SAKryukov
Joined 23 November 2020
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 448: | Line 448: | ||
::::::::::::::::::: First of all, the phenomenon of fundamental frequency goes outside the problems of tonal systems, and I'm not sure if you understand it or disagree. I suspect you overestimate its importance. We can afford to ignore this phenomenon for almost all practical purposes. By the way, the case when an overtone suggests a missing degree of a chord is more important. This is why so-called "power chord" works. — [[User:SAKryukov|SA]], ''Monday 2020 December 7, 08:30 UTC'' | ::::::::::::::::::: First of all, the phenomenon of fundamental frequency goes outside the problems of tonal systems, and I'm not sure if you understand it or disagree. I suspect you overestimate its importance. We can afford to ignore this phenomenon for almost all practical purposes. By the way, the case when an overtone suggests a missing degree of a chord is more important. This is why so-called "power chord" works. — [[User:SAKryukov|SA]], ''Monday 2020 December 7, 08:30 UTC'' | ||
:::::::::::::::::::: If an overtone can suggest missing chord degrees, it stands to reason that an undertone can do the same thing, and the virtual fundamental effect proves to be an example of this happening, albeit by way of how our brains process sound- this is because note produced by the virtual fundamental effect is mathematically the common undertone of all the degrees in the chord- or nearly so. Another example is when high-pitched power chords are put through a more extensive version of the same process used to produce extra bass sounds, they generate minor chords. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) | :::::::::::::::::::: If an overtone can suggest missing chord degrees, it stands to reason that an undertone can do the same thing, and the virtual fundamental effect proves to be an example of this happening, albeit by way of how our brains process sound- this is firstly because the note produced by the virtual fundamental effect is mathematically the common undertone of all the degrees in the chord- or nearly so- and secondly because you don't have overtones or undertones without a fundamental that mathematically holds them together. Another example is when high-pitched power chords are put through a more extensive version of the same process used to produce extra bass sounds, they generate minor chords. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 19:36, 7 December 2020 (UTC) | ||
::::::::::::::::: Now, about the problem, how "exactly to program complicated tonal values". First, the problems are solved using the "divide and conquer" method and "separation of concerns". In particular, tone values can be abstracted from the technical means of sound production. Another thing is: it's good to "think by hands". (In our case, "hands" is the generalization of several things: hands, fingers, hearing, etc.) When you don't understand how to solve the problem, of, course, think about understanding but also start working with incomplete understanding and uncertainties. As you try, you can get a better feeling of the problem, will be able to get rid of some illusionary ideas and get new ones... Moreover, in some analogous ways, I many times recommended people to... avoid reading literature. Here is what I mean: it's good to try to solve a problem from scratch by yourself. Why? First, you won't miss a pretty rare chance of inventing something really new. More realistically, when you read, you don't quite understand reading at first, because the illusionary understanding is quite common, besides, you can be affected by some well-established ideas and reduce your chances for a fresh look. And when you tried hard and broke some of your teeth at the problem, you can use what you learned, and then you will ready with much better understanding. — [[User:SAKryukov|SA]], ''Monday 2020 December 7, 04:01 UTC'' | ::::::::::::::::: Now, about the problem, how "exactly to program complicated tonal values". First, the problems are solved using the "divide and conquer" method and "separation of concerns". In particular, tone values can be abstracted from the technical means of sound production. Another thing is: it's good to "think by hands". (In our case, "hands" is the generalization of several things: hands, fingers, hearing, etc.) When you don't understand how to solve the problem, of, course, think about understanding but also start working with incomplete understanding and uncertainties. As you try, you can get a better feeling of the problem, will be able to get rid of some illusionary ideas and get new ones... Moreover, in some analogous ways, I many times recommended people to... avoid reading literature. Here is what I mean: it's good to try to solve a problem from scratch by yourself. Why? First, you won't miss a pretty rare chance of inventing something really new. More realistically, when you read, you don't quite understand reading at first, because the illusionary understanding is quite common, besides, you can be affected by some well-established ideas and reduce your chances for a fresh look. And when you tried hard and broke some of your teeth at the problem, you can use what you learned, and then you will ready with much better understanding. — [[User:SAKryukov|SA]], ''Monday 2020 December 7, 04:01 UTC'' | ||