good boy.
Now I play 392 and tell you is G4.
Very well.
Now we have to manage the tuning for a gig and have to match other instruments and tune for 392.
If I play A4, 392, you will have to say it is G4, as before, but it is not.

Yes, communication will be difficult without a common labelling system.

But regardless what labelling system an individual happens to be working within, it will nevertheless be possible to determine whether or not that individual has absolute pitch, and their having absolute pitch (or not) will not be dependent on the labelling system within which they happen to be working.

 

[F1308]

Yes, communication will be difficult without a common labelling system.

But regardless what labelling system an individual happens to be working within, it will nevertheless be possible to determine whether or not that individual has absolute pitch, and their having absolute pitch (or not) will not be dependent on the labelling system within which they happen to be working.

But you are asked to identify A0@392 and that frequency did NOT exist on the piano @440.

You trained down to 27.5. A0@440.
Now A0@392 is 24.50.