 The Fingering Forum
|
Author: TorusTubarius
Date: 2003-10-19 15:46
Technically, if you're not playing in tune, you're not playing the right note.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Theboy_2
Date: 2003-10-19 17:24
How would that be? then you'd be saying there is 100 notes between each semitone?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ~Heather ~
Date: 2003-10-19 20:05
i disagree, you can be playing a G very sharp, but it's still a G, unless you are sooo sharp and it turns into an A then it's another note. But it's still the right note, just not in tune.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ~Heather ~
Date: 2003-10-19 20:06
but then again you know alot more than me on music theory, so please explain your theory please! :D
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: d-oboe
Date: 2003-10-20 00:22
I suppose it depends on what you consider the "right" note. Here, A440 is the "right" note, but in malaysia (or wherever) A442 is the "right" note. I think it can all be relative: Once, and if, the general pitch is decided upon, and one doesn't play in accordance with it, then they would be playing an incorrect note, in my opinion.
d-oboe
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Derek
Date: 2003-10-20 02:27
heh, well if we're speaking technically then I have to agree with Torus. TECHNICALLY speaking, a note is defined as an exact pitch. It doesnt matter if its based on A=440 or A=442, every note has a single frequency associated with it. This being said, there's got to be a lot of us out there playing nothing but wrong notes. I suggest ending this theory before it starts to catch on, could get nasty.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TorusTubarius
Date: 2003-10-20 04:55
Well I'm thinking the "right" note is whatever the exact pitch should be relative to the overall pitch center established by the group, whether it be A440, A442, etc. (though of course for me A440 is preferable.)
What I'm saying is that the right note is defined by the intervals from every other note for any given pitch center. There is only one frequency that is the right distance away from A440 for example to be called a G just below it, 391.9954 Hz, if you're using equal temperament.
<b>Since any change in frequency is a change in pitch, and a note is an exact pitch defined by its distance from every other note, then unless you are playing the correct frequency corresponding to that pitch, you aren't playing the right note.</b>
Thus if you're playing a "G" that's "just a little sharp," it's technically not the right note because its frequency is higher than the required frequency as defined by the notes around it, such as A440 (or A442 or whatever).
Additionally, if you're playing an instrument that does not have fixed pitches like the piano, then the argument could be made that the "right" note is the frequency which is in sync with more perfect, Pythagorean proportions. Thus the right note which we call a G in one instance is not the right note G in another instance, but in both cases there is a specific interval which must be achieved in order to be playing the right note.
Also using this logic, there would be a lot more than just 100 notes between each standard, equally-tempered note. Technically there would be an infinite number of notes between each, since the rate of increase in frequency with respect to pitch is a continuous function that can be divided up however you wish.
Just something for you to ponder next time you hear someone playing out of tune.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gnomon
Date: 2003-10-20 07:18
By that definition, Torus, you'd never be playing the right note, because nobody can play within 0.0000% of the correct frequency. You have to have a tolerance around the note. Anything within this tolerance is the right note. A useful figure is 5 cents (5% of a semitone) as very few people can hear a pitch difference smaller than this.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ~Heather ~
Date: 2003-10-20 20:47
That is very interesting Torus. But I also agree with Gnomon.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: d-oboe
Date: 2003-10-20 22:01
so then I guess music is just a bunch of wrong notes isn't it? hehe...
d-oboe
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Andrea
Date: 2003-10-20 22:05
Excuse me for my terrible English.
I think +/- 5% is a good range for an acustic instrument.
For me a +/- 15% can be accepted like an expression of the player if he want to make it.
More than 15% is too much (a violin player can find a 1/4 of ton in his part)
But if you are playng without other instruments you don't have this kind of problems, your music will sounds ok if proportions between notes is the right one.
bye
Andrea
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Musical Mind
Date: 2003-10-21 00:24
It already gives me a headache, Torus. I would ONLY agree with you if you mean PERFECT music. And yes, we humans can't be absolutely perfect. Anyway, do professional musicians care about this?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TorusTubarius
Date: 2003-10-21 01:14
Well, it all depends on what you call the note. You could say that anything within five cents is "the note", but that's just an arbitrary range we've selected for convenience sake, at the cost of accuracy.
Really when you get right down to it, Derek is absolutely right in that this turns into a really nasty situation. If you think about it, playing the note to within 0.0001 Hz is still an arbitrary range. When you sit down and do the math, then you discover that when A is at a defined frequency such as 440, A is in fact the only note that you can possibly play at the right frequency if you're going to be playing an equally-tempered scale.
We know we can play any A because an A is a whole-number amount of Hertz, i.e. 440, 880, 1760, etc... If you consider frequency with respect to pitch you can express frequency as a function of pitch in an equally-tempered scale with the equation y=2^x. The problem arises when you take two A's, y=440Hz and y=880Hz, and try to divide the function between them up into twelve different parts along the x-axis (pitch). I won't do all the math here (unless you want to see it), but what happens is that the y value (frequency) ends up being an irrational number for every pitch in between y=440Hz and y=880Hz.
This means that the actual number of Hertz for every note in between A=440Hz and A=880Hz has an unending number of decimals places, and thus can never really be defined. If you can't define exactly how many Hertz corresponds to the next note, then you can never truly play the correct note. Sucks, huh?
So really it's not just that we'd never be playing the right note because we as humans cannot play to within 0.0001Hz of the correct frequency; it's not possible to play any perfect notes period, with the exception of A's. That's the price we pay for equal temperament.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gnomon
Date: 2003-10-21 07:00
But Torus, it's not even possible to play A exactly in tune. You need to use a frequency meter and no meter measures completely accurately.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TorusTubarius
Date: 2003-10-21 11:32
That's true enough that no meter will measure it accurately enough. But A's are at least definable, and so the possibility that one might actually play a perfect A exists, even if you couldn't tell you were through any sort of measurement. Indeed since for our playing no pitch is ever perfectly stable, you might find yourself going back and forth over the perfect A. This is even more true if they playing is vibrating the notes deliberatey. In that where you pass over it, you are in fact playing a perfect A, if only for a moment.
For every other pitch, you'll never stumble across the right note neither in passing nor by accident because those pitches aren't even definable. It's sort of difficult for me to even fathom, but that is a mathematically valid statement, despite how counterintuitive it seems on the surface.
I do see though exactly where you're coming from. All these musings on math and pitch really are beside the point from the perspective of the performer. I'm arguing the side of mathematical purity as opposed to practicality because it's just neat to consider what is actually happening when we make music.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ~Heather ~
Date: 2003-10-21 20:52
that is really interesting, thanks for sharing Torus!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
