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?













5















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?










share|improve this question









New contributor



tom894 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.



















  • 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















5















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?










share|improve this question









New contributor



tom894 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.



















  • 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













5












5








5








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?










share|improve this question









New contributor



tom894 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











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






share|improve this question









New contributor



tom894 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.










share|improve this question









New contributor



tom894 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 6 hours ago









Todd Wilcox

39.2k373134




39.2k373134






New contributor



tom894 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








asked 8 hours ago









tom894tom894

262




262




New contributor



tom894 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




New contributor




tom894 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.














  • 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





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










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















4














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.






share|improve this answer




















  • 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



















3














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.



  1. Go find any tone generator application (this website works).

  2. Try picking a note (say, 440hz). Play it, then play another sound simultaneously with a frequency 1.5x the original (660hz). Observe.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. Now, starting on 500hz, add 220hz to your 500hz frequency. Play the 500hz frequency at the same time as your new 720hz frequency.

  6. 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.





  1. 440hz, 660hz


  2. 500hz, 750hz


  3. 440hz, 660hz


  4. 500hz, 720hz


And if you haven't already, check out this question.






share|improve this answer

























    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.









    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    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









    4














    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.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 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
















    4














    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.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 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














    4












    4








    4







    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.






    share|improve this answer















    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.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    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













    • 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












    3














    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.



    1. Go find any tone generator application (this website works).

    2. Try picking a note (say, 440hz). Play it, then play another sound simultaneously with a frequency 1.5x the original (660hz). Observe.

    3. 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.

    4. 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.

    5. Now, starting on 500hz, add 220hz to your 500hz frequency. Play the 500hz frequency at the same time as your new 720hz frequency.

    6. 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.





    1. 440hz, 660hz


    2. 500hz, 750hz


    3. 440hz, 660hz


    4. 500hz, 720hz


    And if you haven't already, check out this question.






    share|improve this answer





























      3














      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.



      1. Go find any tone generator application (this website works).

      2. Try picking a note (say, 440hz). Play it, then play another sound simultaneously with a frequency 1.5x the original (660hz). Observe.

      3. 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.

      4. 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.

      5. Now, starting on 500hz, add 220hz to your 500hz frequency. Play the 500hz frequency at the same time as your new 720hz frequency.

      6. 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.





      1. 440hz, 660hz


      2. 500hz, 750hz


      3. 440hz, 660hz


      4. 500hz, 720hz


      And if you haven't already, check out this question.






      share|improve this answer



























        3












        3








        3







        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.



        1. Go find any tone generator application (this website works).

        2. Try picking a note (say, 440hz). Play it, then play another sound simultaneously with a frequency 1.5x the original (660hz). Observe.

        3. 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.

        4. 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.

        5. Now, starting on 500hz, add 220hz to your 500hz frequency. Play the 500hz frequency at the same time as your new 720hz frequency.

        6. 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.





        1. 440hz, 660hz


        2. 500hz, 750hz


        3. 440hz, 660hz


        4. 500hz, 720hz


        And if you haven't already, check out this question.






        share|improve this answer















        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.



        1. Go find any tone generator application (this website works).

        2. Try picking a note (say, 440hz). Play it, then play another sound simultaneously with a frequency 1.5x the original (660hz). Observe.

        3. 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.

        4. 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.

        5. Now, starting on 500hz, add 220hz to your 500hz frequency. Play the 500hz frequency at the same time as your new 720hz frequency.

        6. 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.





        1. 440hz, 660hz


        2. 500hz, 750hz


        3. 440hz, 660hz


        4. 500hz, 720hz


        And if you haven't already, check out this question.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 7 hours ago

























        answered 7 hours ago









        user45266user45266

        5,3681940




        5,3681940




















            tom894 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            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





















































            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

            Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

            Tom Holland Mục lục Đầu đời và giáo dục | Sự nghiệp | Cuộc sống cá nhân | Phim tham gia | Giải thưởng và đề cử | Chú thích | Liên kết ngoài | Trình đơn chuyển hướngProfile“Person Details for Thomas Stanley Holland, "England and Wales Birth Registration Index, 1837-2008" — FamilySearch.org”"Meet Tom Holland... the 16-year-old star of The Impossible""Schoolboy actor Tom Holland finds himself in Oscar contention for role in tsunami drama"“Naomi Watts on the Prince William and Harry's reaction to her film about the late Princess Diana”lưu trữ"Holland and Pflueger Are West End's Two New 'Billy Elliots'""I'm so envious of my son, the movie star! British writer Dominic Holland's spent 20 years trying to crack Hollywood - but he's been beaten to it by a very unlikely rival"“Richard and Margaret Povey of Jersey, Channel Islands, UK: Information about Thomas Stanley Holland”"Tom Holland to play Billy Elliot""New Billy Elliot leaving the garage"Billy Elliot the Musical - Tom Holland - Billy"A Tale of four Billys: Tom Holland""The Feel Good Factor""Thames Christian College schoolboys join Myleene Klass for The Feelgood Factor""Government launches £600,000 arts bursaries pilot""BILLY's Chapman, Holland, Gardner & Jackson-Keen Visit Prime Minister""Elton John 'blown away' by Billy Elliot fifth birthday" (video with John's interview and fragments of Holland's performance)"First News interviews Arrietty's Tom Holland"“33rd Critics' Circle Film Awards winners”“National Board of Review Current Awards”Bản gốc"Ron Howard Whaling Tale 'In The Heart Of The Sea' Casts Tom Holland"“'Spider-Man' Finds Tom Holland to Star as New Web-Slinger”lưu trữ“Captain America: Civil War (2016)”“Film Review: ‘Captain America: Civil War’”lưu trữ“‘Captain America: Civil War’ review: Choose your own avenger”lưu trữ“The Lost City of Z reviews”“Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios Find Their 'Spider-Man' Star and Director”“‘Mary Magdalene’, ‘Current War’ & ‘Wind River’ Get 2017 Release Dates From Weinstein”“Lionsgate Unleashing Daisy Ridley & Tom Holland Starrer ‘Chaos Walking’ In Cannes”“PTA's 'Master' Leads Chicago Film Critics Nominations, UPDATED: Houston and Indiana Critics Nominations”“Nominaciones Goya 2013 Telecinco Cinema – ENG”“Jameson Empire Film Awards: Martin Freeman wins best actor for performance in The Hobbit”“34th Annual Young Artist Awards”Bản gốc“Teen Choice Awards 2016—Captain America: Civil War Leads Second Wave of Nominations”“BAFTA Film Award Nominations: ‘La La Land’ Leads Race”“Saturn Awards Nominations 2017: 'Rogue One,' 'Walking Dead' Lead”Tom HollandTom HollandTom HollandTom Hollandmedia.gettyimages.comWorldCat Identities300279794no20130442900000 0004 0355 42791085670554170004732cb16706349t(data)XX5557367