Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
I too question the assertion that the singing bowls don't generate the low fundamental that is heard. Based on the recent posts on these bowls I went to the Tibet shop in Boulder and tried many of the bowls. I believe they do radiate the low fundmental that we hear. I felt the low tone in my hands as well. I am confident that an oscilloscope, spectrum analyzer, or frequency counter would support that. I bought a small bowl, and will try to measure the fundamental. bret --- Matthias Grob <matthias@grob.org> wrote: > 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 > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/