The Beat that isn't -- Don

[Ric Brekne]

Hi Don:
Comments interspersed below

    Don wrote:

    If two sine waves can have a secondary resultant that beats, then an
    A440 fork to F3 on piano would have lots going on too.

Yes, I agree.

    snip:

    If one subtracts 440 from each of these then the only really strong
    resultant may be at e6 (~1320 hertz). This fits rather nicely with
    the error that Dave Renauld "discovered" at the tuning exam--rather
    than the 1.2 was calculated before based on a5--which doesn't exist
    for f3 nor an A4 fork.

Thats more or less what I mentioned a couple posts back. It fits really 
well actually. Resultant tones are a known phenomena. The numbers fit.  
Seems pretty plausible to me. And it makes more sense (to me at anyrate) 
then simply attributing things to the cleverness of someone to hear a 
beatless A3 or A4 / Tuning fork comparison. Especially when they are 
using the F3 as a controll interval in the first place.


    It certainly also means that proper results can only be achieved by
    using A3 if f3 is going to be the "test" note.

Yes. That is to say if you dont compensate for the inharmonicity error 
that is created in using A4 / F3. 

    I'll let someone else do the subtraction--and the addition of
    inharmonicityto the figures above.

    Any ideas anyone out there?

Cheers
RicB