Vilen
2011-10-13 07:41:55 UTC
It is known that Rameau invented the notion of fundamental bass from
fact that notes' pitches of major triad correspond ratios 4:5:6 of
natural row. From here he came to conclusion that major triad is
natural and its positive features follows from this naturalness. The
minor triad became stumbling stone for his theory as it posses
approximately equal qualities but correspond ratios 10:12:15.
I often encountered the assertion that 1/10 of tonic pitch don't
correspond any note of music scale (see for example the site
http://jjensen.org/musicTheory.html ).Before I didn't prove this
assertion but: for minor tonic A4=440Hz 1/10 is 44Hz and 43,65Hz is
F1, i.e. 44 corresponds F1 with same accuracy as major third
correspond ratio 5/4. It may be anticipated as in these cases mistake
arises by embodiment of ratios 5:1 or 1:5. Clearly just for major
third the more exactness is desirable. So there is note of minor scale
which corresponds begin of harmonic row 1,2.3,...10,..12,...15 and
this note may be used to enhance the fundamental bass. Then what was
bad for Rameau and his followers? Apparently what notes in begin of
harmonic row and tonic note are different and this fact destroys the
mystic theory. In fact Rameau formulated only the useful for definite
time method of music composition, including chord classification and
chord progressions.
On the one hand contemporary scientific data indicate preferences of
ET music scale and expedience to use music instruments on the its
basis. On the other hand there is phenomenon of missing fundamental
which is apparently connected with harmonic row as sound on its basis
has period corresponding its begin. Therefore I came to supposition
that it is expedient to use instruments with ET scale for melody and
harmonic instruments for bass line. By the way, I ponder over this
subject after acquaintance with several articles about interaction of
fundamental bass contour and melody ( and perception of speech) .
Yuri Vilenkin
fact that notes' pitches of major triad correspond ratios 4:5:6 of
natural row. From here he came to conclusion that major triad is
natural and its positive features follows from this naturalness. The
minor triad became stumbling stone for his theory as it posses
approximately equal qualities but correspond ratios 10:12:15.
I often encountered the assertion that 1/10 of tonic pitch don't
correspond any note of music scale (see for example the site
http://jjensen.org/musicTheory.html ).Before I didn't prove this
assertion but: for minor tonic A4=440Hz 1/10 is 44Hz and 43,65Hz is
F1, i.e. 44 corresponds F1 with same accuracy as major third
correspond ratio 5/4. It may be anticipated as in these cases mistake
arises by embodiment of ratios 5:1 or 1:5. Clearly just for major
third the more exactness is desirable. So there is note of minor scale
which corresponds begin of harmonic row 1,2.3,...10,..12,...15 and
this note may be used to enhance the fundamental bass. Then what was
bad for Rameau and his followers? Apparently what notes in begin of
harmonic row and tonic note are different and this fact destroys the
mystic theory. In fact Rameau formulated only the useful for definite
time method of music composition, including chord classification and
chord progressions.
On the one hand contemporary scientific data indicate preferences of
ET music scale and expedience to use music instruments on the its
basis. On the other hand there is phenomenon of missing fundamental
which is apparently connected with harmonic row as sound on its basis
has period corresponding its begin. Therefore I came to supposition
that it is expedient to use instruments with ET scale for melody and
harmonic instruments for bass line. By the way, I ponder over this
subject after acquaintance with several articles about interaction of
fundamental bass contour and melody ( and perception of speech) .
Yuri Vilenkin