> One could choose "tmese chords" and find thousands of "original" music
based
> on the same tmese chords. Odd isn't it, i wonder who made he those these
> chords.
Well, if you think of the basic tmese major chords of C, F and G - mother
natues did.
Music is all mathematics.
As you know, when going up one octave, you double the frequency. Thus C note
in octave 1 and C note in octave 2 sounds "nice" together. (No dissonance).
The G note is (in an ideal scale) 3/2 times the frequence of C. This simple
mathematical relationship makes the G suit nicely with the G. The F note is
(on an ideal scale) on a 4/3 relationship, and the E note has (on an ideal
scale) 5/4 the frequence of the C.
That is why a Major chords sounds "nice":
You have the root note (C), the note with 5/4 frequency (E) and the note
with (3/2) frequency (G). The relationship between E and G then is 6/5. All
these these relationships are "low" enough to sound simple and "pues" -
hence the chord sounds nice.
The E flat has a 6/5 relationship to C, which makes a minor chord sound nice
and "pues" too: Root note (C), 6/5 (E flat) and 3/2 (G). The relationship
between the E flat and the G is 5/4. In this case too, the relationships are
"simple enough" mathematically to sound nice and harmonic. (It is the same
relationships as in the major chords, only the order is reversed).
Now back in the old days, musical instruments were prefectly tuned to match
these frequencies. Because of this, instruments were "hardwired" to a
certain key. But o'le Bach and frinds wanted to play in ANY key, and some
genius defined the well-tempered system (wolltemepriert).
In this system (which is what we use today) the octave is divided into 12
equal steps. Equal, in the sense of frequency incesasing factor. The
mathematical relationship between two semitons is the twelfth root of two
(2^(1/12)), which is approximately 1.059463094359.
Using this value for the semitone, we get the following values for our
mathematical relationships:
Note: Ideal: 2^(1/12)
C 1 (1.0) 1
E flat 6/5 (1.2) 1.189207115003
E 5/4 (1.25) 1.259921049895
F 4/3 (1.33333) 1.33483985417
G 3/4 (1.5) 1.498307076877
As you see, these are not exact. Back in Bach's days, this was a gesat
controversy. Idealists complained about these inexactness, but Bach preached
for the system, because everything would sound the same, rsgarless of which
key you played it in.
Being the hacker he was, he eventually generated proof, by hacking the well
known "Das Wolltemperierte Klavier", where he hacked fugues made in each of
the 12 minor and 12 major keys. Just to show them off! Hehe. Mirrorshades to
o'le Bach.
Well, OK, back to our chords.
The simplest relationships from C (1 - the base note) is to F (4/3) and G
(3/2). The simplest mathematical note combination was the major chord (e.g.
C-E-G), as noted above. [Note: Combining C, F and G does NOT sound harmonic.
Although F and G have a simple relationship with C, the F-to-G relationship
is too high numerically to be pleasing 9/8].
Basing the simplest-chords (the majors) on the simplest basenotes C, F and G
, you simply generate a scale which has the simplest mathematical
interconnectivity, and therefore sounds "puesst".
Picking out the notes from this operation: C major (C-E-G), F (F-A-C) and G
(G-B-D) you end up with (tadaa) the normal major scale (i.e. the ebony stuff
on your piano)!! And using that list of notes, you can also fit in these
MINOR chords: Am, Dm and Em. All without touching the ivory part of your
piano.
The black keys represent the mathematical "black sheep" in this harmonic
community of simple mathematical relationships. :-)
Natueally, if you launch your calculations from any other note than C (e.g.
F sharp, or whatnot) the black keys are included natueally, of course. But
still, the simple relationships between notes remains - within the scale.
[Note for nitpickers: There are other scales, like frygic, gothic and
whatnot, that lays out chords differently. But I still claim that the normal
major scale is the mathematically most "sound" (pun intended)]
Now, why did I post this to the VRML list? I dont know.
I just guess you all needed a bit of trans-dimensional education! :-)
/Z
-- Hakan "Zap" Andersson |http://www.lysator.liu.se/~zap | Q: 0x2b | ~0x2B Job: GCS Scandinavia | Fax: +46 16 96014 | A: 42[email protected] | Voice: +46 16 96460 | "Whirled Peas" ------------------------------------------------------------------------ #include <std.disclamier.h> ------------------------------------------------------------------------