Klarinet Archive - Posting 000438.txt from 2000/08

From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: Re: [kl] Unloading.....
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 11:57:48 -0400

On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 09:11:25 -0400, bhausmann1@-----.com said:

> At 09:53 AM 8/16/2000 +0100, Tony Pay wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 15 Aug 2000 22:17:02 -0400, bhausmann1@-----.com said:
> >
> > > Obviously synthesized sound is, I believe, so obvious because of
> > > the lack of richness of overtones, and, I suspect, the
> > > "in-tuneness" of those overtones (that and inaccuracy of attack).
> >
> > The 'buzzy' sound of a tuning machine is very rich in in-tune
> > overtones.
> >
> I probably should have been more clear. I meant, as separate
> elements, the lack of overtones and the fact that those that are there
> are perfectly in tune, being mathematically generated.

Ah. I misunderstood you. You meant that synthesised sounds seem
unnatural to us, in part because the overtones are perfectly in tune.

But -- this has come up here a few times -- *all* driven oscillations,
even 'natural' ones like wind instruments and organs, have perfectly in
tune overtones, because the oscillations that constitute them are
perfectly periodic. This is a mathematical fact for which I posted a
sort of intuitive justification last year:

http://www.sneezy.org/Databases/Logs/1999/01/000080.txt

Pianos don't, of course, which is what this discussion has been about.

But actually, pianos are rather well synthesised, compared with other
instruments.

You're right about the 'attack' question, of course.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE GMN family artist: www.gmn.com
tel/fax 01865 553339

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org