Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
This may be off topic a bit, but its very interesting:
I am aware of our capacity to complete fundamentals.
I just dont understand why bowls should not vibrate them?
Too low? But how about a smaller bowl?
What did the old cat hear?
>So true, eventhough this low tone is not really produced, nevertheless
>we can "hear" it.
>The reason is simple. Our ears can also be tricked-or missinterpret-
>an acoustic effect, like our visible recognition.
>In this case,we hear from a bell all overtones/harmonics,but the
>"Base Tone" is physical missing. Our brain now adds this missing
>first harmonic to the reall appearing overtones and so we hear also
>this low base-overtone of the harmonic spectrum of the bell.
>
>This effect is also used for such devices like Subharmonic Exciters and
>Psychoacoustic-effects devices.Bring in the sound more bass,without
>changing the volume of a signal.
>
>Allan Hoeltje schrieb:
> > Second, someone here (don't remember who and it's been deleted) said
>it
>> is physically impossible for singing bowls to produce the low tone that
>> you hear. Maybe what they really meant was "physically incredible"
>> because, since you _do_ hear the tone, it is indeed possible. I
>> remember some years ago reading about bells and the mathematical
>formula
>> for determining the "perceived" fundamental frequency. The word
>> perceived is important here because bells are not like organ pipes or
>> strings. Organ pipes and strings actually produce their fundamental
>> tone. Bells do not.
>>
>> Bells produce overtones of what we perceive to be the fundamental tone.
>> This is were my memory escapes me but I seem to remember that a bell
>> produces a low frequency vibration which is below human hearing and
>> overtones which we do hear. It is the sums and differences of this
>> inaudible low tone and the interaction with the overtones which produce
>> the perceived fundamental. This is also why the sound of a bell seems
>> to come not from the bell but from the space around it. No mystical
>> mystery, just nature being its wondrous self. :-)
>>
>> Third, I have not procured a real Tibetan singing bowl yet but last
>> night I was feeding my two cats. One of their bowls is a 6" stainless
>> steel bowl. It dawned on me that it came from a set of six bowls of
>> increasing size up to 16" in diameter. Imagine my surprise when I took
>> a wooden potato masher and rubbed the edge of the 16" bowl with just
>the
>> right circular motion. My 18 year old cat is stone deaf but he stared
>> at me mesmerized by the intense low sound emanating from the bowl - it
>> was probably the first thing he has "heard" in years! I am sure
>> stainless steel is no substitute for high quality bronze alloy so I can
>> only imagine what a real 16" singing bowl must be like.
>>
>> Anyway, once again the folks on Looper's Delight have directed my sonic
>> fascination on to a new and exciting tangent. Singing bowls are now on
>> my "must get" list of looper gear. Thanks to all who have contributed!
>>
>> -Allan
--
---> http://Matthias.Grob.org