The question is basically whether overtones are objective or just one interpretation of a wave. Given that there are multiple ways to decompose a given waveform, why is one decomposition favored as a way of understanding the overtones? If the decomposition corresponds to how the cochlea physically works, or how the brain processes, or a combination of both, this may help explain it. Obviously overtones have a functional relationship to filters, and since filters are sine-wave-based, this leads to the hypothesis that the ear (and/or brain) shares some characteristics with those filters. The ear doesn't have to "know" anything; it may physically function in a way as to break the spectrum into sine components. The cochlea is a complex thing. On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 3:42 PM, laryn91 <caymus91@mac.com> wrote: > In your example, what are the "pitch parts" you're separating when > analyzing the two > oboes? SINE waves - right? Not square or some other arbitrary function. > > Since I can only read the fragmented summary in the referenced paper, so > maybe I'm > understanding it totally incorrectly. But it may not be relevant since the > harmonic phase > relations don't appear to be held constant. In other words yes, you can get > a sine if you > add two signals of different shape. Which is not what the poster asked. > > I believe the poster was wondering if any function can be transformed from > a non-circular > plane - like a square or rectangular one. Maybe it's just my limited > knowledge, but I > haven't heard of such a thing. I can try to *approximate" a sine from a > square plane... > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>, > "Doug" <dougc356@...> wrote: > > > > Pretty sure my original post on this subject is weak (or worse), but > > I think this article might help. One should be able to construct an > > arbitrary periodic function using a non-trigonmetric basis. In other > > words, you *can* "create a sine by adding signals." > > > > http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/31/23557/01085543.pdf? > > arnumber=1085543 > > > > Further, seems to me the ear can be trained to listen for non-sine > > basis functions (aka "overtones"). Take for example, the sound of > > two or more oboes. Pretty sure one could separate the parts by > > pitch, although the parts aren't themselves pure sines. Muting one > > of the oboe parts would be filtering that "frequency", wouldn't it? > > > > I guess I am agreeing with the original poster, and the answer as to > > why we analyse signals in terms of trigonometric basis functions is > > just mathematical (and design?) convenience. > > > > Doug > > > > > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>, > "laryn91" <caymus91@> wrote: > > > > > > I don't believe you can create a sine by adding signals with > > overtones. You can transfer the > > > energy around in the spectrum with specific phase cancellations. > > But every time you > > > cancel an overtone you create or reinforce another. > > > > > > In nature, sine functions are prevalent everywhere. On the other > > hand, square waves are > > > non-existent and must always be synthesized. It would very > > atypical for nature to miss > > > something as mathematically elegant as sines in favor of something > > more convoluted. > > > > > > > > > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com <Doepfer_a100%40yahoogroups.com>, > "Monroe Eskew" > > <monroe.eskew@> wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm curious about harmonics. I've been looking for an > > explanation of why > > > > different waveforms have different overtones. One explanation > > offered is in > > > > terms of Fourier series. Every periodic function can be > > expressed as an > > > > infinite sum of sine waves of increasing frequency and > > decreasing amplitude. > > > > If we look at the Fourier series for a given curve (like a > > sawtooth or > > > > square wave), then we can find the overtones by looking at the > > terms in the > > > > sum. > > > > > > > > Now I like mathematics, but I'm not satisfied by this > > explanation. We can > > > > express a function as a Fourier series, but we can also express > > it in other > > > > ways. Perhaps a sine wave can be expressed as an infinite > > series of square > > > > waves. Then a sine wave should have a lot of overtones. > > > > > > > > Here's my guess-- Qualitatively, different waveforms have > > different sounds, > > > > and this does not necessarily need to be interpreted as having > > overtones. > > > > However FILTERS are what truly reveal overtones. But the > > function of a > > > > filter is determined by the fact that its resonant frequency is > > always a > > > > sine wave. If we had square wave resonance, then we'd have > > totally > > > > different filters, with the square wave being the least affected > > by the > > > > filter. > > > > > > > > Is that more or less correct? > > > > > > > > Also, does the Fourier expression make the most sense to the > > human ear? > > > > (i.e. Does the human ear have something akin to sine wave > > resonance?) > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Monroe > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Message
Re: [Doepfer_a100] Re: hard science question
2008-07-03 by Monroe Eskew
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.