| ||||||||||||||||||||
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
29 of 33 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
nevertheless of some interest, but look elsewhere first,
By A Customer
This review is from: The Science of Musical Sound (Paperback)
1) This book is replete with errors. Two examples:p.68: "A minor third has a frequency ratio 6/5, so the fifth harmonic of E should have the same frequency as the sixth harmonic of C (a G)." No, the fifth harmonic of E is G#, so presumably the author means "the fifth harmonic of Eb". But a 6:5 minor third is really only one of many possible minor third tunings. The Pythagorean minor third, for example, is 32:27, and the 32nd harmonic of this C is the 27th harmonic of this Eb. (To ignore the Pythagorean scale is to ignore two thousand years of music history; here it is given very short shrift.) The point this chapter misses in regard to just intervals is that beating is a matter of degree. We have only to venture up one harmonic along the 6/5 Eb's series: its sixth harmonic (Bb, 36:5) clashes with the 7th harmonic of C (7:1). They are 49 cents (a quarter tone) apart and well within the "critical band". p.100: "In his fine piece 'Stria' (1977), John Chowning used partial spacings and pseudo-octaves in the ratio of the Golden Mean (approximately .618)." Sorry, the Golden Mean is not a ratio; the Golden Mean means moderation. Presumably the author intends "the Golden Section". This is small error, but nevertheless inexcusable. The book ought to have been proofread and edited. For an introductory text I recommend Sir James Jeans's "The Science and Music". For an historical text I recommend Helmholtz's "On the Sensations of Tone". For an accurate text explaining current thought I recommend Juan Roeder's "The Physics and Psychophysics of Music".
11 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
This book serves as a great learning tool!!!,
By A Customer
This review is from: The Science of Musical Sound (Paperback)
Problems in the development of certain theories, like Critical Bandwidth. The minor third by his research proves to be dissonant, because of the geometric origin of note frequencies. Rather than notice this, he makes the opposite conclusion and states otherwise. Overall I recommend that anyone interested in what music is, the science behind music read this book, so long as they are willing to do some research on thei own.
18 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Horrible for a modern work,
By A Customer
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Science of Musical Sound (Paperback)
With misinterpretations of current theory (particularly on consonance and dissonance), an arrogant focus on mostly the Stanford and MIT group of the past, this book should be avoided.There are many problems with symbols used in the text, many of which are non-standard (he uses P for intensity when it is used as Pressure in most books). The book has mostly lame, tacked-on material on digital sound (played up incorrectly as a feature on the back cover). Music V is from the late 1960s! The revisions are minor to the first addition. This is not a modern work, not a good exposition, not worthy of American university classes. There is absolutely no cross-cultural material on tunings, or discussion of musical instrument acoustics. The ordering of material is startlingly disjunct, the focus unclear, except that the author liked these subjects, while rejecting myriad issues.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|