[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Clarifications of some terms
Consonance and dissonance seem to have at least two meanings. In
western music, dissonance requires resolution to consonance.
Depending on the historical period this will mean different things.
The "third" required resolution in the 12th century, that is why it
was an 'imperfect' interval.
Harshness, in my experience, relates to spectrum and distortion
components. Ringing refers to the duration of a sound in that one may
not have a ringing sound which is very short.
I think part of your question is about the belief that these terms
have meaning independent of sounds. They are after all (simply)
labels, and for me reside in the psychometric domain of
interpretation, and as such agreement on their meaning would be
statistical in nature (and contextual). There are times when an
eight-note chord can be heard (by some people) as consonant.
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:12:38 -0500
From: Ranjit Randhawa <rsran@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Clarifications of some terms.
With all the heavier topics under discussion in this forum, my
request for information could be a bit trivial, but am hoping for
I have read about "consonance" and dissonance" and have assumed a
kind of understanding of these, but then I have also read about
"ringing" and "harshness", and have been wondering whether there is
a relationship between these terms and how one would describe this
My own assumption has been that the auditory system performs its
frequency analysis in its own unique way, and a clearer
understanding of these terms may show that it is not based on our
present analytical models. If one is trying to develop a different
model, than the test stimuli used for auditory psychological
experiments could also be drastically different than those usually
described. Therefore, a better understanding of the above terms
would be helpful.
Thanks in anticipation, cheers,