Re: Noises through pickups (rather gongs...)

[Bret <echoplex@yahoo.com>]

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/