ting ting Yes, but actually no

r/woooosh?

TinCan not even a little bit...

Is a perfect 5th dissonant?

F/Ab

Same, bro. "Adam Neely hexa-head support group?"

I see a Pentagon. Could it be a counting sides problem ? Check your math.

Same, maan

Late-ass comment, but I feel like he wore the beanie to accentuate it.

Whoever asked that is the equivalent of an LSS.

no, i won't. You're totally correct thinking that way

I'd rather request you educate me in this matter.

@@boris3866 F's perfect fifth is a C if we move the F up an octave it becomes the perfect fourth.

Proof: 4/3 * 3/2 = 2

Clock diagrams are wack

That is exactly my experience. Thank you.

Raised my eyebrow too before the apostrophe kicked in.

Shane Dawson?

The syntonic comma has nothing on that apostrophe.

adam neely has a cat fursona

Valid question. Next Q&A: how to kill people with music.

Can we get this to the top so Adam answers it next please

He kills me every time.

To quote Adam: "I'm glad, that my audience is asking the important question."

I mean, he murdered Ted Nugent at 7:37

I was about to comment the same thing! But I'm incredibly late anyways so nvm....

F

Thats horrendous advice to be entirely honest it will just make you more nervous and pressured, you should read the book effortless mastery which talks about how to enter a stress-free mindset while playing and how much that will allow you to play better

@@aitorcazalis2307 it was more about "play in a speed you can keep consistently" 😂

touts to echo

s to echo

s to echo

echo...

*Echo runs in scares from all the shouting*

Because they are functionally inversions of prefect fifths.

Thanos Psaridis They're almost like power chords in that song.

I don't know are you sure about that, because whenever I hear that song my ears bleed

They are used as the perfect fifths

Actually the second inversion of a major/minor triads is the proof that 4ths can be consonant. Also the 4th resulting from the doubling of a triad's root in root position. All intervals in a major or minor triads are consonant, and yes, power chords too as in Smoke on the water.

It's certainly one of the reasons Ted Nugent sucks

Actually, I never wondered. I thought the many reasons were fairly evident.

u q 6 voice fugue from bwv 1079, not sure whose arrangement or what exact part of it it was

So I'm guessing there can't be much left that does scare you anymore. :)

There is a minor 3rd (from G to Bb). And minor 6th is kinda considered a little bit dissonant anyway.

Yeah, I mean there's the 3rd harmonic and the 4th harmonic and together they produce a perfect fourth. Right after an octave and a perfect fifth. Starting from 100 hz and going up 200, 300, 400 100/200 = Octave 200/300 = Fifth 300/400 = Fourth

@@mysteriev7071 Yes, of course but we are talking about with respect to the root here.

@@mikabjorklund3678 Yes, it doesn't exist with respect to the root but the two notes do have a lot of coincident overtones which is probably what is really important.

Lmao, well memed

Mate Mišo Mesić 420 “Anyways, here’s the Dorian mode”

r/imsmart gold right here

@@ethantamales ok so first of all it's r/iamverysmart secondly, it's supposed to be a rick and morty copypasta reference

Eatham Tamales copypasta lmao stfu

Nailed it

tritone (sqrt(2)/1) is theoretically one of the most dissonant intervals (even slightly worse would be a golden ratio interval), being as far from simple ratios as possible. the simplest ratio that is closer than 5 cent is 17/12 (3 cent off). the easier 7/5 is already 17cents off... so the tritone by itself is quite dissonant, and almost everyone will agree on that :-)

@@deinauge7894 but 7/5 is resonant with a consonant quality.

@@deinauge7894 You're the first one who describes Tritone as sqrt(2)/1 And I like that.

same. he gets a lot of unnecessary hate.

Wait what? Why does he get hate ?

Petter Houting Perfect Fourth’s lives matter!!

Not really pop but Vulfpeck does it all the time

Or the fluffed chord change in Jean Genie? Maybe they just thought it was funny to leave it in? Maybe the rest of the take was great, and they had to finish soon? Maybe they just didn't care? Maybe all of the above?

Maybe this isn't so recent but I know that some of The Veronicas' songs have some of these mistakes in their studio album recordings. I have heard from other people that producers and sound engineers are pressured to have the recordings be polished much more than they used to be. This was referring to vocals and pitch correction but I would imagine it would also apply to these kinds of small mistakes too.

you should listen to my band's album, it's full of mistakes

Daniel Weddell To be honest, unless your David Bowie or Paul McCartney, that kind stuff usually comes off pretty corny.

When?

Outro music

why is it clever?

Probably because it wasn't "supposed" to be used that way, but he did it anyways and it doesn't sound half-bad.

oh, i was wondering if i was was missing some obvious theory joke :p

matsomo Andy is a genius

Andy is god!

I LOVE his stuff

Yep, paused the video to say the same thing. Andy is god.

I was like why does that name and KZfaq channel picture look so familiar 🤔🤔

Such a great KZfaqr

Is it actually THE Andy Rehfeldt???

Well the profile picture is the right one So it seems that it is the one and only

Ritvik Karra I literally came to the comment section to see if anyone else got excited when they noticed that 😅

He's a legend

I subbed for his Hexagon head.

Granted most people wouldn’t be friends of Chopin

Ethan H. Eediot

Ethan H. Shoutflips to simpleouts.

That man is a legend, I saw his name and had to do a double take. Love his work

Aesthetics come in all shapes and sizes

Viktor Kaganovich he pulled his hair out with frustration over the hexagon question....

hair reveal soon

The hat makes your head look MORE hexagonal. Cool!

Adam Neely next time make sure the hat and your hair are in the SAME KEY

Bingo. The main thing I had to learn when first playing live back in the 80's was, "Mean what you play, even when you don't play what you meant."

yeah i still dont understand this. its literally right there in the harmonic series, so im not sure why he's saying it isnt there.

What he means is say in the Bb harmonic series, the fourth fron that is Eb. But that not doesnt occur. Bb, Bb, F, Bb, D, F, Ab, Bb etc. A fourth from the fundamental doesnt show up

The harmonic series has no perfect 4ths of the fundamental is what he means. Yes, there are overtones that are a perfect 4th from each other, but never the fundamental.

@@bigchiefbc but by that logic, neither does the perfect fifth or the major third occur in the overtone series. No harmonic will have a frequency 1.5 (3/2) times the fundamental, just like no harmonic will have a frequency that is 1.333... (4/3) times the fundamental. The 1st harmonic is unison, the 2nd harmonic is an octave, the 3rd harmonic is an octave + a fifth, the 4th harmonic is an octave + a fifth + a fourth, the 5th harmonic is an octave + a fifth + a fourth + a major third, and so on. I think Adam is wrong with his reasoning here, although I agree with the conclusion that it can vary based on context. Consonance is more complicated than just ratios of frequencies. There's culture, the timbre of specific instruments, effects like guitar distortion, and other things that contribute to consonance and dissonance. In the case of a distorted guitar for example, (imo) a fourth is more consonant than a major third, despite it feeling the other way around on a clean piano. I think this is probably because when it comes to distortion on guitar, the simple ratios are much more important than anything else. A heavily distorted major third sounds very messy compared to a fifth, a fourth, or an octave.

@@Henry-fv3bc I think that he is correct if you factor in octave equivalence. The third harmonic is a perfect 12th above the fundamental which is a perfect fifth above the octave, so in that sense if the fundamental is a C you do have an interval between a C and G, just not the fundamental C. The same is true for any interval of the form X:2^n, which includes the major third. It does not include the fourth.

Rhythm as well^

I hope that for modern jazz sound you do not mean a fucking guitar distortion

How do you mean by modern jazz?

You should play as out-there as you possibly can, honestly. Piss people off. Do good in your work, prove you know your stuff, but try to approach "protest music" in a jazz mindset- people don't want music to change? Fuck em, distort the hell out of your guitar, use a drum machine, play synthesizer, use non-standard instruments... music has no rules and as long as you can prove you know what you need to know for the major, no "jazz police" can fail you for trying to do cool new things.

*Insert Jazz Police by Leonard Cohen here* Almost unrelated, but it's still a great song.

"They teach you there's a boundary line to music. But, man, there's no boundary line to art." -Charlie Parker

insanetherainmusic/adam neely collab please

SO LAME ;)

saschamuecke seems Monteverdi Choir - pilgrimage to santiago

thomasLike YES

read about the equal temperament and you will understaind. Basicaly, thirds and fifths were improtant for mideval music. Around bach's time though, we started using equal temperament. That means that you devide the octave in equal parts - 12 parts in our case, which is deacent, because the thirds/fifths are really close to being the ratio that they should be (you would need to devide the octave to infinite equal parts to achieve an actual... 3/2 ratio for a fitth and also have correct third intervals), and all of the 12 intervals are useable (it wasn't always like this)

Nicolás Bascuñán *fretless*

It isn't everything you're asking, but this is the reason we have 12 notes per octave (plus a little bit). Remember that intervals are ratios: you multiply the lower frequency by a number to get the higher frequency, and you divide the higher frequency by the same number to get the lower frequency. Theoretically, every positive number defines a different interval whether it is rational or irrational. It's all based on the circle of fifths, which is based on the harmonic series. The third harmonic (3) is a perfect 12th above the fundamental (1), or a just perfect 5th (3/2=slightly less than 7.02 semitones) above the second harmonic (2, an octave above the fundamental). The perfect fifth was a consonance identified as 3:2 by Pythagoras and was well known throughout the medieval era in Europe. Since they are the most consonant intervals, (and the only recognized consonances for a while,) it is natural that Europeans (as well as many other consonance-liking cultures) would structure their system of pitch with just perfect fifths and octaves. (Our scales repeat every octave so they're based on octaves.) If you take a note like, say, F0, and add a note a just perfect 5th above it (C1+2cents), and then add a note a just perfect fifth above that (G1+4c), the results are: (The Real Circle/Spiral/Line of Fifths) 1: F0 2: C1+2c 3: G1+4c 4: D2+6c 5: A2+8c 6: E3+10c 7: B3+12c 8: F#4+14c 9: C#5+16c 10: G#5+18c 11: D#6+20c 12: A#6+22c 13: F7+23c (23.46 to be more exact, E#7 in a "Pythagorean" tuning) The first twelve notes of this may be transposed to every octave to create one possible "Pythagorean" tuning. Theoretically there are 12 possible 12-note Pythagorean tunings because you could use any of the 12 notes as the starting note. (That's disregarding the fact that you can transposes any of those 12 tunings to any pitch, like A=432hz instead of A=440hz.) Although this 13th note is noticeably sharper than normal F7 (2^7=128, seven octaves above the F0) it is the closest this sequence comes to making a full circle (returning to the same note in a different octave) for a while. This makes it a good place to stop adding notes (for practical reasons if nothing else) which still provides a good sense of continuity across the frequency spectrum, with 12 nearly equal half-steps spanning every octave. (The sequence of adding JP5s is infinite and never repeats a note exactly.) The 23.46 difference between this 13th note (E#7) and F7 is called the Pythagorean Comma and is equal to (3/2)^12)/(2^7)=531441/524288. Nowadays we tune instruments using a system called 12-tone equal temperament. In this system every half-step is the same and is therefore equal to the twelfth root of two (2^(1/12)). This also means that each (ET) perfect fifth is equal as they are all equal to 7 semitones (2^(7/12)). This means that, if you add ET fifths in the same manner as above, the 13th note is exactly 7 octaves above the first note, actually making the full circle I mentioned above (The Circle of Fifths). Another way of looking at it is that the just perfect fifth has been flattened by 1/12 of the Pythagorean comma or about 1.955 cents to create the ET perfect fifth so that 12 ET perfect fifths equals 7 octaves. (3/2)/(2^7/12)=(531441/524288)^(1/2) ((log[(3/2)/(2^7/12)=(531441/524288)^(1/2)]/log[2])x1200=about 1.955) (There are 1200 cents per octave.) Many different tuning systems were used from the 16th to 19th centuries and many of them were made by altering the fifth by a certain amount to create a desired effect like making thirds more consonant. You may notice that the first 7 notes form a diatonic scale (lydian if F is the tonic, this has something to do with why it's the brightest), and the first 5 notes form a pentatonic scale (Major Pentatonic if F is tonic. Ironically this is the theoretical darkest pentatonic mode based on how low the notes are in the scale) In medieval Europe, only diatonic modes were used, with occasional accidentals being added over time to avoid tritones and create leading tones. I'm not sure, but believe that the twelve note system was largely the result of trying to theorize and play chromatic notes such as leading tones, and eventually modulations. It is possible to create a 35-note extended Pythagorean tuning spanning every writable note from Fbb to Bx stacked in (just) perfect fifths like below. Fbb, Cbb, Gbb, Dbb, Abb, Ebb, Bbb, Fb, Cb, Gb, Db, Ab, Eb, Bb, F, C, G, D, A, E, B, F#, C#, G#, D#, A#, E#, B#, Fx, Cx, Gx, Dx, Ax, Ex, Bx The appropriate Pythagorean tunings for every major and minor key (and more) are found in this system, and so this and similar 35-note systems may be useful to think about when reading about tuning systems. (You might also find it bizarrely satisfying used as a more modern xenharmonic (microtonal) tuning. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/qdNdkrin3JjScoE.html) It is a rather odd scale as a whole the though, because each of the 12 traditional notes is split into a cluster three close together notes such as Dbb, C, and B#, or Gb, F#, and Ex. (Except that Ab/G# is only a 2-note cluster because it is a tritone away from D which is the center note) It is also a little bizarre that notes with more sharps are higher than their enharmonic counterparts and notes with more flats are lower, meaning that, when looking at a cluster of enharmonic notes, the ones written lower on the staff actually sound slightly higher in Pythagorean tuning. Also, medieval pitch theory was based on interlocking hexachords, which are the first six notes of a major or mixolydian scale. These can be made by taking the first six notes of a the circle of fifths and transposing them all into one octave. (Medieval theorists thought of notes in different octaves as different notes.) Harmonically, medieval hexachords are also identical to minor 11 chords as well as diatonic clusters (all the notes) and perfect quartal hexachords (stacks of 5 perfect fourths). Also, you can find that sus chords and double sus chords come from the first 3 and 4 notes of the circle of fifths. It just goes to show how useful the circle of fifths is in structure music.

Thanks. Still can't get why the system works with that specific number of frenquency intervals. Why not a "macrotonal" (?) system of 9 notes or a microtonal system of 27 or 100 notes? (That related to the micro bends question).

Nicolás Bascuñán I said that the tuning we use is "deacent", by which I mean it isn't the best, but it works. If you would instead use 7 equal notes, you wouldn't really have a perfect fifth and a third. That being said, the 24 note system would have more acurrate fifths & thirds, but there are alot more notes now. 12 is just a deacent aproximation that works good enough without having a whole lot of notes.

For me it will always be the C prelude because for one it's awesome but it's also the first thing I ever learned to play on piano.

Which book? (Mine for both is the C# minor fugue)

His explanation got a little confusing. What he means is that, even though 4:3 does appear in the series, you never get a 4:3 ratio in relation to the fundamental note. That is, if the fundamental is C, you never get an F in the harmonic series. But this only makes sense if you think that notes an octave apart correspond to the "same note", which is just Western tradition. If you take the harmonic series on its own, that doesn't make any fucking sense.

That clears it up, thanks mate :)

If you go by that logic, technically every interval is included in the harmonic series (technically, because they are getting really silent at some point in most sounds). For our ears though, it is more important how the overtones relate to the fundemental note, because it is the lowest (the second lowest too) and, in most cases, the loudest perceived frequency.

I don't have a copy of Persichetti but I do have Walter Piston's "Harmony" and I was just reading his position on perfect 4ths - I think he said they're dissonant when they are the lowest interval but consonant in upper voices. To me that would fit with the idea of notes being in the harmonic series of the fundamental bass, but not necessarily with other notes that they form consonances with. Then again, by this reasoning minor thirds are dissonant too!

"If you go by that logic, technically every interval is included in the harmonic series" Well, almost. The harmonic series is infinite, so it does include every possible rational interval (if any math inclined person can correct me on this, please do!). Irrational intervals are absent, though. You don't have the interval 1:e in the harmonic series--which is exactly why we should be using that *more* in our music. The real question here is: does it even matter if our intervals are "included in the harmonic series"? We still believe in the lie that the seventh degree of the harmonic series represents the minor seventh, when it doesn't. The minor seventh is the perfect fourth of the perfect fourth, that is, it's 3/4 * 3/4 = 9/16, which is "more complex" i.e. "more dissonant" than the 7/4 of the harmonic series; yet we perceive 9/16 as being in tune and 7/4 as being out of tune. Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

I love to explore the math to ridiculous extremes, but I think what sounds "consonant" comes down to how we hear things. My ears have an "uncanny valley" encompassing all intervals too big to be considered a unison and too small to be considered a third. When any pair of strong overtones between two notes falls in that uncanny valley, there's a possibility for it to sound dissonant. We can use math to avoid the uncanny valleys and find the "tolerance" of consonance rather than a "perfect" consonance. Let me know when you make your 1:e music, Fernie... I'd love to hear it :) John Chowning's "Stria" uses the golden ratio as an interval... www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/comj.2007.31.3.26

There are an infinite amount of rational numbers (Just Intonation, or JI), AND an infinite amount of real numbers. There are MORE real numbers, though, because they can't all be listed. JI gives a framework for consonance in closed form that's historically relevant and mathematically consistent, so that's a big part of its usefulness.

Brass is a metal (an alloy, actually).

bmoremike God dammit...

Depends on the vocal style in most cases. Scream over brass instruments and you got Brass Metal. There you go.