Added beginning of microtonal draft
Getty Ritter
9 years ago
| 1 | \meta{("microtonal-music" | |
| 2 | "microtonal music" | |
| 3 | ("music"))} | |
| 4 | ||
| 5 | There was a recent, very good blog post by | |
| 6 | \link{https://eev.ee/|Eevee} about | |
| 7 | \link{https://eev.ee/blog/2016/09/15/music-theory-for-nerds/|Music Theory For Nerds}, | |
| 8 | which is a very good introduction. | |
| 9 | That blog post inspired me to write about a | |
| 10 | particular niche interest of mine, which is the slightly dauntingly-named | |
| 11 | field of \em{microtonal music}. I'll rehash the important details from that | |
| 12 | post here, but one way or another, you should do yourself a favor and read | |
| 13 | that post, too. | |
| 14 | ||
| 15 | Let's start by dipping way down into very basic sounds! | |
| 16 | ||
| 17 | \h1{Consonance and Dissonance} | |
| 18 | ||
| 19 | It helps us to think of sounds as abstract \em{waves}, which correspond to the | |
| 20 | vibrations of air or other ambient material that create or carry sound. For | |
| 21 | our purposes, we can think in terms of simple repeating waves like | |
| 22 | \em{sine waves}, which sound like this: | |
| 23 | ||
| 24 | [insert sound here] | |
| 25 | ||
| 26 | We can visualize this sound like this: | |
| 27 | ||
| 28 | [insert image here] | |
| 29 | ||
| 30 | When we talk about the \em{frequency} of this sound, we're talking about how | |
| 31 | often those peaks show up. Frequency is measured in hertz (abbreviated as Hz), | |
| 32 | which just means "number per second".\ref{hertz} | |
| 33 | \sidenote{It's also my least favorite kind of donut.} | |
| 34 | Two sounds that have the same number of peaks per second are perceived as | |
| 35 | "the same" by human beings. | |
| 36 | ||
| 37 | Additionally, sounds whose frequencies are simple ratios are perceived as | |
| 38 | somehow "pleasing", and the less simple the ratio is, the less pleasant the | |
| 39 | sound. For example, a \tt{2:1} ratio of sounds is still pleasant: | |
| 40 | ||
| 41 | [insert sound here] | |
| 42 | ||
| 43 | However, a ratio of [INSERT RATIO HERE] sounds awkward and harsh: | |
| 44 | ||
| 45 | [insert sound here] | |
| 46 | ||
| 47 | In music and music theory, sounds which sound pleasant together are | |
| 48 | \em{consonant} and sounds which sound unpleasant together are called | |
| 49 | \em{dissonant}. These two terms aren't separated by a strict line: | |
| 50 | some pairs of sounds are clearly consonant (such as the \tt{2:1} ratio) | |
| 51 | and some are clearly dissonant, but there is no well-defined cutoff | |
| 52 | point where sounds stop being consonant and start being dissonant. It's best | |
| 53 | to think of them as relative terms: a pair of sounds can be | |
| 54 | \em{more consonant} or \em{more dissonant} than another.\ref{condis} | |
| 55 | \sidenote{It's also important to note that the terms \em{consonant} and | |
| 56 | \em{dissonant} are old, but have been informally and sometimes | |
| 57 | contradictorily defined for centuries: some people define them in terms of | |
| 58 | frequencies, some in terms of perception, some in terms of both. Defining | |
| 59 | them as \em{pleasant} and \em{unpleasant} is pretty reductive, but | |
| 60 | not completely wrong.} | |
| 61 | ||
| 62 | So, when we |