Why is the relationship between frequency and pitch exponential?Calculation of a note's frequency in the 18th-19th centuryFormula to adjust a note by centsWhy is a 440 Hz frequency considered the “standard” pitch for musical instruments?
Does any lore text explain why the planes of Acheron, Gehenna, and Carceri are the alignment they are?
Can an old DSLR be upgraded to match modern smartphone image quality
If a problem only occurs randomly once in every N times on average, how many tests do I have to perform to be certain that it's now fixed?
Asking bank to reduce APR instead of increasing credit limit
Does it cost a spell slot to cast a spell from a Ring of Spell Storing?
Will TSA allow me to carry a Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) device?
Why is the relationship between frequency and pitch exponential?
Word for a small burst of laughter that can't be held back
Will dual-learning in a glider make my airplane learning safer?
What happens to foam insulation board after you pour concrete slab?
Could the Missouri River be running while Lake Michigan was frozen several meters deep?
What is a simple, physical situation where complex numbers emerge naturally?
Does Peach's float negate shorthop knockback multipliers?
Is it legal in the UK for politicians to lie to the public for political gain?
Can I ask a publisher for a paper that I need for reviewing
How to split a string in two substrings of same length using bash?
GFCI Outlet in Bathroom, Lights not working
Is it possible for people to live in the eye of a permanent hypercane?
Applicants clearly not having the skills they advertise
Is there a rule that prohibits us from using 2 possessives in a row?
How to apply the "glow" effect to a rectangle with tcolorbox?
You've spoiled/damaged the card
Chopin: marche funèbre bar 15 impossible place
Are gibbering mouthers immune to each other's area effects?
Why is the relationship between frequency and pitch exponential?
Calculation of a note's frequency in the 18th-19th centuryFormula to adjust a note by centsWhy is a 440 Hz frequency considered the “standard” pitch for musical instruments?
I read that the formula relating frequency to the note played was:
F = 440 + 2^(n/12)
Where F
is the frequency in hertz of the note played and n
is the number of notes from middle A.
It seems strange to me that this relationship is exponential, doesn't it make more sense for the relationship to be linear, so it is easier for the musician to quickly subconsciously predict what each increasing note will sound like?
Is there even any point in this formula at all, or is it just a strange convention? If it is just convention, then where does it originate?
frequency
New contributor
add a comment |
I read that the formula relating frequency to the note played was:
F = 440 + 2^(n/12)
Where F
is the frequency in hertz of the note played and n
is the number of notes from middle A.
It seems strange to me that this relationship is exponential, doesn't it make more sense for the relationship to be linear, so it is easier for the musician to quickly subconsciously predict what each increasing note will sound like?
Is there even any point in this formula at all, or is it just a strange convention? If it is just convention, then where does it originate?
frequency
New contributor
Because frequencies sound more similar the more oscillation nodes they have in common. Frequencies of 1, 2, 3, 4... don't have as many as 1, 2, 4, 8, 16... do - you can make a simple diagram to see why.
– Kilian Foth
2 mins ago
add a comment |
I read that the formula relating frequency to the note played was:
F = 440 + 2^(n/12)
Where F
is the frequency in hertz of the note played and n
is the number of notes from middle A.
It seems strange to me that this relationship is exponential, doesn't it make more sense for the relationship to be linear, so it is easier for the musician to quickly subconsciously predict what each increasing note will sound like?
Is there even any point in this formula at all, or is it just a strange convention? If it is just convention, then where does it originate?
frequency
New contributor
I read that the formula relating frequency to the note played was:
F = 440 + 2^(n/12)
Where F
is the frequency in hertz of the note played and n
is the number of notes from middle A.
It seems strange to me that this relationship is exponential, doesn't it make more sense for the relationship to be linear, so it is easier for the musician to quickly subconsciously predict what each increasing note will sound like?
Is there even any point in this formula at all, or is it just a strange convention? If it is just convention, then where does it originate?
frequency
frequency
New contributor
New contributor
edited 6 hours ago
Todd Wilcox
39.2k373134
39.2k373134
New contributor
asked 8 hours ago
tom894tom894
262
262
New contributor
New contributor
Because frequencies sound more similar the more oscillation nodes they have in common. Frequencies of 1, 2, 3, 4... don't have as many as 1, 2, 4, 8, 16... do - you can make a simple diagram to see why.
– Kilian Foth
2 mins ago
add a comment |
Because frequencies sound more similar the more oscillation nodes they have in common. Frequencies of 1, 2, 3, 4... don't have as many as 1, 2, 4, 8, 16... do - you can make a simple diagram to see why.
– Kilian Foth
2 mins ago
Because frequencies sound more similar the more oscillation nodes they have in common. Frequencies of 1, 2, 3, 4... don't have as many as 1, 2, 4, 8, 16... do - you can make a simple diagram to see why.
– Kilian Foth
2 mins ago
Because frequencies sound more similar the more oscillation nodes they have in common. Frequencies of 1, 2, 3, 4... don't have as many as 1, 2, 4, 8, 16... do - you can make a simple diagram to see why.
– Kilian Foth
2 mins ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
It's because the way the ear actually hears pitch differences (for most people) is based on frequency ratios, rather than absolute frequency differences.
If I played you "twinkle twinkle little star" starting at on a note of 400 Hz, and then played it again with another 300Hz added the frequency of each note, it wouldn't sound like the same tune. However, if we multiplied the frequency of each note in the original by a ratio (say 1.75), it would sound like "the same tune, but higher".
I'm not an expert on the physiology, but I believe there are even physical characteristics of the ear that relate to notes an octave apart (which corresponds to a doubling in frequency) being heard as somewhat equivalent.
By the way, the formula you quote describes how to find note frequencies in an equal temperament system; this system came into common usage over time as a clever compromise that allows many different combinations of notes with 'almost consonant' harmonic relationships to be sounded. There are other systems of temperament possible, and therefore there are also different equations possible, though they will all be broadly logarithmic.
1
Whenever I see a question about acoustics, you're one of the users that I hope will answer. Do you know if there are any examples of common tunes with the linear change you discussed in your second paragraph? That'd be really interesting to hear!
– Richard
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Essentially, it's because we humans perceive pitch on a logarithmic/exponential scale. We hear an octave when the frequency is doubled or halved, not when it has a certain amount added or subtracted to it. Since musicians (well, the western ones, anyway) divide the octave into 12 equal parts, we had to take the 12th root of two as our factor to represent a semitone.
As for the origins of this system, we have to go back all the way to at least the time of Pythagoras, who was one of the first to discover the ratio-based nature of music, and also the harmonic series (which itself is wholly integer multiples of the fundamental). Now, back in Pythagoras' day, there was no such thing as 12-TET - the system we use now and the system described by that handy equation you posted here -, but Pythagoras knew that integer ratios are what drives most harmony, and our modern system of frequencys and their relationships is in large part an approximation of Pythagoras' harmony with some things fixed up. My source for all this is Tom Jackson's Mathematics: An Illustrated History of Numbers. It's a great book, written mostly about math, but math and music are inextricably bound together, and there's a page or two on the origins of music itself.
You can experiment for yourself, too.
- Go find any tone generator application (this website works).
- Try picking a note (say, 440hz). Play it, then play another sound simultaneously with a frequency 1.5x the original (660hz). Observe.
- Clear both tones. Play another tone with a different frequency (say, 500hz). Play a second tone at the same time with 1.5x the frequency of the original (750hz). You should hear a very similar sound, starting on a higher note. This is the result of multiplying the frequency by the same amount.
- Start again with a 440hz tone. This time, add 220hz to it to produce the second note (which should still end up as 660hz). Play that; obvoiusly, it's the same sound as before.
- Now, starting on 500hz, add 220hz to your 500hz frequency. Play the 500hz frequency at the same time as your new 720hz frequency.
- Notice the difference?
Conclusion: Our ears perceive pitch in a logarithmic manner. Therefore, to change a frequency by any amount, one must multiply the frequency by certain factors instead of adding or subtracting. All musical intervals can be represented as a ratio, and multiplying the two frequencies by the same factor produces that same ratio. Adding the same amount to both frequencies does not preserve the ratio.
440hz, 660hz
500hz, 750hz
440hz, 660hz
500hz, 720hz
And if you haven't already, check out this question.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "240"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
tom894 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f85371%2fwhy-is-the-relationship-between-frequency-and-pitch-exponential%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It's because the way the ear actually hears pitch differences (for most people) is based on frequency ratios, rather than absolute frequency differences.
If I played you "twinkle twinkle little star" starting at on a note of 400 Hz, and then played it again with another 300Hz added the frequency of each note, it wouldn't sound like the same tune. However, if we multiplied the frequency of each note in the original by a ratio (say 1.75), it would sound like "the same tune, but higher".
I'm not an expert on the physiology, but I believe there are even physical characteristics of the ear that relate to notes an octave apart (which corresponds to a doubling in frequency) being heard as somewhat equivalent.
By the way, the formula you quote describes how to find note frequencies in an equal temperament system; this system came into common usage over time as a clever compromise that allows many different combinations of notes with 'almost consonant' harmonic relationships to be sounded. There are other systems of temperament possible, and therefore there are also different equations possible, though they will all be broadly logarithmic.
1
Whenever I see a question about acoustics, you're one of the users that I hope will answer. Do you know if there are any examples of common tunes with the linear change you discussed in your second paragraph? That'd be really interesting to hear!
– Richard
6 hours ago
add a comment |
It's because the way the ear actually hears pitch differences (for most people) is based on frequency ratios, rather than absolute frequency differences.
If I played you "twinkle twinkle little star" starting at on a note of 400 Hz, and then played it again with another 300Hz added the frequency of each note, it wouldn't sound like the same tune. However, if we multiplied the frequency of each note in the original by a ratio (say 1.75), it would sound like "the same tune, but higher".
I'm not an expert on the physiology, but I believe there are even physical characteristics of the ear that relate to notes an octave apart (which corresponds to a doubling in frequency) being heard as somewhat equivalent.
By the way, the formula you quote describes how to find note frequencies in an equal temperament system; this system came into common usage over time as a clever compromise that allows many different combinations of notes with 'almost consonant' harmonic relationships to be sounded. There are other systems of temperament possible, and therefore there are also different equations possible, though they will all be broadly logarithmic.
1
Whenever I see a question about acoustics, you're one of the users that I hope will answer. Do you know if there are any examples of common tunes with the linear change you discussed in your second paragraph? That'd be really interesting to hear!
– Richard
6 hours ago
add a comment |
It's because the way the ear actually hears pitch differences (for most people) is based on frequency ratios, rather than absolute frequency differences.
If I played you "twinkle twinkle little star" starting at on a note of 400 Hz, and then played it again with another 300Hz added the frequency of each note, it wouldn't sound like the same tune. However, if we multiplied the frequency of each note in the original by a ratio (say 1.75), it would sound like "the same tune, but higher".
I'm not an expert on the physiology, but I believe there are even physical characteristics of the ear that relate to notes an octave apart (which corresponds to a doubling in frequency) being heard as somewhat equivalent.
By the way, the formula you quote describes how to find note frequencies in an equal temperament system; this system came into common usage over time as a clever compromise that allows many different combinations of notes with 'almost consonant' harmonic relationships to be sounded. There are other systems of temperament possible, and therefore there are also different equations possible, though they will all be broadly logarithmic.
It's because the way the ear actually hears pitch differences (for most people) is based on frequency ratios, rather than absolute frequency differences.
If I played you "twinkle twinkle little star" starting at on a note of 400 Hz, and then played it again with another 300Hz added the frequency of each note, it wouldn't sound like the same tune. However, if we multiplied the frequency of each note in the original by a ratio (say 1.75), it would sound like "the same tune, but higher".
I'm not an expert on the physiology, but I believe there are even physical characteristics of the ear that relate to notes an octave apart (which corresponds to a doubling in frequency) being heard as somewhat equivalent.
By the way, the formula you quote describes how to find note frequencies in an equal temperament system; this system came into common usage over time as a clever compromise that allows many different combinations of notes with 'almost consonant' harmonic relationships to be sounded. There are other systems of temperament possible, and therefore there are also different equations possible, though they will all be broadly logarithmic.
edited 7 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
topo mortotopo morto
28.9k249115
28.9k249115
1
Whenever I see a question about acoustics, you're one of the users that I hope will answer. Do you know if there are any examples of common tunes with the linear change you discussed in your second paragraph? That'd be really interesting to hear!
– Richard
6 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Whenever I see a question about acoustics, you're one of the users that I hope will answer. Do you know if there are any examples of common tunes with the linear change you discussed in your second paragraph? That'd be really interesting to hear!
– Richard
6 hours ago
1
1
Whenever I see a question about acoustics, you're one of the users that I hope will answer. Do you know if there are any examples of common tunes with the linear change you discussed in your second paragraph? That'd be really interesting to hear!
– Richard
6 hours ago
Whenever I see a question about acoustics, you're one of the users that I hope will answer. Do you know if there are any examples of common tunes with the linear change you discussed in your second paragraph? That'd be really interesting to hear!
– Richard
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Essentially, it's because we humans perceive pitch on a logarithmic/exponential scale. We hear an octave when the frequency is doubled or halved, not when it has a certain amount added or subtracted to it. Since musicians (well, the western ones, anyway) divide the octave into 12 equal parts, we had to take the 12th root of two as our factor to represent a semitone.
As for the origins of this system, we have to go back all the way to at least the time of Pythagoras, who was one of the first to discover the ratio-based nature of music, and also the harmonic series (which itself is wholly integer multiples of the fundamental). Now, back in Pythagoras' day, there was no such thing as 12-TET - the system we use now and the system described by that handy equation you posted here -, but Pythagoras knew that integer ratios are what drives most harmony, and our modern system of frequencys and their relationships is in large part an approximation of Pythagoras' harmony with some things fixed up. My source for all this is Tom Jackson's Mathematics: An Illustrated History of Numbers. It's a great book, written mostly about math, but math and music are inextricably bound together, and there's a page or two on the origins of music itself.
You can experiment for yourself, too.
- Go find any tone generator application (this website works).
- Try picking a note (say, 440hz). Play it, then play another sound simultaneously with a frequency 1.5x the original (660hz). Observe.
- Clear both tones. Play another tone with a different frequency (say, 500hz). Play a second tone at the same time with 1.5x the frequency of the original (750hz). You should hear a very similar sound, starting on a higher note. This is the result of multiplying the frequency by the same amount.
- Start again with a 440hz tone. This time, add 220hz to it to produce the second note (which should still end up as 660hz). Play that; obvoiusly, it's the same sound as before.
- Now, starting on 500hz, add 220hz to your 500hz frequency. Play the 500hz frequency at the same time as your new 720hz frequency.
- Notice the difference?
Conclusion: Our ears perceive pitch in a logarithmic manner. Therefore, to change a frequency by any amount, one must multiply the frequency by certain factors instead of adding or subtracting. All musical intervals can be represented as a ratio, and multiplying the two frequencies by the same factor produces that same ratio. Adding the same amount to both frequencies does not preserve the ratio.
440hz, 660hz
500hz, 750hz
440hz, 660hz
500hz, 720hz
And if you haven't already, check out this question.
add a comment |
Essentially, it's because we humans perceive pitch on a logarithmic/exponential scale. We hear an octave when the frequency is doubled or halved, not when it has a certain amount added or subtracted to it. Since musicians (well, the western ones, anyway) divide the octave into 12 equal parts, we had to take the 12th root of two as our factor to represent a semitone.
As for the origins of this system, we have to go back all the way to at least the time of Pythagoras, who was one of the first to discover the ratio-based nature of music, and also the harmonic series (which itself is wholly integer multiples of the fundamental). Now, back in Pythagoras' day, there was no such thing as 12-TET - the system we use now and the system described by that handy equation you posted here -, but Pythagoras knew that integer ratios are what drives most harmony, and our modern system of frequencys and their relationships is in large part an approximation of Pythagoras' harmony with some things fixed up. My source for all this is Tom Jackson's Mathematics: An Illustrated History of Numbers. It's a great book, written mostly about math, but math and music are inextricably bound together, and there's a page or two on the origins of music itself.
You can experiment for yourself, too.
- Go find any tone generator application (this website works).
- Try picking a note (say, 440hz). Play it, then play another sound simultaneously with a frequency 1.5x the original (660hz). Observe.
- Clear both tones. Play another tone with a different frequency (say, 500hz). Play a second tone at the same time with 1.5x the frequency of the original (750hz). You should hear a very similar sound, starting on a higher note. This is the result of multiplying the frequency by the same amount.
- Start again with a 440hz tone. This time, add 220hz to it to produce the second note (which should still end up as 660hz). Play that; obvoiusly, it's the same sound as before.
- Now, starting on 500hz, add 220hz to your 500hz frequency. Play the 500hz frequency at the same time as your new 720hz frequency.
- Notice the difference?
Conclusion: Our ears perceive pitch in a logarithmic manner. Therefore, to change a frequency by any amount, one must multiply the frequency by certain factors instead of adding or subtracting. All musical intervals can be represented as a ratio, and multiplying the two frequencies by the same factor produces that same ratio. Adding the same amount to both frequencies does not preserve the ratio.
440hz, 660hz
500hz, 750hz
440hz, 660hz
500hz, 720hz
And if you haven't already, check out this question.
add a comment |
Essentially, it's because we humans perceive pitch on a logarithmic/exponential scale. We hear an octave when the frequency is doubled or halved, not when it has a certain amount added or subtracted to it. Since musicians (well, the western ones, anyway) divide the octave into 12 equal parts, we had to take the 12th root of two as our factor to represent a semitone.
As for the origins of this system, we have to go back all the way to at least the time of Pythagoras, who was one of the first to discover the ratio-based nature of music, and also the harmonic series (which itself is wholly integer multiples of the fundamental). Now, back in Pythagoras' day, there was no such thing as 12-TET - the system we use now and the system described by that handy equation you posted here -, but Pythagoras knew that integer ratios are what drives most harmony, and our modern system of frequencys and their relationships is in large part an approximation of Pythagoras' harmony with some things fixed up. My source for all this is Tom Jackson's Mathematics: An Illustrated History of Numbers. It's a great book, written mostly about math, but math and music are inextricably bound together, and there's a page or two on the origins of music itself.
You can experiment for yourself, too.
- Go find any tone generator application (this website works).
- Try picking a note (say, 440hz). Play it, then play another sound simultaneously with a frequency 1.5x the original (660hz). Observe.
- Clear both tones. Play another tone with a different frequency (say, 500hz). Play a second tone at the same time with 1.5x the frequency of the original (750hz). You should hear a very similar sound, starting on a higher note. This is the result of multiplying the frequency by the same amount.
- Start again with a 440hz tone. This time, add 220hz to it to produce the second note (which should still end up as 660hz). Play that; obvoiusly, it's the same sound as before.
- Now, starting on 500hz, add 220hz to your 500hz frequency. Play the 500hz frequency at the same time as your new 720hz frequency.
- Notice the difference?
Conclusion: Our ears perceive pitch in a logarithmic manner. Therefore, to change a frequency by any amount, one must multiply the frequency by certain factors instead of adding or subtracting. All musical intervals can be represented as a ratio, and multiplying the two frequencies by the same factor produces that same ratio. Adding the same amount to both frequencies does not preserve the ratio.
440hz, 660hz
500hz, 750hz
440hz, 660hz
500hz, 720hz
And if you haven't already, check out this question.
Essentially, it's because we humans perceive pitch on a logarithmic/exponential scale. We hear an octave when the frequency is doubled or halved, not when it has a certain amount added or subtracted to it. Since musicians (well, the western ones, anyway) divide the octave into 12 equal parts, we had to take the 12th root of two as our factor to represent a semitone.
As for the origins of this system, we have to go back all the way to at least the time of Pythagoras, who was one of the first to discover the ratio-based nature of music, and also the harmonic series (which itself is wholly integer multiples of the fundamental). Now, back in Pythagoras' day, there was no such thing as 12-TET - the system we use now and the system described by that handy equation you posted here -, but Pythagoras knew that integer ratios are what drives most harmony, and our modern system of frequencys and their relationships is in large part an approximation of Pythagoras' harmony with some things fixed up. My source for all this is Tom Jackson's Mathematics: An Illustrated History of Numbers. It's a great book, written mostly about math, but math and music are inextricably bound together, and there's a page or two on the origins of music itself.
You can experiment for yourself, too.
- Go find any tone generator application (this website works).
- Try picking a note (say, 440hz). Play it, then play another sound simultaneously with a frequency 1.5x the original (660hz). Observe.
- Clear both tones. Play another tone with a different frequency (say, 500hz). Play a second tone at the same time with 1.5x the frequency of the original (750hz). You should hear a very similar sound, starting on a higher note. This is the result of multiplying the frequency by the same amount.
- Start again with a 440hz tone. This time, add 220hz to it to produce the second note (which should still end up as 660hz). Play that; obvoiusly, it's the same sound as before.
- Now, starting on 500hz, add 220hz to your 500hz frequency. Play the 500hz frequency at the same time as your new 720hz frequency.
- Notice the difference?
Conclusion: Our ears perceive pitch in a logarithmic manner. Therefore, to change a frequency by any amount, one must multiply the frequency by certain factors instead of adding or subtracting. All musical intervals can be represented as a ratio, and multiplying the two frequencies by the same factor produces that same ratio. Adding the same amount to both frequencies does not preserve the ratio.
440hz, 660hz
500hz, 750hz
440hz, 660hz
500hz, 720hz
And if you haven't already, check out this question.
edited 7 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
user45266user45266
5,3681940
5,3681940
add a comment |
add a comment |
tom894 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
tom894 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
tom894 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
tom894 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Music: Practice & Theory Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f85371%2fwhy-is-the-relationship-between-frequency-and-pitch-exponential%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Because frequencies sound more similar the more oscillation nodes they have in common. Frequencies of 1, 2, 3, 4... don't have as many as 1, 2, 4, 8, 16... do - you can make a simple diagram to see why.
– Kilian Foth
2 mins ago