Roughness — where it appears
Named by 71 essays across 8 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
Beats are arithmetic that anybody can hear
Two tones a few hertz apart swell and fade at exactly their difference. It is the most direct evidence available that the ear does sums on what reaches it, and it is how every instrument in the world gets tuned.
Roughness can be computed, and the answer looks like a scale
Feed two spectra into a model of how nearby frequencies interfere, sweep one past the other, and the curve that comes out has dips exactly where the consonant intervals are. Nobody put them there.
A third is rougher in the bass
Consonance is usually presented as a property an interval has. It is not. The same major third is muddy two octaves below middle C and clean two octaves above it, the ratio never changed, and the frequency where it stops being muddy can be solved for.
Three is the largest agreeable number
Take every chord of every size that can be built from the twelve, score each one for roughness and for the size of the whole numbers it needs, and ask how many are good on both counts. At two notes the answer is one. At three notes it is still one. At four it is eight, and the question stops having an answer.
Consonance is half learned, and this is the half
This site's founding claim is that consonance is small whole numbers. Two computable models say so and they disagree about which chords — which is already awkward. The cross-cultural evidence is worse: listeners with little exposure to Western music discriminate roughness exactly as anyone does, match octaves exactly as anyone does, and rate consonant and dissonant chords as equally pleasant.
Where the hammer lands
Strike a string at exactly one over n and the nth partial is silent, because the hammer has landed on that mode's node and cannot move it. A piano's hammers strike between a seventh and a ninth of the way along, which puts the seventh partial — the most dissonant member of the series — at or near a null. That is a design decision made in wood, and it takes one line of trigonometry.
The body is the filter
A violin string radiates almost nothing. What reaches a room is the string's sawtooth multiplied by the body's response, and that response is a comb of measured resonances that stays put while the note moves. It is the same arithmetic that identifies a vowel, on wood instead of a mouth — which is why an instrument has a voice rather than a tone.
A melody that can accompany itself
Whether a tune works as a round is decidable before anyone sings it. Score every simultaneity it makes against a delayed copy of itself, at every delay, with the roughness model already in use, and two nursery tunes separate completely — every delay of one is smoother than every delay of the other. What the scan does not do is pick out the entry the tradition uses, and that refusal is the most informative thing in it.
A spectrum chooses its own scale
The roughness curve's dips are always described as landing on the small whole numbers. They do not land on numbers. They land where partials coincide, and stretching a spectrum by seven per cent moves every one of them by exactly seven per cent — so the scale a set of intervals belongs to is a property of the instrument's spectrum rather than of arithmetic.
Roughness cannot choose a scale
Score all four hundred and sixty-two seven-note selections from the twelve for roughness and the answer at middle C is a mode of the diatonic set, first out of four hundred and sixty-two. Ask the same question an octave lower and the same selection ranks a hundred and forty-first. The model is not wrong; it is answering a question about frequencies, and a scale is not one.
A dissonance has to last
Roughness is a fluctuation, and a fluctuation needs cycles. A minor second at the bottom of a cello fluctuates thirty-three times a second, so a semiquaver holds four of them and a demisemiquaver holds two — which turns the counterpoint rule that a dissonance may pass if it is short into a number, and puts that number at about seventy milliseconds through most of the range, once the pairs beating too slowly to be roughness at all are taken out of the average.
Where to put the third
Take three pitch classes, four octaves to put them in, and score all twenty-seven arrangements. The smoothest is root, fifth an octave up, third two octaves up — which is partials one, three and five of the harmonic series — and the roughest, at every register tried, is the chord in close root position at the bottom of the range. Every orchestration manual states that rule and none of them derives it.
A dissonance is what has to be resolved
The perfect fourth is a consonance between two upper voices and a dissonance against the bass, and the same three notes are involved either way. Score both arrangements with the roughness model and the one the rules call a dissonance comes out thirty per cent smoother. Whatever the rule is tracking, it is not the sound.
The same chord is harsher when it is louder
Every roughness number so far was computed at a level nobody stated. Roughness is the product of two partial amplitudes, so it is quadratic in pressure, while loudness is compressive — which makes a minor third at middle C thirty-two thousand times rougher at fortissimo than at pianissimo and only twenty-five times louder. A chord has no single consonance to report.
The third the model has no opinion about
A neutral third — halfway between major and minor, and a scale degree in most of the music between Morocco and Iran — is nothing at all on an ordinary roughness curve. It becomes a well at 347 cents, which is exactly 11:9, only for a spectrum whose ninth and eleventh partials are at least three times their natural strength. No instrument has that spectrum.
The spectrum that was supposed to explain the gamelan
Run the model that designed the Bohlen–Pierce scale on a bar's partials and it asks for a compressed pseudo-octave at 1166 cents and wells at 694 and 870. A measured slendro's degrees are at 231, 474, 717 and 955, and only one of the four is near anything the model wants. Sweep the partials and a spectrum wanting a 240-cent step can be found — sitting sixty per cent of the way up its own roughness curve, which is what a scale-level test says about the whole comparison.
The inversion that cannot end a phrase
Three positions of one triad, three measurements, and the practice contradicted at every turn. The second inversion is the smoothest of the three by roughness, the best explained of the three by a virtual-pitch model, and the one that three centuries of practice will not let a phrase end on. What forbids it is a rule about a two-voice skeleton.
A chord is a register
The same three pitch classes are five times rougher at the bottom of a piano than in the middle, and the arrangement that minimises the roughness over a low bass turns out to be the bass's own fifth and sixth partials. The orchestration rule about low thirds is not a convention. It falls out of the width of a critical band, exactly.
A stack that is not thirds
Build every chord that repeats a single interval and score them all. Eight of the eleven three-note stacks are smoother than the major triad; the four-note stack of fourths is smoother than a dominant seventh by a third and has no fundamental any matcher can find. Two absences, both computable, and both are exactly what the chord was adopted for.
The series is not a chord
The major triad is derived from the first six partials of the harmonic series in every textbook that derives it from anything, and the derivation works: the first six contain a major triad and nothing else. Take the first four instead and there is no third at all; take seven and there is a dominant seventh with a flat seventh thirty-one cents below any keyboard note; take sixteen and there are eight pitch classes. Six is the last stopping point that gives the answer, roughness prefers three, four or ten depending on the register, and no criterion in the arithmetic selects six over any of them.
The chord that is not played at once
Every chord until now starts its notes at the same instant, and no figure ever set the asynchrony to anything else. A spread chord is not a defective simultaneity: at forty milliseconds a triad of half-second notes is still eighty-seven per cent simultaneous, so it carries almost all its roughness, and it stops being a chord at all only when the last note arrives after the first has finished. What none of this can explain is the one thing every keyboard player knows — that a chord is rolled upward. The masking asymmetry that ought to explain it is 2.4 decibels at a close voicing, which is not enough.
An instrument is not one timbre
Every roughness verdict so far uses one partial list per instrument, and a violin does not have one. Its body's resonances stay where they are while the fundamental moves, so the radiated spectrum is different at every pitch: the power-weighted centroid runs from 1.02 to 1.64 across the compass, and it is not monotonic. Which means the result that a spectrum chooses its own scale gives a different scale at every note on the same instrument — three minima in the dissonance curve at the bottom of a violin's range, two in the middle and four at the top.
Which instrument is underneath
Every roughness curve so far compares two tones of the same timbre, which is a duet nobody plays. Give the two notes different instruments and the sum stops being symmetric: the same written interval, on the same two players, is up to five times rougher depending on which of them takes the lower note. From G3 upward the fifth is a well in all twenty-five pairings and no other interval is; below it, three pairings lose even that, and all three have a clarinet on top.
The note that sounds twice
A triad has three notes and a four-part texture has four voices, so one note is doubled — and the voicing model used here leaves the choice free because the rules have an opinion about it. Asked properly, the arithmetic agrees with the treatises for the first time in nine essays: root, then fifth, then third. For a minor triad it does not agree, and for a symmetric chord it correctly has nothing to say.
Which player on which note
An interval's roughness depends on which instrument is underneath, so the pair does not commute. Three players over three notes is the smallest thing that asymmetry has anywhere to go: six assignments, all of them the same chord, and across 450 of them the roughest averages half again the smoothest and reaches six times it. It is orchestration in the only form that can be computed here — not which chord, and not which voicing, but who is on which note.
Every partial beats at its own rate
Five earlier essays have drawn one beat rate per figure, and every one of them is the rate between two fundamentals. Two real notes beat between all of their partials at once, the k-th pair beats k times as fast, and somewhere up the spectrum the rate passes the point at which a beat stops being a beat — so a chorused note is a beat at the bottom of itself and a roughness at the top, simultaneously, with a crossover partial that is arithmetic.
A section against another section
The choir has been treated as a unison, and no choir sings only unisons. Two sections an interval apart beat between partials rather than between fundamentals — the third brings the fifth partial of one against the fourth of the other — and equal temperament puts that coincidence fourteen cents out. So two sections singing a tempered third beat at nearly nine per second with every singer in both of them perfectly in tune, and the same temperament is inaudible on a fifth.
Sixteen sweeps against sixteen
Every intonation figure about the voice treats a singer as a frequency. A singer is a frequency being swept a hundred cents wide six times a second, and two sections singing an interval are two hundred and fifty-six pairs of sweeps. The beat rate between the partials the interval brings together stops being a number and becomes a function of time — and the pair spends four fifths of its time above the rate at which beating is beating at all.
Who plays what and how loud is one question
Two lines of argument, one about spectrum and one about loudness, each stopped at the same wall and each said so. One of them can choose who plays which note and has every player at the same level; the other can choose how loud each part is and has nobody assigned to anything. Put together they are a single problem with two kinds of variable, and solving it in stages picks a different answer from solving it at once — nine per cent rougher, at the same loudness, on an ordinary triad.
The ranking survives the dynamic and the chord does not
Roughness is quadratic in pressure and loudness is compressive, so sixty decibels multiply a chord's roughness by a million and its loudness by ninety-six. Roughness per sone therefore rises ten thousandfold between a pianissimo and a fortissimo of the same four notes — and yet the ranking of which doubling is smoothest, over four hundred and eighty voicings, does not move by a single place.
A dynamic mark changes what a note is
Every spectrum until now is a shape with a level in front of it, so that playing ten decibels louder raises every partial by ten. That is true of exactly one instrument in an orchestra. Everybody else steepens their own spectrum as they lean on it, and a trumpet's centre of gravity moves from the second partial to the sixth across a dynamic range while an organ flue pipe's does not move at all.
A roughness with a rate of its own
Every roughness figure so far computes one number for a steady spectrum. Evaluate the same sum at every instant of a vibrato and there are three numbers instead — a mean, a depth and a rate — and the mean is not the roughness of the mean frequency. On an octave it is nineteen times it, because an octave sits in a deep narrow minimum and a vibrato smears it out of one.
The mean survives the window
A roughness that moves has a mean, a depth and a rate — all three of which a listener could only have through a temporal window. Applying the window already to hand settles which of the three survives, and the answer refutes the guess: a running average cannot change an average, so the octave's factor of nineteen stands and the movement is what goes.
A loud chord is a smaller chord
Two earlier essays hold the level fixed, and the level decides how much of a chord a listener is given. At thirty decibels twenty of a triad's twenty-four partials stand above what the rest of it masks; at a hundred, nine do. Every roughness figure until now counts partials that are in the score, and a partial the chord masks is not a partial the listener has.
Two players on one note
Six essays have put one instrument on each note of a chord, and the commonest thing an orchestrator actually does is put two on the same note. Two independent sources add in power, so the composite is neither of them — except that it nearly always is one of them, because the level at which ownership changes hands is rarely at zero. And a unison ten cents out is rougher than a major third dead in tune.
The dissonance arrives and the dynamic does not
A scoring decides two things at once and both of them have to be integrated by a listener before they exist. The loudness smoother's release is two seconds and the roughness window is thirty-seven milliseconds, and that ratio of fifty decides which of the two survives at the pace music is actually played. Nothing anybody performs is fast enough to blur a dissonance, and a great deal of it is fast enough to average a dynamic.
A low chord stops being rough by stopping being a chord
Every count of audible partials until now is of a chord at middle C, and the three registers it did compare span C3 to C5 — a third of the range a chord is written in. Move the same triad down and the count collapses: 79 per cent of its partials arrive at E3 and 4 per cent at C1. So the roughest chord on the page is the lowest one and the roughest chord a listener receives is at G2, and where that maximum sits moves nearly two octaves with the dynamic.
A section has a loudest member, not a colour
Two players on one note have a balance at which the composite belongs to neither, and that is what blending means. Three should have three such balances and no reason for them to agree — a trio with a rock-paper-scissors ownership would have no strongest member at all. Twenty trios, sixty pairwise comparisons, and not one disagreement: the possibility is real, arbitrary spectra do it once in twenty, and instruments never do.
The blend table has a row for every note
Eight earlier essays sound their instruments at one note, and one of them says why that cannot be innocent: every filter here is fixed in frequency and the fundamental is not. Swept over four octaves, the number of pairs that blend doubles from six to twelve, the ranking turns over rather than shuffles — seventy of a hundred and five comparisons swap — and a clarinet with an oboe goes from the best pair in the collection to the eleventh.
A soft chord has to fade in
Forward masking sits between the two integration times already in play — two hundred milliseconds against a thirty-seven millisecond roughness window and a two-second loudness release — and it was owed as the term that might eat the dissonance contrast. It does not. It widens it, by three per cent at a chorale's pace and fifty-nine at four chords a second, because it can only ever remove partials and it can only reach the chord a dynamic has already made quiet. What it does instead is stranger: one chord in the passage is entirely inaudible for its first twelve milliseconds and takes a quarter of a second to arrive whole.
The fourth player is a spectrum, not a decision
Six earlier essays put exactly one instrument on each note, which makes an arrangement a permutation — and the commonest operation in orchestration is a doubling, which does not. Four players on three notes give thirty-six arrangements instead of six, and the extra choice turns out to be the smallest thing on the page: which note carries the pair explains three per cent of the spread and which players sit on the bass explains eighty-nine. A doubled note can be priced as one player, and which one is not the one a spectral account would have named.
The rate that does not rise with the partial
Twelve earlier essays give every vibrato the same six hertz, and the measured spread is 5.5 to 7.5. Putting the two fluctuations a choir contains on one axis shows why the rate matters: the beating between mistuned voices rises with the partial and leaves the range a listener follows as fluctuation at 1,217 hertz, while the vibrato's own modulation is six hertz at every partial. Above that frequency a section fluctuates by vibrato alone — and if every singer had the same rate, it would barely fluctuate at all.
A clarinet keeps what a string loses
Every masker, probe, chord, line and texture until now is eight partials falling as 1/n, and it was not even an option a placement could pass. Sweeping the six spectra to hand says the clarinet is the worst of them — 54 per cent of itself at best against a string's 79 — and that answer is an artefact of the score. Counted against what each note keeps on its own, the clarinet keeps 100 per cent where the string keeps 79, because its components stand a twelfth apart rather than an octave. The missing parameter was the spectrum; the second missing parameter was the denominator.
Eighty-one chords, one number
A dominant seventh has eighty-one arrangements inside three octaves and their roughness spans a factor of five and a half. The tonal-expectation model gives every one of them the same 3.51 bits, because its states are scale degrees and there is no register anywhere in them. Conditioning the surprise on the voicing costs no corpus — and the arithmetic says the conditioning belongs beside the probability rather than inside it, for three reasons that can each be computed.
A fifth on a piano is not a fifth a second later
Nine essays draw one note in silence, and a listener is given a texture. Put two struck notes an interval apart and consonance comes apart into two quantities that had agreed while nothing moved: the partial coincidence that names the interval outlives the strike in exactly the order common-practice theory ranks its intervals, and the roughness that scores it reorders itself inside a third of a second, with the fifth overtaken by four intervals every treatise calls harsher.
An orchestrator doubles a line, not a chord
Three earlier essays made the objective a functional over a passage and a later one went back to holding one chord still. Put the doubling back into time and the retreat turns out to have been cheap: one arrangement held down a five-chord phrase is that phrase's own best answer at four of its five chords and costs 2.4 per cent of the range the choice spans — while the forward mask named earlier as the third temporal constant reaches for twenty milliseconds rather than two hundred, and cannot change the answer at any pace at all.
An entrance is a change of colour
Eight essays on orchestration move the assignment and hold the ensemble still, and a score does the opposite: it brings players in and takes them out. Loudness is a sum over parts and roughness is a sum over pairs, so the player who joins adds one term to the first and one to the second for everybody already there. What the entrance is worth in phons falls by a factor of forty-eight across the range an ensemble spans and crosses the difference limen at five players; what it is worth in roughness rises by twelve, and by a further factor of ten for every ten decibels the passage is played at.
The release is on the wrong side
Whether the loudness model's two-second release makes an entrance inaudible has the answer no, for a reason the question did not anticipate. The smoother is asymmetric — ninety-nine milliseconds going up and two seconds coming down — so a rise is tracked twenty times faster than a fall, and an entrance is received promptly by every one of a listener's three readings. The colour of it arrives first, at twenty-five milliseconds against ninety, and the reading that moves with the ensemble is the one nobody would have picked.
A part that leaves is not a part that arrives
The same player, the same note, the same level, and the only difference is which way round it happens. A listener's loudness reading takes 1.43 seconds to receive half of a departure and 90 milliseconds to receive half of an arrival — a factor of sixteen with nothing asymmetric in the sound at all, since both readings integrate the same two states in the same order. The colour reading receives the two identically, because a window has no direction, so a departure is a change whose grain arrives at once and whose level takes most of two seconds.
A major triad's combination tones are its own notes
Play a just major triad of pure tones and two of the ear's cubic products land exactly on its root and its fifth. The reason is a condition rather than a coincidence — a chord's cubic products fall on its own notes when its middle note is the mean of the outer two in hertz — and it holds for the major triad in root position and in the six-four, and for no minor triad in any position or tuning. Equal temperament misses the landing by one number, 5.6 hertz on middle C, which is a beat that belongs to no pair of notes in the chord.
An inversion lasts as long as its outer sixth
A struck interval keeps the partial coincidence that names it for a time set by its ratio, and a chord is three intervals at once. Voiced over one bass and struck on a piano, a triad keeps the evidence of all three only as long as its weakest one lasts, and for an inversion that is the sixth on the outside: a major sixth lasts as long as a major third, a minor sixth dies first. So the major six-four and the minor sixth chord are the most durable voicings of their triads and the major sixth chord and the minor six-four the least — and unlike a dyad, a triad's inversions keep their order by roughness through almost the whole decay.
A rough arrival is rough because of its spacing
The pair the expectation essays report for every chord — how surprising it was, how rough its voicing is — has no level in it. Putting level back in answers the question it left open, and not the way it was framed. At one written dynamic the arrivals keep their order from 40 to 90 dB at three registers of four, and the bass stays 8.6 times rougher than the treble. Made equally loud, the bass has to be played 12.8 dB harder, and it is 343 times rougher: level does not explain the register's roughness away, it multiplies it.
An open triad lasts as long as its tenth
Close, every triad's weakest link is a third or a sixth. Raise its middle note an octave and the link becomes a compound interval, and compound intervals do not last alike: a major tenth, 5:2, lives as long as a major sixth, while a minor tenth, 12:5, needs the twelfth partial and lives 0.47 seconds. So the spacing orchestration manuals recommend for a major chord in the bass is the longest-lived voicing a struck triad has, and the same spacing halves the life of a minor chord — and the six-four's advantage reverses.
A minor triad can be spaced to last
Two spacings of each triad, drawn side by side, say that opening lengthens a major chord and halves a minor one. Drawn over every arrangement of the three pitch classes within two octaves of a fixed bass, the asymmetry disappears: a minor triad reaches 1.26 seconds over C3 and so does a major one, with two spacings of each tied at the top. The short-lived chords were never the minor ones. They were the ones with a minor tenth on the outside, and a minor triad has three spacings that avoid it.
The tempo moves a scale further than the touch
A gamelan is played two ways on the same bars: a saron's are damped as the next is struck and a gendèr's ring over their resonators. That decision moves a slendro's standing among random scales of its size by up to seventeen percentile points, which is real. Over the tempo levels a piece actually moves through it moves by fifty-four — from the twenty-ninth percentile at a fast elaboration to the eighty-third at a slow one. The same five pitches on the same bars are a smoother-than-average scale and a rougher-than-average one, and which depends on how fast they are played.
The scale belongs to the ringing instrument
A gamelan plays two instruments on one scale at once — a saron damped at every stroke and a gendèr several times faster with its bars left to ring — and a quarter of the roughness a listener receives falls on pairs that cross between them, which no figure had computed. The cross pairs turn out to be no worse than either stream's own. What decides the scale's standing is the fast part: the ensemble sits at the sixth percentile among random five-note scales and so does the ringing instrument alone, while the damped one alone sits at the ninety-sixth.
A bass chord low enough to balance has already hidden its tenor
Played as loud as the written register, a progression two octaves down is 343 times rougher than the same progression an octave up — if every partial on the page is counted. Count only the partials that stand above what the rest of the chord masks and that register is the smoothest of the four, with nothing left that beats. The balance is not what does it: the extra thirteen decibels move no voice by more than two partials. The register had already buried the tenor at the written dynamic.
A wrong bar beats the same on either instrument
The ringing instrument carries a gamelan scale's standing, so a tuning error on it was predicted to cost more than the same error on the damped instrument. Put in the beating the model lacked, and the prediction fails: moved ten cents, a degree costs the same 0.85 summed over the scale on either instrument, because almost all of the cost is the wrong bar beating against the right one on the other instrument, and a beat belongs to both of the bars that make it. Moving a whole instrument costs exactly what its five degrees cost separately, and it takes nothing from the scale's standing.
A tuned seventh chord does not beat; it buzzes
Three four-note chords share a ceiling of 0.87 seconds on how long their partial coincidences last, and nothing in that measure could tell them apart. Their beating can. A chord tuned exactly to one harmonic series is one periodic sound, so no two of its partials can differ by less than the series' fundamental: the tuned dominant seventh has no slow beating at all, where the tempered diminished seventh has 125 beating pairs at the strike. Its roughness is another matter. Tuning removes the beats and changes the roughness by a few per cent, in either direction, and a seventh on its way to 7 : 4 beats more, not less, until it arrives.
The bar a gamelan can least afford wrong is the one its skeleton lands on
A wrong bar in a gamelan costs what its beating against the other instrument costs, and that depends on how often the music doubles the degree. The obvious place for doubling is where an elaborating part meets the skeleton at the end of each four-stroke unit, so the prediction was that the meeting rule would rank the degrees. It barely does: a part left to ring doubles a degree whenever it sounds it while the other instrument's bar still sounds, and the meetings add three per cent. What ranks the degrees is where the skeleton lands. A skeleton that ends its units on one degree makes that bar three and a half to five times as costly to leave wrong as any other single bar.
A tuned close seventh chord low on the keyboard flutters at one rate
A dominant seventh tuned 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 in close position repeats exactly at a frequency two octaves below its bass, and below B2 that frequency is too slow to be a pitch. The question left was whether the repeat is heard as a flutter. In every auditory filter the chord reaches, its envelope pulses at that one rate, forty times over the threshold for detecting a fluctuation in the filter where it is strongest. The tempered chord fluctuates too, but a third as deeply and at rates that change from filter to filter. Tuning adds something here rather than sharpening it, and it adds it only within two cents of 7 : 4.
An elaboration that arrives early makes every goal tone the bar to tune first
A gamelan's bars are costliest to leave out of tune where the skeleton lands, but a mode with three goal tones spread the cost so thinly that a low goal could end up cheaper than a high bar that is never a goal. The rule tested there put the elaborating part on the goal only at the goal stroke. Elaborations in the style reach their goal early and stay on it. Let them arrive seven strokes early and every goal tone costs more than three times the dearest bar that is not a goal; the goal's own cost rises by about half for every few strokes of anticipation, and a whole instrument out of tune becomes dearer too.
A vibrato hides a choir's tuning above four hundred hertz
Thirteen essays drew a vibrato that had always been running; a real one grows out of a straight tone over the first quarter-second of a note. Counting the beats a listener can follow between two voices of a section shows what that front edge is worth. A vibrato takes most of a section's countable beats away above about 400 hertz — seven in ten of them at the singer's formant — and adds some below. The straight start gives them back only while the vibrato is still growing, and in the band where a voice carries that is less than one beat.
A gamelan tuner can name the goals for nothing
A pair tuned so that each goal beats at its own rate lets the swells before a gamelan's structural strokes say which goal is coming, and the question left was what that costs in roughness. Held at the same average shimmer, nothing: a constant interval adds one per cent less roughness than an even beat rate, and a rate rising as the square of the pitch adds three per cent less while naming the goals for a far coarser ear. The even shimmer puts its widest pairs on the low degrees, where a cent of detuning costs most.
A gamelan's shimmer has to start again at every octave
Within one octave, a gamelan tuner who lets each pair's beat rate rise faster than its pitch names the goal tones and pays nothing in roughness for it. Carried across a real instrument's three octaves, the same rise breaks twice. The steepest rise that keeps every pair beating falls from a power of four to a power of one, and the roughness saving turns into a cost: a rise as the square of the pitch is seven per cent rougher than one rate everywhere. A tuning that gives each degree its middle-octave rate in every octave keeps both the clock and the saving at any compass. The beat rate then names the degree, not the pitch.
A degree's three swells are one landmark only if they agree
A gamelan's goal tone is struck in several octaves at once, so the swell of beating that warns of it is three swells. A tuning whose beat rate rises with pitch across the whole compass gives each octave its own rate, and a listener who hears a degree's swells as one event only when their rates agree finds that, at any useful rise, none of them do: every goal becomes a swell of no particular rate and the clock is left exactly where swells that all sound alike leave it. No rise can both name the goals and let their swells agree, since naming needs ten times the power agreeing allows. Repeating the middle octave's rates in every octave does both.
A gamelan's shimmer should rise only downward
A gamelan tuner who lets each pair's beat rate follow its pitch saves roughness in the low octave, where the pairs slow, and pays it in the high octave, where they race. Repeating the middle octave's rates only at the goal tones and letting the rest follow the pitch, as the lead proposed, is rougher than repeating everywhere. The tuning that saves is the one that lets the rate follow the pitch below the middle octave and repeats it above — a fifth less roughness at the square — and it keeps the clock only if the low octave does not double the goals.
A gamelan's shimmer has no cheaper shape, only a slower one
The tuning that let each pair's beat rate follow its pitch below the middle octave and repeated it above saved a fifth of the roughness — and slowed the ensemble's average shimmer by more than a third while doing it. Held to the shimmer it promised, it is rougher than repeating the middle octave's rates everywhere, and the middle octave's rates simply slowed to the same average are smoother than either. With the average fixed, the cheapest shape runs the other way, and a knee is never cheaper than a step.
A gamelan's shimmer can slow to a fifth before its clock notices
Roughness falls steadily as every pair's beating is slowed by one factor, and the listener who times a goal's swell does not object until the shimmer is a fifth of the promised speed. The limit is not how many beats a swell holds — a ten-second step holds eight even there — but the once-a-second boundary below which a beat is waited out rather than counted, and it bites when the second-slowest goal degree crosses it. At the quick tempi where a swell could hold too few beats, the skeleton already carries the clock alone.
A tied note is the oldest thing in its own dissonance
A suspension is taught as a dissonance that resolves, and the sum is done on a chord symbol with no time in it. Put the time back. On voices or an organ, a 4–3 is no smoother after its step than before: of eight spacings, two fall and four rise. On a piano the tied note was struck a chord ago, so it supplies under a third of the roughness it is blamed for, the fall to the resolution is the clock's, and the step itself makes the sound about three times rougher than leaving the note where it was.
A trill is half a consonance unless it borrows its own resolution
A struck suspension loses roughness because its tied note is old, and the obvious repairs are all things a player already has. Three of them fail in ways nobody would predict. A re-strike under about nine decibels below the chord is smoother than the tie it replaces. No rate of trill stops the fading, because the three notes under the trill are what is fading. And a trill on the upper neighbour spends half its time on a chord note: only the trill that alternates a suspension with its own resolution gives back more than a single strike.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Critical bandwidthPartialSpectrumBeatingVoicingOrchestrationTimbreSensory dissonanceSlendroTriadHarmonic seriesIntonation