Text: Subject: Re: Have either of you ever seen this? Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 08:42:28 -0700 From: Dale Pond Organization: Delta Spectrum Research To: lui , Lynda Susoni References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 lui wrote: >F G A Bb C D E F - F Major I'm just going to ramble a bit here. If we take the F Major chord and add its ninth we get all the notes Keely specified. F G A Bb C D E F G 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 Not only that but the triads are intertwinded with each other. Terrestrial = FAC Celestial = CEG Neutral = BfDF We've been over this before. The next question is how does one build "progression of thirds" from these? After all we've been hammering on these past couple of months I'm not sure what a progression is. >The C note is in the 5th position which is the dominat position and the chord is constructed from there. I am only saying that this may have been one reason to choose the F A C triad. >It isn't for me to say what is 'license' or not! After all I ignored most of the rules myself and found that the music system really isn't anything like what they teach people. Yeah, I know exactly what you mean. To quote an adventurous movie archeologist: "I'm making it up as I go." >The same is happening with the overtones. I have worked out that, even with the discrepencies between some note naming, that the first proper scale as we know it won't appear until the 19th overtone appears. Then some four or five Major and minor scales are possible to build. One of the difficulties is the thing that is creating the series of overtones. A string creates one series and a hollow resonator something else. Both vibrators are subject to density, weight, length, temperature, tension, material, etc. Due to the countless varieties of strings in an orchestra there is no "standard" string or its "standard" overtone series. I think the ordinary scales are created from string harmonics plus the natural vibrations of the instruments. There HAS to be fudging to make the harmonics harmonize through the span of music desired. Which is what Lynda was saying about detuning piano strings so the various string harmonics synchronize. That one fudging tradition tells it all. Speaking of harmonization of overtones, so much of modern music has so many mismatched tones, chords and harmonics I find listening to much of it an unpleasant experience. These musicians have studied music theory haven't they? Or do they do that on purpose so as to stand out or what? >This takes me onto the circle of 5ths. This seems to be a very naturally occuring thing that is following the law of PHI. I don't profess to fully understanding it except that I see it in the Fibonnacci numbers. If the circle of 5ths is the natural way keys seem to evolve (look at Hughes's charts) then the overtones hold a vast secret for me. The comma of 23 closes the circle of twelve keys and from that circle there are 12 Major and 12 Minor scales that can be built. It is also a fact that other keys are possible that do not belong in the same circle , implying that another circle exists beyond the divide of the 23 comma. To stick my neck yet again I'd say the 5th position (also being dominant) is the way it is because it is founded on 3. Russell says the universe is made up of threes. 3 is the resultant of 1 (fundamental; i.e., Adam) added to its mate 2 (octave; Eve). This is the Fibonacci process. So 3 is the creation and the creation is in endless motion (round and round; i.e., circle of fifths or prodgeny (ala latter chapters of Genesis where so and so begat so and so, seemingly endlessly). The 2 cubed is only the 3rd octave but the 3 cubed is a cube! A complete form and the first solid or 3D structure possessing dynamism. So 3 must be a foundation in motion (pardon the paradox). In the C Major scale G is the fifth and that is the way Russell shows us with his keyboard graphic on page 249 of "The Universal One". Let's not forget the Masons place a G in the middle of their two interlaced triangles of the square (2?) and compass (circle?). Rambling some more: 2 (octave) builds the gamut of activity (the extent of the useable universe) while 3 (fifth) gives it motion being constructed of two thirds, male and female, minor and major. The 2 and 3 meet again in the Circle of Fifths or the completion of their creation with the exception of the Comma. For years I maintained this Comma was the God-essence (the burr under the saddle or grit in the oyster) that kept things from harmonizing and thus becoming inert (balanced). Maybe it is so - maybe not. Makes a good picture though. >If we begin with any vibration and give it any letter name or symbol and then apply Ramsey's maths we get this: >F A C, C E G, G B D = one example of the ratios having been given letters. Then we loose the Bf again. This Bf is a slippery character! >So how can Maths produce the above subdominant-tonic-dominant (for C Major) and yet the overtones do not see any F note until around the 21st mark? Ramsey builds the scale mathematically so there must be some justification within its existence. I'll have to modify my Overtone Calculator (yet again) to show the sequence in which these overtones are generated. The problem in this is we have a "license" to put into the program whatever we want - to get out whatever we want. It could be self-fulfilling and prove nothing. I did notice one thing that continues to bother me. Three. If allowed to propagate mathematically it introduces the 81 and its octaves which are the oyster grit (81:80 = Comma) reappearing in an otherwise perfect progression of overtones. Of this sequence Keely says it is indeed geometric (not arithmetical) in progression but does not give any more information. 3^4 = 81 = 3*3*3*3 2^4*5 = 80 = 2*2*2*2*5 The progression of 3^3 cannot exist within the usual gamut because its identity splits. This may be synonomous with the male force within the female - which Russell claims is the reactive principle in voiding (sexual mating). So at 27 3 splits into a series of squares and a series in cubes. In a strange sort of way this makes a lot of sense. Metaphysical sense. The squaring of 3 (by its mating to 2) splits to give birth to a whole 'nuther series (of cubes) that becomes (according to Russell) the physical foundation of form (family unit?) about which the family's activities revolve.

See Also: MUTATIONS

Source: