Leap years are a perfect analogy. It's so easy: There's a leap year every 4 years. Well, except every 100 years, when it isn't. Well, except every 400 years, when it's a leap year again. And we still have to add random seconds here and there to be in sync with the solar year, with weird side effects like 23:59:60 being a valid time on Jun 30 or Dec 31. Sometimes.
Lets all start using the iranian calendar system then, where the beginning/end of a year is determined by an actual astronomical event, where by the sun passes through the plane of the earths equator or the plane of the earths equator swallows the sun (the vernal equinox) depending on your astronomical outlook on the earth ;)
Michael Heare is back making vsauce videos finally, after his experiment with paid content that nobody watched, though now he's made all those vids free to watch. The vsauce videos he makes these are ALL about maths, like it's fascinating but he used to talk about a lot more varied stuff. His old videos were essentially video versions of XKCD's "What If" series and books, like the question "what would happen if the sun disappeared". Mr. Heare made a video on that, and it's exactly the kind of question XKCD would cover, albeit he'd answer it with more actual physics, but either way.
Science and Music - book by Sir James H. Jeans - 2012 - Science Sir James H. Jeans. "On taking the ... clock-face is that shewn in fig. 55; it extends to infinity in both directions, and all simplicity has disappeared." That is the truth of reality as the Perfect Fifth/Perfect Fourth/ Infinity or what Fields Medal math professor Alain Connes calls "2, 3, infinity" as the Unified Field of relativity and quantum physics. The ancient nonwestern cultures realized this truth of reality. Adam Neely is covering it up with his Archtyas 5/4 b.s. 6/5 (harmonic mean) x 5/4 (arithmetic mean) = Perfect Fifth as Geometric Mean Squared. 3/2 is NOT Geometric Mean Squared as Adam Neely is claiming. Since 81/80 is the amount by which Didymus corrected the Pythagorean major third 81:64, to a just major third 5:4. Archytas will have assigned this interval the ratio 5:4 (the nearest epimoric smaller than the ditone: (9:8)squared = 81:64 and 5:4 = 80:64). The Monochord in Ancient Greek Harmonic Science books.google.com/books?isbn=0521843243 David Creese - 2010 - History
Yet we still watch the whole video and try to understand wtf he’s talking about. Even when I don’t, I still feel satisfied by the end of his videos because I’ve learned at least one new thing. 😊
I'm a late learner and I'm 100% self taught from TH-cam videos. I'm going to be completely honest, I feel so proud that I've finally got to the point that I fully understand an entire Adam Neely video! Lol I remember just a year ago around this same time not understanding anything on this channel. So you can get better quickly if you push yourself. Get a notebook, use the notebook, draw in everything music related. Circle of 5ths/4ths, scales, chords for each key, etc. That helped me alot because I can mentally reference everything by visualizing a page from my notebook. Also as plenty of other people have said stop noodling around on your instrument and *actually practice* or *actually play.* Noodling is a waste of energy and time. Plus it forms very bad habits.
@@the_original_Bilb_Ono So in his book, Kyle Gann is incorrectly claiming that the 5/4 as Major Third is from the 5th overtone harmonic. This is not true at all - it's from Archytas use of geometric mean. "However, he [Archytas] noted that the product of the arithmetic mean and the harmonic mean is equal to the square of the geometric mean, so this gave a way of dividing the fifth of 3:2 into the product of 5:4 and 6:5." A Truman State University review on Scriba, Christoph J. “Mathematics and music.” (Danish) Normat 38 (1990), no. 1, 3-17, 52. So that's the ORIGIN of Adam incorrectly using 5/4 (and the 16th C. WEstern music theorists) as an extension of 3/2. It's not a "circle of fifths" but in fact it's an infinite spiral of fifths as noncommutative phase (2/3 is C to F while 3/2 is C to G). 6/5 (harmonic mean) x 5/4 (arithmetic mean) = Perfect Fifth as Geometric Mean Squared. 3/2 is NOT Geometric Mean Squared as Adam Neely is claiming. "Archytas will have assigned this interval the ratio 5:4 (the nearest epimoric smaller than the ditone: (9:8)squared = 81:64 and 5:4 = 80:64)." The Monochord in Ancient Greek Harmonic Science books.google.com/books?isbn=0521843243 David Creese - 2010 - History
What's more impressive is that despite the pitch drift, the arrangement is designed to start and end in the same key!!!!!!! Literally the math is insane for that
Actually you can... but it would limit creativity. The writer of the melody would have to actually take the math into account, and ensure that there are an equal number of notes which cause a sharpness drift as notes which cause a flatness drift, plus to not have too many of each in a row at any given time.
the weirdest part is that i starting singing the soprano part on the piano while imagining the lower notes in my head in order to stay in tune, and after a bit i found my singing was actually becoming sharper and sharper, without me even trying. congratulations adam, you made me comma pump myself
The sad thing for me was I started splitting the columns and trying to figure out what the chords were before realizing I shouldn't be analyzing the piece like a Bach chorale. Then it took me a few more minutes to realize this was a tuning puzzle that affects choirs and not bands and orchestras. :) (To be fair, my instrument is trumpet, not voice. So not the tuning issue I normally deal with.) BTW, I got V 5/3, A unaccented passing tone into vi 5 that resolves into I if you're curious.
“You either die a musician or live long enough to see yourself become an extraordinarily intelligent music theorist with enough information about music theory to make a person depressed.”
@@scottfreeland3242 And yet if you repeatedly multiply and divide, funny things happen too ;) The “floating point comma pump”, perhaps? 0.1*0.2/0.1/0.2 = 1.0000000000000002 🤔
@@yinge101 I mean, no this only happens in digital environments with imperfect floating point representations. If you calculate 0.1*0.2/0.1/0.2 with "infinite precision" you just get 1. But still I appreciate your comment it made me chuckle ^^
Or in other words: 12 just-intonated fifths are extremely close to 7 octaves so what if we just stretch the fifth by 2 cents and then it will be sweet as. Edit: I got it the wrong way around, you would actually need to squash the fifth to get an equal tempered fifth
"school is more about how music works today and less why" - reason why I sucked at music back in school right there. Everything constantly felt so arbitrary, and the teacher was in so way over her head I couldn't even dare inquire about anything. Just took the barely passing grade and left. Only over the years and with channels like yours I began to fathom and come to terms with the state of it all. Thank you based Adam.
Dude, totally same. I've tried starting multiple instruments over the years but never got anywhere because I always felt so lost and the pieces my teachers had me play felt more like drills than actual music. But I feel like I have some direction now because of all these theory vids, and I'm starting to pick up the guitar again, and it ACTUALLY makes sense to me now.
Kim Andaya not every method book is created equal, but they are all written so you learn fundamentals of musicianship on that instrument in a way that progresses the student’s knowledge so that the skills become an after thought. Every good musician has to practice their scales, know their intervals,fingerings,bowings,articulations etc before they can begin to make music, it’s just part of the proven process.
@@devonc99 Yeah, I understand that the basics are super important, I'm not knocking that down. I know music is a discipline. But I just had so many unanswered questions, and I have a hard time being dedicated to something I don't understand (in terms of why and how). I think it's just the way that I learn.
Kim Andaya that’s fair, it sounds like you need a better teacher or would benefit more from private instruction if you haven’t tried that already. I’m currently watching Adam instead of doing my music education course work because it’s just more enjoyable, but the fundamentals learned through those drills can be invaluable at a young age with a good teacher. Unfortunately it’s an underpaid, undervalued profession so it’s very common to find bad teaching examples
Why did you have to comment this and force me to find out that it was All Star? I was perfectly content before (in all serious though good job noticing that because I had no idea)
Man I love these theories, but your french cracked me up at 6:25 . A "coup de grâce" is indeed a final thrust, but what you said is a "coup de gras", meaning "a fat hit" :D
@@MK-zl7hj I know it is. I am French. But "coup de grâce" in English is spelled "coup de gras", for whatever reason. Yes, it's silly and incorrect. Just like us talking about doing one's "footing" for jogging, or going to the "parking" for the parking lot. Adam's not wrong, it's just the way the language solidified.
@@Chozal There's a fundamental difference there, it's that your examples show a shift in meaning, as is natural, while the "coup de grâce" is a mispronounciation.
This is fascinating. In my choir, we often sing acapella pieces and I would always get annoyed because we would end out of key. Now I realize that it's us singing in tune that forces us to end out of key. Thank you for this
This video makes me want to sing one of these as a canon, and throw everyone off by RAISING the pitch instead of the everpresent sinking pitch. How often does the conductor get to complain we're drifting too sharp?
I can’t be the only person who watches his videos that is not a jazz musician or studied music theory. I mean I’ve played multiple instruments but I only have a basic understanding. I just love watching his videos and I’m honestly so engrossed by learning new things even if I won’t ever use this information
Out of two versions of G major the first one definitely feels more in tune, probably because I've been conditioned by decades of listening to music in equal temperament.
It may be more custom to instruments we usually hear in just intonation. If a group of singers did this, it would seem more natural. Heck, it might even be due to digitally altering the piano, which can cause errors in the overtones.
You can tell the difference by listening to the volume: in the first, you can have sort of the "wawawa" effect, unlike the second where the sound just goes down uniformly.
yeah, i think it's like the slight dissonances between the notes and the sort of wavering tail end of the sound they produce has become an integral part of the sound of piano to us. listening to the just intonation version again i can see it being more locked-in, more stable, but it also sounds just a bit less like 'piano'.
Having them play in succession doesn’t help, I thought the same. If you listen to the second one a bunch of times then the first will sound out of tune 🤯
I worked my way through school in part by holding keys for an pipe organ tuner and in the process learned a tone about applied tuning theory. The core stop on the organ is always tuned in equal temperament from a reference pitch (except for that one house organ that we tuned in Just C -- The wolf howls in d-flat), However every other rank in the organ is tuned by ear against that core stop. This means that while the intervals between notes on the keyboards are equal temperament, the tuning between stops is Just. It is part of the system that makes a well maintained pipe organ sound like it is playing a single note even though there could be 6 or more pipes sounding together. It creates what this video describes as that "locked in" feeling. There is also a process of adjusting the volume and rate of attack of the pipes to blend together called voicing. (Fun fact for the day the toccata J.S. Bach's Toccata and Fugue in d-minor is a stylized embellishment on what voicing frequently sounds like, leading some to believe that it may have originated as the Maestro's test for an organ)
Yes, all organ stops higher than 8' essentially act as harmonic synthesis to enhance the base 8' tone, just as in analog synthesizers. In fact, it has been said that the pipe organ was the first synthesizer. So, when tuning a 2-2/3' stop, it should be exactly 3 times the frequencies of an 8' stop, and a 1-3/5' should be exactly 5 times the frequencies of the 8'. As an organist, I've always found the mixture stops especially magical in how they sound so glorious by adding quints along with the octaves, and only because the quint ranks are tuned justly to the foundations stops.
When you mentioned this as music's version of Gödel's incompleteness theorem, I did a double take. That is such a fundamental theorem in theoretical maths. When you got to "you can't have just intonation and a stable pitch", the connection clicked in such a perfect way.
This was one of the things I came to experience after playing guitar for a few years; you can't have every string and every note in tune with every other note. On more than one occasion, I remember spending easily, _easily_ over a half hour at a time doing nothing but trying to tune my guitar. I'd get it perfectly tuned using a piano in my college practice room tuning to, say, the low E string. Then I'd tune all the other strings to the low E, and then compare A-string, D-string etc. to the A, D etc. notes on the piano. I went back and forth like that until I decided I was either a complete idiot (Probably true.) or it's impossible to have perfect tuning that also sounds perfect. (Definitely true.) I'd even learned this in depth at that point; cappella pitch relation being different than other musical instruments as a simple example. Took me a bit to put two-and-two together. Lastly, this is what perplexes me about people with so-called 'perfect pitch.' They can memorize the names of notes to the pitch of notes, but at the same time, what is and is not in tune varies depending on your tonic.
Me: Oh boy, he's getting theoretical; am I going to need elephant doodles to understand this? Adam: If you want to understand better, watch this video with elephant doodles.
@Gustavo Campos The explanation is that the youtuber 12tone, whose video adam featured in 7:03 always uses Elephant drawings in his videos, he is really great
@@santotiago80 The good thing about Adam Neely, in relation to 12tone, is that you don't need to snort cocaine to keep up with the pace of his talking.
I decided to have a whack at the problem, and I learned some interesting things. My first attempt went like this: Instead of having 3 fundamental ratios, there will only be two. 2:1 (octave) and 3:2 (fifth). The reason I chose this is because it allows notes to be arranged in a hex grid where each step in a direction is always the same ratio interval. Right would be the octave (2:1), up/right would be fifth (3:2), and it turns out that up/left becomes down a perfect fourth (3:4) (down an octave and up a fifth). However, while this hex grid is stable and without conflict, there are still multiple paths to the supposed same note. The third for example has two obvious potential paths: Either down two octaves and up four fifths, which results in 81:64 (funnily enough a ratio of squares), or up two octaves and down three fifths, which results in 32:27 (please ignore TH-cam's tendency to link anything that looks like a timestamp). These are already decently complex ratios, but I'm ignoring complexity and searching specifically for stability. In this case, however, it is obviously not stable because there are multiple paths to the same note. This is when it hit me that the only way to have a just intonation system that is stable is to have an intonation system where there is only one valid path to each note, which in turn requires that there only be one fundamental ratio from which to derive the rest of the notes. But if we pick the octave, we'll never be able to reach the notes in between. So the only way to derive all notes from a single ratio without skipping any is to pick the smallest interval, that being the half-step or semitone. And here we reach the crux: Which ratio should we use for the semitone? Since we are already guaranteeing the stability of the system, we can now focus on how it sounds. Which ratio would sound the best? We could pick 16:15 because it's the simplest ratio that matches what we feel the interval should be, however, that kills the octave, which would be about 2.17 times the frequency of the starting note. Heck, the 7th is closer to a proper octave in this case, being 2.03 times the frequency of the starting note, resulting in a potentially interesting 11-tone system. But no, we want a nice sounding 12-tone system because we like octaves. In fact, the octave is the simplest of ratios, and the most pleasing to hear, so what if we picked a ratio that will result in a perfect octave after 12 iterations? Well, it turns out that that ratio is the *irrational* 2^(1/12):1, otherwise known as equal temperament. Turns out the one stable system that sounds the best is equal temperament. If we want to sound better than the best stable system, we can only choose unstable systems. And thus the paradox returns, and we're back where we started.
him: “yeah you can hear that the key has gotten higher we’re in Ab major” me, tone deaf, hears literally no difference: “I mean I’m a little lost but fair enough”
Don't worry! Not many people would notice. Noticing would require either perfect pitch or really good relative pitch (being able to hear and quantify differences between different notes). So basically, you're not alone.
It blows my mind that equal temperament is so ingrained into my brain that when Adam shows both tunings back to back the first one actually sounded more "in tune" to me
Perhaps the quote has been misused often enough that now it simply means "things aren't as simple as we'd like them to be". I don't think Adam was going for the direct analogy, but it's cool to know he's read some physics.
@@martinkrauser4029 I don't think he was going for a direct analogy. He was trying to explain that things are not what they seem in first glance. So "God playing dice" is a great example as there wasn't enough experimental evidence at the time to prove phenomenon like superposition and the uncertainty principle which Einstein thought were false.
It's great to see Adam knows about quantum physics which shouldn't be that surprising considering the types of complex stuff he talks about on the channel. It's highly likely that someone who likes to research, understand, and talk about a complex subject will like to learn about other complex subjects. Adam talked about free will in one of his QnA. His answer was really concise and to the point. It's like he knows the subject so well. Maybe he is into philosophy too.
I have a friend who sings barbershop quartet. He once told me that one of the songs they would sing would always end up about a semitone sharper than they started. Really interesting to hear the explanation. Thanks Adam
I was just trying to explain this to someone yesterday! And, clumsiliy stumbling over the concepts, I was just confusing. So I sent him you're video. You really have a gift for taking complex topics and making them understandable.
Just intonation is interesting, because while on a *piano* we definitely hear it acutely, but it's used everywhere else in music. We even sing in just intonation - your voice pretty much automatically, almost instinctually seeks those 3/2, 5/4 ratios because they sound more...sound... Than 5√2/12. Just intonation is really important for getting things like resonating overtones, which musicians can use for tuning purposes.
@@TheTauntalus I sometimes tune my digital piano to the just intonation and am surprised how boring harmonies sound. They lose their "bite" and brilliance. This is probably because the richness of the harmony played on the piano comes from the clashing overtones.
@@ryofurue that's fair. Both systems have their merits - I tend to play music in the world of wind bands and small ensembles, where having that locked in sound helps to clear up the musical sound and avoids some of the unnecessary destructive interference that comes from out of sync tones; but it ain't perfect, and the crunch of clashing overtones definitely can bring out flavors and emotions you just can't get from just. More power to you, man!
@@ryofurue You must have quite the ear to feel such an emotional difference between just intonation and modern equal temperament. If you gave me the same song tempered differently, I might be able to tell they're not the same, but I wouldn't be able to say one is full of "bite and brilliance" compared to the other. My musical tastes are deeply ordinary. I'd rather have a sleeve of Oreos than, say, creamy shrimp risotto with mascarpone, or turbot and morels. I'm inclined to believe this is a bad thing -- a "good" person can perceive and appreciates these kinds of musical differences.
Three times in this video I came down to ask a question only to have you exactly answer what I was typing up. Such an awesome video! I was lucky enough to have a jazz teacher who taught me this stuff through the book "Lies My Music Teacher Told Me" in college. It completely changed how I sing in choir. I'm a low bass, so any time I sing a capella I constantly have to trade off tuning an interval and keeping the root notes in the right key center. It wasn't until I learned about this that I really clicked for me.
Remarkable to listen from 0:25 thru 0:50 then go back to 0:25 again. I had no idea the pitch was rising so steeply! An excellent explanation of a truly curious phenomenon.
Of course you have to state at the end of the video that most musicians don't learn this. I was going to use this video with my middle schoolers to explain what I mean when I say "Music theory is math that doesn't follow the rules of math." But you make an excellent point as well!
I love your tuning theory videos, exploring the very foundation of our occidental music tradition is extremely interesting! The fact that changing the tuning opens up new dimensions of soundscapes and then delving into a whole new world of harmonies is amazing. I would love to hear your thoughts on "the well tuned piano"!
The solution to this is pretty obvious: Everyone just needs to start composing every single piece in such as way that the upward moving and downward moving comma pumps cancel out, so that by the end you are back at the pitch level you started at. In fact you could take it a step further and consider this to be a sort of second-level tonicization. Say your piece starts in tonic, moves to the dominant key in the central section, and then returns to tonic. At the same time you manipulate your comma pumps so that the underlying pitch levels rises by (say) a quarter-step in the central section and then gradually steps back down to the original pitch level by the end. Though if I had my druthers we would write every single phrase so as to be "comma pump neutral" as landing on a tonic that is say 20 cents higher than the original after just a few measures is really jarring. Composers: Make every phrase comma-pump neutral or I *will* be hunting you down . . .
Yeah, when he said that "you can't have both", I would argue that you simply have to compose with that in mind, just as one composes with the location of the tritone in the diatonic scale in mind. And if people naturally do it, why bother with tonality anyways?
Wow this is eye-opening. Feels like this is because music is more like a fractal-like spiral and not a perfect circle like we want it to be. The imperfect nature of it is what makes it sound appealing. If it where mathematically perfect it just wouldn't work. Perfection really doesn't exist anywhere in nature. The irregularities in the universe are what make matter, life, and music possible.
@@jonocour Actually it isn't this, is not comma pump what Jacob uses, he plays with interval ratios to keep in tune every chord while raising up the pitch, David Bruce composer explains it clear as water
Very interesting video. I believe this is all why, even with "perfect" intonation on a guitar and "in tune", some chord shapes sound crap unless you slightly detune or overtune a string. For me personally, it's usually the G-string that needs to drop a bit (insert joke here) for many open chord shapes, especially open D.
As a non-mathematician I too love using mathematical concepts like Gödel’s Incompleteness Theory in dubious analogies. It can be fun to make mathematician’s eyes spin upwards in their sockets much like a gluon.
I didn't know that gluons could spin upwards in their sockets, but (as a mathematician) I do think roping in Gödel didn't make much sense. Never mind, on the whole the video was very good.
I paused the video at that line, but I think it makes sense broadly. They are both arguably the "you can't have your cake and eat it too" theorem of their respective fields. Cue math people saying "Godel's theorems don't apply to all of math", etc.
I'm writing a thesis paper on different systems of tuning within music and it's always super fun to watch a youtube video mention something about tuning and I know *exactly* what they're talking about
Not quite, with 3^12 ≠ 2^19 you are talking 3-limit (only using octaves and fifth) but omit the next prime (5), which is neccessary for well tuned thirds and is used in classical music theory. These lead to different kinds of commas, e.g. 2^7 ≠ 5^3 Some modern theorists go even further and include 7th, 11th and 13th harmonics...
@@foo0815 Yes, of course there are other commas. I attempted to define the Cosmic Joke very succinctly by simply pointing out the most fundamental inequality.
@@AbhiBass96 Adam talked about 5-limit tuning system at 2:05. Does it suffice to say that the comment about "3-limit" is (gasp) talking about a tuning system, too?
I don't play an instrument and I don't study music. But since one of your vids came on randomly, I've been hooked. The science, psychology and pattern involved has opened my mind considerably. Thank you for an unexpected introduction to music theory.
In just intonation, ratios are the mathematic framework of the harmonic language. In this example, the A note is an anticipation. This means that the A is not linked to the G bass note, but to the C bass note. So, we have: 1st chord: G(1/1) - D(3/2) - G(2/1) 2nd chord: C(4/3) - E(5/3) - A(10/4) , with A(10/4) anticipated one beat before 3rd chord: C(4/3) - E(5/3) - G(1/1) There is not pitch drifting. Thank you for introducing me to just intonation and microtonality.
As was alluded to, in the context of vocal music the soprano's A is used as a reference for the alto's E, and by extension the tenor's C. Meaning, whatever the tuning of that A is (whether sharp or flat), the alto part will naturally attempt to "lock into" it a 4:3 away. What you are suggesting is that the alto deliberately (and more importantly, accurately!) enter with an E a 27:20 away from the soprano's A. That's simply not what happens in practice, even for an advanced-level choir.
Interestingly, of the 2 versions of G major you played at 1:20, I found the first one warmer and more natural. I guess this means I'm so acclimatized to equal temperament that anything else sounds out of tune to me!
Well, if you instead try just listening to pure 5ths, one based on equal temperament and the other on just intonation, just is more sonorous. The equal-tempered 5th will have beating as the phase shifts over time.
There is a problem with this explanation and I will try to clarify it. In the just intonation major scale, its degrees have the following frequency ratios: I: 1 II: 9/8 III: 5/4 IV: 4/3 V: 3/2 VI: 5/3 VII: 15/8 I: (VIII, octave higher) 2 One can easily calculate that the same intervals at different positions have different sizes - eg the major second between I-II is larger than the same interval between II-III; the minor third between II-IV is smaller than the one between III-V; also, the fifth between II and VI degrees (D and A) equals (5/3)/(9/8) which is 40/27, not 3/2. Therefore, the ninth between G in the bass and upper A of this example, in just intonation would be 20/9 (2.222…), not 9/4 (2.25). These fine differences enable us to hear DEGREES of the scale. Moreover, this music example is far too simple and I doubt that any choir would rise intonation singing this bar repeatedly. The problem is more theoretical than practical - in practice, all singers and instruments without fixed intonation listen to and are led by the tonal centre and by the scale degrees, not by some manipulative theoretical multiplications of the frequencies (here wrongly supposed that the two fifths, G-D and D-A, are equal). Hence, the assumption that the bass will rise the pitch leaping up from G to C isn't correct. Every string player knows that if he, for instance, plays a major sixth, with open G string and with first finger on E, that E won't sound in tune as a perfect fourth with the open string A. (We meet again those ratios, major sixth + perfect fourth is 20/9, and two perfect fifths, as tuned on a string instrument, make 9/4). In practice, the player would move his finger just a little bit, depending on the tonal context. So the singers change their pitch to stay within the tonal centre. This is done automatically most of the time. In more complicated situations, as mentioned in this video, a cappella choirs and strings do shift from the initial tonality, but this also could be a symptom that, in those particular cases, music may be badly written. Those who want to find out more about this subject can read Paul Hindemith's "Unterweisung im Tonsatz" (English title: "The Craft of Musical Composition").
hey Adam,that was one of the best little explanations i've ever heard.....in 60 years!!!!If you have the time ,look into the shakuhachi ......that is where the secrets of intonation are hidden.
This reminds me of a time I was in choir where we sang a song acapella, but ended up one half step down from where we started. B major was the original key but we ended in B-flat some way somehow. The same thing happened on this other song except we ended up a half step higher than the original key. Started in A-flat major and ended up in A major. There were also times were we ended up in a quarter tone key like E half flat major.
Anyone else fascinated with how mathematically perfect music on account of its pitch drift is naturally ascendant / transcendent? No wonder those great choral pieces make you feel the way they do. They quite literally lift up your mind and heart.
Hey Adam, I recently designed something I called "Monkey Tuning" (because of jacob collier's tuning system swinging analogy in one of his June Lee interviews) and I've been thinking for a while now about making my own VST. The idea is to allow musicians using midi controllers to change their tuning systems in real time (while performing). I've noticed that the tuning always climbs slowly upwards (as opposed to downwards), but I've never understood why. Mathematically, is it because an interval's ratio to the root is on average greater than the inverse of the ratio which corresponds to its inversion in the octave? For example, if I'm playing in C JI, retune to D JI keeping the note D the same between the two tuning systems, then tune back down to C JI now keeping C the same, the new C is higher than the original C. Is this because the interval ratio of a major second greater than the inverse of the interval ratio of the minor seventh? Thanks for the cool vid. Very helpful to know what to look up now to read more about this. Cheers
That's an interesting point about rising in pitch. I think this is because a JI fifth is slightly wider than an ET fifth, so if you are ascending in fifths then the pitch will slowly rise. However, if you descend through fifths then surely the pitch would drop... interesting
You can drop in pitch in a very similar way that Benedetti's example rises in pitch. For example: G5-G5sus4-Amin-Dmaj-G drops by a syntonic comma every repetition.
Concerning playing C-D-C, keep in mind that in just intonation, a "whole step" can be 8:9, or 9:10, or one of several other options as well (although, those two are the most commonly found). Similarly, a minor seventh can be 9:16 or 5:9 or another set of options. Note that 5:9 and 9:10 are a kind of octave-reduced inversions of each other. But, it sounds to me like you're trying to do something like move up by 8:9 and then down by 9:10. Of course you'll end up in a different place.
I’m curious how this relates to musical traditions that use a drone. In that context, we don’t get drawn offsides by harmonic progression and are free to play with just intervals with an anchor. Fascinating!
As soon as he mentioned Gödel’s incompleteness theorem, I thought, “Of course! It’s exactly like Perry Fernalia’s gramixious obstacle!” and it all made sense.
So true that you rarely have an opportunity to learn this stuff in music school. I always had a conceptual idea of the difference in just and equal temperament, but never actually learned the underlying mathematical difference, so I’m all about these tuning theory and temperament focused videos.
The "ce" at the end of "coup de grâce" is sounded as an S. French doesn't drop every single consonant at the end. Other than that, great video! I like learning about Renaissance theoretical problems like this.
Well, there are certain English pronunciations of French words you will just have to accept. It's frustrating and telling that they ever came to be but it is how it is. "Coup de gras" instead of "coup de grace" is one (and yes, making the "strike of mercy" into a "strike of fat" is especially, well, ungraceful); "fem" instead of "femme" is another. The latter is especially aggravating in "femme fatale" where the nice flow of the three /a/ sounds is abandoned in favour of one /e/ and two /a/s for no good reason.
@@unvergebeneid lol yeah, I know I'm being a pedant. Definitely way worse to hear that in Mike Duncan's Revolutions Podcast, through several French revolutions, than here.
Yeah, I also checked that, on Wiktionary they state that the standard English pronunciation is /kuː də ɡɹæs/ and pronouncing it as /kuː də ɡɹɑː/ is "hyperforeign" en.wiktionary.org/wiki/coup_de_grâce
@@gcewing There are literally thousands of originally French words which are now part of English, all of which are "mispronounced" by the majority of speakers. That's just how language works, things drift and change constantly. You don't complain that modern Italians are always "mispronouncing" Latin words, do you?
Best way to explain in simple mathematical terms: 5 ^ 3 (5 to the 3rd power) is 125, but 2 ^ 7 (2 to the 7th power) is 128. Multiplying a frequency by 5 is equivalent (in just intonation) to two octaves plus a major 3rd. So, going up 2 octaves + maj 3rd 3 times should give us precisely 7 octaves. But, an octave is achieved by multiplying frequency by 2; do this 7 times and you get 128, not 125. So to 'fix' this, a tempered major third + 2 octaves is actually multiplying a frequency by 5.0397. Fascinating stuff! This all became clear to me when a woodworker/bassist friend of mine decided to build bass guitars. The first one was fretless, and came out great. The next one was supposed to be fretted. One day he called me in a panic: "Dude -- where do I put the frets??!!!"
I'm not sure why, but whenever I hear pianos tuned to just intonation like this, I think the equal temperament version sounds better. Not sure if it's just what I'm used to or of its just that I find the electronic artifacts of retuning the piano sounds bad.
I’ve been looking for the reason behind why I’ve found myself trending sharp over time in unaccompanied singing since being introduced to Just Intonation and Tuning Theory (outside of music school). This may just be part of it... . . . . . Or maybe I just haven’t been practicing enough and have been listening to way too much Ben Johnston.
Benedetti: I can show the dangers of just intonation by making this melody that will shift due to singers relying on each other to find pitches! Me, who has perfect pitch: *You have no power here.*
My instructor: play in tune Me: Excuse me, I thought this school accepted other cultures. Why are you infringing on my cultural rights and insisting that your American tuning system is superior?
I'm one of those musicians who started very "left-brained", so though I haven't thought about the technical acoustics behind the music lately, this video was genuinely enlightening. Good work, Adam!
Hey you in the comment section! you're looking pretty acute!
Spinal Tap
gee im blushing :3
Pumped for this episode
**winks**
Thanks man, you're looking pretty sharp yourself!
This is like a calendar without Leap Year.
Without a day subtracted every 128 years
Potentially one of the best analogies!
:)
Leap years are a perfect analogy. It's so easy: There's a leap year every 4 years. Well, except every 100 years, when it isn't. Well, except every 400 years, when it's a leap year again. And we still have to add random seconds here and there to be in sync with the solar year, with weird side effects like 23:59:60 being a valid time on Jun 30 or Dec 31. Sometimes.
No wonder music then!
Lets all start using the iranian calendar system then, where the beginning/end of a year is determined by an actual astronomical event, where by the sun passes through the plane of the earths equator or the plane of the earths equator swallows the sun (the vernal equinox) depending on your astronomical outlook on the earth ;)
Adam is getting crazier and crazier. Just like Vsauce before Michael forgot his password
Soon Adam will give us existential crisis at the end of his videos
Michael Heare is back making vsauce videos finally, after his experiment with paid content that nobody watched, though now he's made all those vids free to watch. The vsauce videos he makes these are ALL about maths, like it's fascinating but he used to talk about a lot more varied stuff. His old videos were essentially video versions of XKCD's "What If" series and books, like the question "what would happen if the sun disappeared". Mr. Heare made a video on that, and it's exactly the kind of question XKCD would cover, albeit he'd answer it with more actual physics, but either way.
Tuning theory is crazy? Hm ... .
freeform144 ok Benedetti
@@duffman18 Ok
some kid in school: ugh i hate math problems im gonna be a musician instead
music:
😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣
exactly it
here I come xddddd
Austin Martín Hernández then you're half gay
If you play guitar for example, you don't need too much math.
Me: *already not comprehending*
Adam: "Of course it can't be this simple"
jamesu Music 😢
Science and Music - book by Sir James H. Jeans - 2012 - Science
Sir James H. Jeans. "On taking the ... clock-face is that shewn in fig. 55; it extends to infinity in both directions, and all simplicity has disappeared." That is the truth of reality as the Perfect Fifth/Perfect Fourth/ Infinity or what Fields Medal math professor Alain Connes calls "2, 3, infinity" as the Unified Field of relativity and quantum physics. The ancient nonwestern cultures realized this truth of reality. Adam Neely is covering it up with his Archtyas 5/4 b.s. 6/5 (harmonic mean) x 5/4 (arithmetic mean) = Perfect Fifth as Geometric Mean Squared. 3/2 is NOT Geometric Mean Squared as Adam Neely is claiming.
Since 81/80 is the amount by which Didymus corrected the Pythagorean major third 81:64, to a just major third 5:4. Archytas will have assigned this interval the ratio 5:4 (the nearest epimoric smaller than the ditone: (9:8)squared = 81:64 and 5:4 = 80:64).
The Monochord in Ancient Greek Harmonic Science
books.google.com/books?isbn=0521843243
David Creese - 2010 - History
Yet we still watch the whole video and try to understand wtf he’s talking about. Even when I don’t, I still feel satisfied by the end of his videos because I’ve learned at least one new thing. 😊
I'm a late learner and I'm 100% self taught from TH-cam videos. I'm going to be completely honest, I feel so proud that I've finally got to the point that I fully understand an entire Adam Neely video! Lol
I remember just a year ago around this same time not understanding anything on this channel. So you can get better quickly if you push yourself. Get a notebook, use the notebook, draw in everything music related. Circle of 5ths/4ths, scales, chords for each key, etc. That helped me alot because I can mentally reference everything by visualizing a page from my notebook. Also as plenty of other people have said stop noodling around on your instrument and *actually practice* or *actually play.* Noodling is a waste of energy and time. Plus it forms very bad habits.
@@the_original_Bilb_Ono So in his book, Kyle Gann is incorrectly claiming that the 5/4 as Major Third is from the 5th overtone harmonic. This is not true at all - it's from Archytas use of geometric mean. "However, he [Archytas] noted that the product of the arithmetic mean and the harmonic mean is equal to the square of the geometric mean, so this gave a way of dividing the fifth of 3:2 into the product of 5:4 and 6:5."
A Truman State University review on Scriba, Christoph J. “Mathematics and music.” (Danish) Normat 38 (1990), no. 1, 3-17, 52.
So that's the ORIGIN of Adam incorrectly using 5/4 (and the 16th C. WEstern music theorists) as an extension of 3/2. It's not a "circle of fifths" but in fact it's an infinite spiral of fifths as noncommutative phase (2/3 is C to F while 3/2 is C to G). 6/5 (harmonic mean) x 5/4 (arithmetic mean) = Perfect Fifth as Geometric Mean Squared. 3/2 is NOT Geometric Mean Squared as Adam Neely is claiming. "Archytas will have assigned this interval the ratio 5:4 (the nearest epimoric smaller than the ditone: (9:8)squared = 81:64 and 5:4 = 80:64)."
The Monochord in Ancient Greek Harmonic Science
books.google.com/books?isbn=0521843243
David Creese - 2010 - History
"I'm not sure why you would want to - maybe just to flex on your teacher"
I've never heard such a succinct summation of jazz before.
xD
I’ve never seen a top TH-cam comment use such a clever vocabulary word: “succinct.”
@@henrycavalierkingcharlessp6064 Do you only watch channels for children?
“You can’t actually have mathematically pure music without the pitch drifting.”
Great. Now the sopranos have an excuse. THANKS FOR NOTHING ADAM.
Thanks for making a choir geek cry laughing, my dude.
@@TheCubologist lmao aww, hope it happens a lot more often sense
If a soprano could make their pitch drift as described in this video, I would want to meet them and marvel at their incredible ear.
What's more impressive is that despite the pitch drift, the arrangement is designed to start and end in the same key!!!!!!! Literally the math is insane for that
Actually you can... but it would limit creativity. The writer of the melody would have to actually take the math into account, and ensure that there are an equal number of notes which cause a sharpness drift as notes which cause a flatness drift, plus to not have too many of each in a row at any given time.
"It's very pretty. What do you call this?" "Oh, this piece is called Licc My Comma Pump".
Nigel Tufnel
Just intonation was really the saddest key all along, it makes music theorists weep instantly to hear it
No greater comment has ever existed. Cheers.
In D minor: the saddest of all keys.
that one is quite good sir :D
the weirdest part is that i starting singing the soprano part on the piano while imagining the lower notes in my head in order to stay in tune, and after a bit i found my singing was actually becoming sharper and sharper, without me even trying. congratulations adam, you made me comma pump myself
Sounds like something that should only be done in private...lol
lmao
The sad thing for me was I started splitting the columns and trying to figure out what the chords were before realizing I shouldn't be analyzing the piece like a Bach chorale. Then it took me a few more minutes to realize this was a tuning puzzle that affects choirs and not bands and orchestras. :) (To be fair, my instrument is trumpet, not voice. So not the tuning issue I normally deal with.)
BTW, I got V 5/3, A unaccented passing tone into vi 5 that resolves into I if you're curious.
i'm very curious if you could cause a choir to do this... like, we often do warmups where you must "fill in" the chord without hearing it on piano
@@Cloiss_ Sounds like an awful lot of practice just to fuck with the choir director during warmups.
“You either die a musician or live long enough to see yourself become an extraordinarily intelligent music theorist with enough information about music theory to make a person depressed.”
*laughs in extraordinarily intelligent music theorist with enough information about music theory to make a person depressed
I would like to have that problem
4:10 “Multiply by the inversion.” That, my friend, is called dividing.
Multiplying the inversion, adding the difference... it works, doesn't it?
Or "reciprocal" - if only music theory words weren't already mathematical words with different meanings in so many cases!
Dividing, my friend, is multiplying by the inversion. And so the world keeps spinning.
@@scottfreeland3242 And yet if you repeatedly multiply and divide, funny things happen too ;) The “floating point comma pump”, perhaps?
0.1*0.2/0.1/0.2 = 1.0000000000000002 🤔
@@yinge101 I mean, no this only happens in digital environments with imperfect floating point representations. If you calculate 0.1*0.2/0.1/0.2 with "infinite precision" you just get 1. But still I appreciate your comment it made me chuckle ^^
I need an endlessly looped version of this so I can hear the drift over a longer period of time.
th-cam.com/video/FT71tggrrQc/w-d-xo.html This one goes up an octave for a few of Benedetti's puzzles. Pretty interesting!
I would love that. Just imagine it's like A9 and your ears are screaming
I would listen to that until I couldn't hear it
th-cam.com/video/FT71tggrrQc/w-d-xo.html
this is actually until you cannot hear it :)
"Fortunately enough 12√2 ^7 is close enough to 3/2." - The big brain guy who created equal temperament.
Or in other words: 12 just-intonated fifths are extremely close to 7 octaves so what if we just stretch the fifth by 2 cents and then it will be sweet as.
Edit: I got it the wrong way around, you would actually need to squash the fifth to get an equal tempered fifth
@@Danicker Hahahah, spot on.
probably a physicists
unfortunately he thus went "so bugger the thirds and sevenths". harmony is always a compromise.
Well (5/4)^3 is close enough to 2
(It's actually 1.953125)
Therapist: "The Lick Comma Pump isn't real, it can't hurt you"
Lick Comma Pump: 9:59
BASS
He had to to it to 'em (us). The man was cosmically obligated.
It hurts you for sure!
It needs more autotune.
Wasn't that a song by Spinal Tap?
People often talk bad about equal temperament, but it’s genius that people figured it out, and made it so simple
"school is more about how music works today and less why" - reason why I sucked at music back in school right there. Everything constantly felt so arbitrary, and the teacher was in so way over her head I couldn't even dare inquire about anything. Just took the barely passing grade and left. Only over the years and with channels like yours I began to fathom and come to terms with the state of it all. Thank you based Adam.
Dude, totally same. I've tried starting multiple instruments over the years but never got anywhere because I always felt so lost and the pieces my teachers had me play felt more like drills than actual music. But I feel like I have some direction now because of all these theory vids, and I'm starting to pick up the guitar again, and it ACTUALLY makes sense to me now.
Ours constantly teaches about old dances like minuet and gavotte, most modern music we got was Prokofyev
Kim Andaya not every method book is created equal, but they are all written so you learn fundamentals of musicianship on that instrument in a way that progresses the student’s knowledge so that the skills become an after thought. Every good musician has to practice their scales, know their intervals,fingerings,bowings,articulations etc before they can begin to make music, it’s just part of the proven process.
@@devonc99 Yeah, I understand that the basics are super important, I'm not knocking that down. I know music is a discipline. But I just had so many unanswered questions, and I have a hard time being dedicated to something I don't understand (in terms of why and how). I think it's just the way that I learn.
Kim Andaya that’s fair, it sounds like you need a better teacher or would benefit more from private instruction if you haven’t tried that already. I’m currently watching Adam instead of doing my music education course work because it’s just more enjoyable, but the fundamentals learned through those drills can be invaluable at a young age with a good teacher. Unfortunately it’s an underpaid, undervalued profession so it’s very common to find bad teaching examples
Everyone asks how is music, but no one asks why is music 😞
BEgan
Harmony?
Or just - like in and other art form - an abstraction from reality humans project their thought and feelings onto?
"How is music?"
"I'm fine, but sometimes my temperament gets the better of me."
I'll do you one better! WHERE is music???
if you're not constantly asking yourself "when is music", you'll never find your groove
the answer is "on the 1" btw
@@aloisjanicek293 That's the scientific answer I was looking for. :)
1:45 How did NOT I realize that was All Star until now after watching this for the 5th time or so... ADAM YOU CHEEKY LITTLE-
nice
Why did you have to comment this and force me to find out that it was All Star? I was perfectly content before (in all serious though good job noticing that because I had no idea)
xDDDD
wow good ear!
Whoa, it was so slow I didn't notice...
Man I love these theories, but your french cracked me up at 6:25 . A "coup de grâce" is indeed a final thrust, but what you said is a "coup de gras", meaning "a fat hit" :D
that is how it is in english though~
@@Chozal It's French ...
Merci pour le fou rire !
@@MK-zl7hj I know it is. I am French. But "coup de grâce" in English is spelled "coup de gras", for whatever reason. Yes, it's silly and incorrect. Just like us talking about doing one's "footing" for jogging, or going to the "parking" for the parking lot. Adam's not wrong, it's just the way the language solidified.
@@Chozal There's a fundamental difference there, it's that your examples show a shift in meaning, as is natural, while the "coup de grâce" is a mispronounciation.
Adam: "Music is too easy, let's add multiplying fractions to it."
I think it is closer to, "We're running out of chalk. Let's do our math with vibrating strings instead."
@@StephenMercer Isn't math with strings (and every other physical phenomena in our universe) just physics?
@@TheWizardMyr Is that why we call it "String Theory"? :hmmm:
You can learn to multiply fractions in an hour. Music can take a lifetime. I think it's obvious which one is easier.
You just multiply the tops and bottoms together, it's really easy
Me after school: "Finally I can rest from maths and watch Adam Neely"
Adam Neely:
Adam Neely: Imma become a math channel.
This is fascinating. In my choir, we often sing acapella pieces and I would always get annoyed because we would end out of key. Now I realize that it's us singing in tune that forces us to end out of key. Thank you for this
This video makes me want to sing one of these as a canon, and throw everyone off by RAISING the pitch instead of the everpresent sinking pitch. How often does the conductor get to complain we're drifting too sharp?
@@drekfletch not much cause like Adam said, music was composed with that in mind
Does anyone know a video in which you can actually hear a choir drifting?
@@ivyssauro123 exactly. It'd be a new and different lecture from being yelled at for going flat. lol
Is "Lick My Comma Pump" the spirtual successor to Spinal Tap's "Lick my Love Pump", in Dm, the saddest of all keys?
These go to eleven
In a just intonation tuning in C, Dm is much sadder and slightly dissonant. Equal temperament made every key Vanilla.
There's a fine line between clever and stupid!
Adam was influenced by Mozart and Bach and this licc is somewhere in between there ... a kind of “Mach” piece.
But after a few repetitions it moves to E♭m, then Em, then Fm…
I can’t be the only person who watches his videos that is not a jazz musician or studied music theory. I mean I’ve played multiple instruments but I only have a basic understanding. I just love watching his videos and I’m honestly so engrossed by learning new things even if I won’t ever use this information
Out of two versions of G major the first one definitely feels more in tune, probably because I've been conditioned by decades of listening to music in equal temperament.
I agree, I was so confused because the second one felt unnatural af
It may be more custom to instruments we usually hear in just intonation. If a group of singers did this, it would seem more natural.
Heck, it might even be due to digitally altering the piano, which can cause errors in the overtones.
You can tell the difference by listening to the volume: in the first, you can have sort of the "wawawa" effect, unlike the second where the sound just goes down uniformly.
yeah, i think it's like the slight dissonances between the notes and the sort of wavering tail end of the sound they produce has become an integral part of the sound of piano to us. listening to the just intonation version again i can see it being more locked-in, more stable, but it also sounds just a bit less like 'piano'.
Having them play in succession doesn’t help, I thought the same. If you listen to the second one a bunch of times then the first will sound out of tune 🤯
"Your musicians were so preoccupied with whether or not they *could* that they didn't stop to think if they *should*."
I worked my way through school in part by holding keys for an pipe organ tuner and in the process learned a tone about applied tuning theory. The core stop on the organ is always tuned in equal temperament from a reference pitch (except for that one house organ that we tuned in Just C -- The wolf howls in d-flat), However every other rank in the organ is tuned by ear against that core stop. This means that while the intervals between notes on the keyboards are equal temperament, the tuning between stops is Just. It is part of the system that makes a well maintained pipe organ sound like it is playing a single note even though there could be 6 or more pipes sounding together. It creates what this video describes as that "locked in" feeling. There is also a process of adjusting the volume and rate of attack of the pipes to blend together called voicing. (Fun fact for the day the toccata J.S. Bach's Toccata and Fugue in d-minor is a stylized embellishment on what voicing frequently sounds like, leading some to believe that it may have originated as the Maestro's test for an organ)
Yes, all organ stops higher than 8' essentially act as harmonic synthesis to enhance the base 8' tone, just as in analog synthesizers. In fact, it has been said that the pipe organ was the first synthesizer. So, when tuning a 2-2/3' stop, it should be exactly 3 times the frequencies of an 8' stop, and a 1-3/5' should be exactly 5 times the frequencies of the 8'. As an organist, I've always found the mixture stops especially magical in how they sound so glorious by adding quints along with the octaves, and only because the quint ranks are tuned justly to the foundations stops.
Some of my best examples started as tests.
Had the same job for a few years! Very interesting experiences... Thanks!!
7:31 - Adam, you messed up a ratio! No , not in the music. The aspect ratio of the choir video is 4:3; you have it stretched to 16:9 !
Just noticed, it's the video representation of replacing a 4th by minor 7th.
One of the smaller, less insane sins regarding internet video.
At least he didn't add blurry moving shit in 2/3 of the video.
He did it fair and *ahem* /square/
It's still within the 5-limit.
Sexy Piano Notes
/square/ is not comfortable to pronounce.
When you mentioned this as music's version of Gödel's incompleteness theorem, I did a double take. That is such a fundamental theorem in theoretical maths.
When you got to "you can't have just intonation and a stable pitch", the connection clicked in such a perfect way.
This was one of the things I came to experience after playing guitar for a few years; you can't have every string and every note in tune with every other note.
On more than one occasion, I remember spending easily, _easily_ over a half hour at a time doing nothing but trying to tune my guitar. I'd get it perfectly tuned using a piano in my college practice room tuning to, say, the low E string. Then I'd tune all the other strings to the low E, and then compare A-string, D-string etc. to the A, D etc. notes on the piano. I went back and forth like that until I decided I was either a complete idiot (Probably true.) or it's impossible to have perfect tuning that also sounds perfect. (Definitely true.)
I'd even learned this in depth at that point; cappella pitch relation being different than other musical instruments as a simple example. Took me a bit to put two-and-two together.
Lastly, this is what perplexes me about people with so-called 'perfect pitch.' They can memorize the names of notes to the pitch of notes, but at the same time, what is and is not in tune varies depending on your tonic.
Hence the phrase "close enough for rock and roll" when trying to get the band in tune ...
Me: Oh boy, he's getting theoretical; am I going to need elephant doodles to understand this?
Adam: If you want to understand better, watch this video with elephant doodles.
@Gustavo Campos Google "Daniel Quasar pride flag" - it's a recent redesign riffed off the 2017 Philadelphia Pride flag.
@Gustavo Campos The explanation is that the youtuber 12tone, whose video adam featured in 7:03 always uses Elephant drawings in his videos, he is really great
Gustavo Campos Pretty sure it’s a pride flag with a focus on trans people and POC in the LGBTQ+ community
@@santotiago80 The good thing about Adam Neely, in relation to 12tone, is that you don't need to snort cocaine to keep up with the pace of his talking.
@@FernieCanto AHAHAAHAHHA made my day man! 🤣🤣🤣 some twelve tone vids have subtitles though
I decided to have a whack at the problem, and I learned some interesting things.
My first attempt went like this: Instead of having 3 fundamental ratios, there will only be two. 2:1 (octave) and 3:2 (fifth). The reason I chose this is because it allows notes to be arranged in a hex grid where each step in a direction is always the same ratio interval. Right would be the octave (2:1), up/right would be fifth (3:2), and it turns out that up/left becomes down a perfect fourth (3:4) (down an octave and up a fifth).
However, while this hex grid is stable and without conflict, there are still multiple paths to the supposed same note. The third for example has two obvious potential paths: Either down two octaves and up four fifths, which results in 81:64 (funnily enough a ratio of squares), or up two octaves and down three fifths, which results in 32:27 (please ignore TH-cam's tendency to link anything that looks like a timestamp).
These are already decently complex ratios, but I'm ignoring complexity and searching specifically for stability. In this case, however, it is obviously not stable because there are multiple paths to the same note.
This is when it hit me that the only way to have a just intonation system that is stable is to have an intonation system where there is only one valid path to each note, which in turn requires that there only be one fundamental ratio from which to derive the rest of the notes.
But if we pick the octave, we'll never be able to reach the notes in between. So the only way to derive all notes from a single ratio without skipping any is to pick the smallest interval, that being the half-step or semitone.
And here we reach the crux: Which ratio should we use for the semitone?
Since we are already guaranteeing the stability of the system, we can now focus on how it sounds. Which ratio would sound the best?
We could pick 16:15 because it's the simplest ratio that matches what we feel the interval should be, however, that kills the octave, which would be about 2.17 times the frequency of the starting note. Heck, the 7th is closer to a proper octave in this case, being 2.03 times the frequency of the starting note, resulting in a potentially interesting 11-tone system.
But no, we want a nice sounding 12-tone system because we like octaves. In fact, the octave is the simplest of ratios, and the most pleasing to hear, so what if we picked a ratio that will result in a perfect octave after 12 iterations?
Well, it turns out that that ratio is the *irrational* 2^(1/12):1, otherwise known as equal temperament.
Turns out the one stable system that sounds the best is equal temperament. If we want to sound better than the best stable system, we can only choose unstable systems. And thus the paradox returns, and we're back where we started.
him: “yeah you can hear that the key has gotten higher we’re in Ab major”
me, tone deaf, hears literally no difference: “I mean I’m a little lost but fair enough”
Don't worry! Not many people would notice. Noticing would require either perfect pitch or really good relative pitch (being able to hear and quantify differences between different notes). So basically, you're not alone.
here, let me help you out:
[music]
you have to listen for a while (atleast 1 minute\60seconfs
@@oscargill423 lots of people wouldn't hear it, for sure, but I don't think you'd have to have brilliant pitch to hear it either
@@tenor1190 For some people, brilliant pitch is being able to tell when a song changes key
other musicians in quarantine: making new music
Adam and Ben: mathematically impossible music and fake guitar rap videos
WE NEED 10 HOURS VERSION OF THE LICC COMMA PUMP PLEASE ADAM
I would watch for ten minutes at least, think of the ad revenue Adam
I checked Adam Neely 2, it's still not there.
oh s$&%
You could pull this off with the Comma Pump / Shepard Tone combo. The licc never ending rising octaves.
yeah, with licc slowly ascending above the human preception.
I want a girlfriend that compliments me like adam neely complements a wierd musical interval
"You might find a use for that"
“Spicy”
Wow this hit
So you are a weird musical interval? Everything I've strived for! Congrats! I'm just a mr. Bungle power tritone :)
It blows my mind that equal temperament is so ingrained into my brain that when Adam shows both tunings back to back the first one actually sounded more "in tune" to me
Adam: "God indeed does play dice"
Wasn't expecting Einstein to be called out like that in a music theory video.
It's not quite the quote to pull, though, because this isn't about just intonation being non-deterministic, it's about its internal inconsistency.
Perhaps the quote has been misused often enough that now it simply means "things aren't as simple as we'd like them to be". I don't think Adam was going for the direct analogy, but it's cool to know he's read some physics.
@@martinkrauser4029 I don't think he was going for a direct analogy. He was trying to explain that things are not what they seem in first glance. So "God playing dice" is a great example as there wasn't enough experimental evidence at the time to prove phenomenon like superposition and the uncertainty principle which Einstein thought were false.
It's great to see Adam knows about quantum physics which shouldn't be that surprising considering the types of complex stuff he talks about on the channel. It's highly likely that someone who likes to research, understand, and talk about a complex subject will like to learn about other complex subjects. Adam talked about free will in one of his QnA. His answer was really concise and to the point. It's like he knows the subject so well. Maybe he is into philosophy too.
@@manan-543 i for one wants to hear sonata for electric bass and electron superposition in b flat.
"I didn't actually study any of this tuning theory stuff in music school..."
I was *shocked* when this didn't lead into an ad for Brilliant XD
I have a friend who sings barbershop quartet. He once told me that one of the songs they would sing would always end up about a semitone sharper than they started. Really interesting to hear the explanation. Thanks Adam
I never meta-comma I didn't licc.
But have you Meta-Slendro?
"You can't have mathematically pure music without the pitch drifting."
Have you tried playing it in A=432Hz? It might help.
How dare you.
I honestly can’t tell if he’s serious or joking
Pro tip: remember to have you synth adlfhaig pe aaheh tt
goddamn it, EazyRun 😂
I‘ve heard of that, but im very dumb when it comes to music. It‘s some sort of conspiracy theory right?
this has ruined my saying of "I'm a musician, not a mathematician"
@@tuna5618 You ever just calculate the integral under Mozart? It gets weird fast.
Theory
I was just trying to explain this to someone yesterday! And, clumsiliy stumbling over the concepts, I was just confusing. So I sent him you're video. You really have a gift for taking complex topics and making them understandable.
‘Okay! *clap*’ - 10 minutes of incomprehensible wizardry
Adam: plays a few notes in just intonation
My ears: No no no no NO non nonononononono
Just intonation is interesting, because while on a *piano* we definitely hear it acutely, but it's used everywhere else in music. We even sing in just intonation - your voice pretty much automatically, almost instinctually seeks those 3/2, 5/4 ratios because they sound more...sound... Than 5√2/12.
Just intonation is really important for getting things like resonating overtones, which musicians can use for tuning purposes.
@@TheTauntalus
I sometimes tune my digital piano to the just intonation and am surprised how boring harmonies sound. They lose their "bite" and brilliance. This is probably because the richness of the harmony played on the piano comes from the clashing overtones.
@@ryofurue that's fair. Both systems have their merits - I tend to play music in the world of wind bands and small ensembles, where having that locked in sound helps to clear up the musical sound and avoids some of the unnecessary destructive interference that comes from out of sync tones; but it ain't perfect, and the crunch of clashing overtones definitely can bring out flavors and emotions you just can't get from just.
More power to you, man!
@@ryofurue You must have quite the ear to feel such an emotional difference between just intonation and modern equal temperament. If you gave me the same song tempered differently, I might be able to tell they're not the same, but I wouldn't be able to say one is full of "bite and brilliance" compared to the other.
My musical tastes are deeply ordinary. I'd rather have a sleeve of Oreos than, say, creamy shrimp risotto with mascarpone, or turbot and morels. I'm inclined to believe this is a bad thing -- a "good" person can perceive and appreciates these kinds of musical differences.
eh just intonation is better.
Quasi-pythagorean wolf ET thirds are the definition of ugliness.
Three times in this video I came down to ask a question only to have you exactly answer what I was typing up. Such an awesome video! I was lucky enough to have a jazz teacher who taught me this stuff through the book "Lies My Music Teacher Told Me" in college. It completely changed how I sing in choir. I'm a low bass, so any time I sing a capella I constantly have to trade off tuning an interval and keeping the root notes in the right key center. It wasn't until I learned about this that I really clicked for me.
9:56, and all of a sudden, tears of joy begin to swarm... So perfect an ending to the imperfection manifest!
Oh you’ve done it again Adam! This is exactly what I needed to fuel some isolation practice and research!
Becca Deegan thank you so much! Please like and subscribe :) I appreciate all the support x
My doctor: Arnold scheonerrberger isn't real, he can't hurt you
Arnold schoenerrberger: 7:22
Imagine jazz in just intonation where on top of everything, you have to keep track of how much your notes are making you drift.
8:02 " you can't have mathematically pure music without the pitch drifting" unless you make one-note EDM bangers :P
El Sondito babyyyy
*djent
Remarkable to listen from 0:25 thru 0:50 then go back to 0:25 again. I had no idea the pitch was rising so steeply! An excellent explanation of a truly curious phenomenon.
I love the editing of this video! Keep up the nice work!
This the content we need more of, even if it's more niche, and even if someone has a different opinion... they're wrong
This is the way of thinking
Agree!
Of course you have to state at the end of the video that most musicians don't learn this. I was going to use this video with my middle schoolers to explain what I mean when I say "Music theory is math that doesn't follow the rules of math." But you make an excellent point as well!
I love your tuning theory videos, exploring the very foundation of our occidental music tradition is extremely interesting! The fact that changing the tuning opens up new dimensions of soundscapes and then delving into a whole new world of harmonies is amazing.
I would love to hear your thoughts on "the well tuned piano"!
The solution to this is pretty obvious: Everyone just needs to start composing every single piece in such as way that the upward moving and downward moving comma pumps cancel out, so that by the end you are back at the pitch level you started at.
In fact you could take it a step further and consider this to be a sort of second-level tonicization. Say your piece starts in tonic, moves to the dominant key in the central section, and then returns to tonic. At the same time you manipulate your comma pumps so that the underlying pitch levels rises by (say) a quarter-step in the central section and then gradually steps back down to the original pitch level by the end.
Though if I had my druthers we would write every single phrase so as to be "comma pump neutral" as landing on a tonic that is say 20 cents higher than the original after just a few measures is really jarring. Composers: Make every phrase comma-pump neutral or I *will* be hunting you down . . .
Or do like Jacob Collier and use comma pumping as an expressive tool!
Something like ultra hyper meta mega lydian, right? :)
Yeah, when he said that "you can't have both", I would argue that you simply have to compose with that in mind, just as one composes with the location of the tritone in the diatonic scale in mind.
And if people naturally do it, why bother with tonality anyways?
@@taras-ablamsky the hyper ultra meta something mega lydian is just the first four intervals of lydian repeated, e.g. CDEF# GABC# DEF#G#A ...
Surely somewhere, Bach wrote something like that.
Wow this is eye-opening. Feels like this is because music is more like a fractal-like spiral and not a perfect circle like we want it to be. The imperfect nature of it is what makes it sound appealing. If it where mathematically perfect it just wouldn't work. Perfection really doesn't exist anywhere in nature. The irregularities in the universe are what make matter, life, and music possible.
Adam Neely posts this video:
*Jacob Collier Arrives* -Nice
*laughs in G half sharp*
Pretty sure JC use this technique in his "In the Bleak Midwinter", as explained on his interview
@@aloysiuskurnia7643 Didn't know, I knew he used four chords to modulate up to G half sharp, but I didn't know it was this
@@jonocour Actually it isn't this, is not comma pump what Jacob uses, he plays with interval ratios to keep in tune every chord while raising up the pitch, David Bruce composer explains it clear as water
San Tiago yeah I have watched that video. Just a while back so I thought I had forgotten
Very interesting video. I believe this is all why, even with "perfect" intonation on a guitar and "in tune", some chord shapes sound crap unless you slightly detune or overtune a string. For me personally, it's usually the G-string that needs to drop a bit (insert joke here) for many open chord shapes, especially open D.
"You can't have both".
Damn you Schrodinger.
What about Heisenberg?
0:57 Lord Vinheteiro, is that you?
Lol
Looking left is watching for malfeasance
Did he ever get to finally impress girl with music? That little sketch was hilarious.
As a non-mathematician I too love using mathematical concepts like Gödel’s Incompleteness Theory in dubious analogies. It can be fun to make mathematician’s eyes spin upwards in their sockets much like a gluon.
I didn't know that gluons could spin upwards in their sockets, but (as a mathematician) I do think roping in Gödel didn't make much sense. Never mind, on the whole the video was very good.
I paused the video at that line, but I think it makes sense broadly. They are both arguably the "you can't have your cake and eat it too" theorem of their respective fields. Cue math people saying "Godel's theorems don't apply to all of math", etc.
I'm writing a thesis paper on different systems of tuning within music and it's always super fun to watch a youtube video mention something about tuning and I know *exactly* what they're talking about
This video from 3:14 almost feels like a complete piece of music! That was unusual experience
yeah like everything is in time
The Cosmic Joke pertaining to Western tuning can be summarized very succinctly: 3^12 != 2^19.
Pythagorean comma? lol
Not quite, with 3^12 ≠ 2^19 you are talking 3-limit (only using octaves and fifth) but omit the next prime (5), which is neccessary for well tuned thirds and is used in classical music theory. These lead to different kinds of commas, e.g. 2^7 ≠ 5^3
Some modern theorists go even further and include 7th, 11th and 13th harmonics...
@@foo0815 What are you even talking about?
@@foo0815 Yes, of course there are other commas. I attempted to define the Cosmic Joke very succinctly by simply pointing out the most fundamental inequality.
@@AbhiBass96 Adam talked about 5-limit tuning system at 2:05. Does it suffice to say that the comment about "3-limit" is (gasp) talking about a tuning system, too?
I don't play an instrument and I don't study music. But since one of your vids came on randomly, I've been hooked. The science, psychology and pattern involved has opened my mind considerably. Thank you for an unexpected introduction to music theory.
You do realise that we'll need the lick comma pump pumped through 8 octaves and looped for 5 hours now, right?
Ditto!
Yes please
I think this is inevitable and necessary.
Yes please someone make this.
Get Collier to play it live on a range of instruments.
This is the nerdiest "Let's break it down" I've ever heard.
ps: the content is awesome.
I don't understand any of this but I can't stop watching.
Me: *Hears theme*
Brain: "Minecraft?"
not at all. just because it's piano you say it's minecraft music. but c418's piano songs are totally different
@@toniokettner4821 It's a joke lol you're taking it too seriously
ERBOCH was i supposed to realize that this crap was a joke?
@@toniokettner4821 Yes?
It has that slightly 'out of tune' sound to it. Absolutely. Wonder if C418 was purposely using some justonic theory in his pieces?
I think I have to show this video to all my “I got perfect pitch” friends 😂
Perfect-enough..
love it when the soprano has perfect pitch but you're singing a chorale in a church and they REFUSE TO TUNE TO ANYONE ELSE
In just intonation, ratios are the mathematic framework of the harmonic language. In this example, the A note is an anticipation. This means that the A is not linked to the G bass note, but to the C bass note. So, we have:
1st chord: G(1/1) - D(3/2) - G(2/1)
2nd chord: C(4/3) - E(5/3) - A(10/4) , with A(10/4) anticipated one beat before
3rd chord: C(4/3) - E(5/3) - G(1/1)
There is not pitch drifting.
Thank you for introducing me to just intonation and microtonality.
As was alluded to, in the context of vocal music the soprano's A is used as a reference for the alto's E, and by extension the tenor's C. Meaning, whatever the tuning of that A is (whether sharp or flat), the alto part will naturally attempt to "lock into" it a 4:3 away. What you are suggesting is that the alto deliberately (and more importantly, accurately!) enter with an E a 27:20 away from the soprano's A. That's simply not what happens in practice, even for an advanced-level choir.
Interestingly, of the 2 versions of G major you played at 1:20, I found the first one warmer and more natural. I guess this means I'm so acclimatized to equal temperament that anything else sounds out of tune to me!
Well, if you instead try just listening to pure 5ths, one based on equal temperament and the other on just intonation, just is more sonorous. The equal-tempered 5th will have beating as the phase shifts over time.
There is a problem with this explanation and I will try to clarify it. In the just intonation major scale, its degrees have the following frequency ratios:
I: 1
II: 9/8
III: 5/4
IV: 4/3
V: 3/2
VI: 5/3
VII: 15/8
I: (VIII, octave higher) 2
One can easily calculate that the same intervals at different positions have different sizes - eg the major second between I-II is larger than the same interval between II-III; the minor third between II-IV is smaller than the one between III-V; also, the fifth between II and VI degrees (D and A) equals (5/3)/(9/8) which is 40/27, not 3/2. Therefore, the ninth between G in the bass and upper A of this example, in just intonation would be 20/9 (2.222…), not 9/4 (2.25).
These fine differences enable us to hear DEGREES of the scale. Moreover, this music example is far too simple and I doubt that any choir would rise intonation singing this bar repeatedly. The problem is more theoretical than practical - in practice, all singers and instruments without fixed intonation listen to and are led by the tonal centre and by the scale degrees, not by some manipulative theoretical multiplications of the frequencies (here wrongly supposed that the two fifths, G-D and D-A, are equal). Hence, the assumption that the bass will rise the pitch leaping up from G to C isn't correct.
Every string player knows that if he, for instance, plays a major sixth, with open G string and with first finger on E, that E won't sound in tune as a perfect fourth with the open string A. (We meet again those ratios, major sixth + perfect fourth is 20/9, and two perfect fifths, as tuned on a string instrument, make 9/4). In practice, the player would move his finger just a little bit, depending on the tonal context. So the singers change their pitch to stay within the tonal centre. This is done automatically most of the time.
In more complicated situations, as mentioned in this video, a cappella choirs and strings do shift from the initial tonality, but this also could be a symptom that, in those particular cases, music may be badly written.
Those who want to find out more about this subject can read Paul Hindemith's "Unterweisung im Tonsatz" (English title: "The Craft of Musical Composition").
if we play d and a at the same time we change one so that the fifth is harmony
hey Adam,that was one of the best little explanations i've ever heard.....in 60 years!!!!If you have the time ,look into the shakuhachi ......that is where the secrets of intonation are hidden.
This reminds me of a time I was in choir where we sang a song acapella, but ended up one half step down from where we started. B major was the original key but we ended in B-flat some way somehow. The same thing happened on this other song except we ended up a half step higher than the original key. Started in A-flat major and ended up in A major. There were also times were we ended up in a quarter tone key like E half flat major.
'Tuning Theory' is such an intuitive term compared to the phrases other peeps have come up with in places like the Xen community.
The what now?
I feel like xen refers more to the people who are actually making music outside of 12TET, like Sevish for example.
@@unvergebeneid people who play/compose/study music that isnt in 12tet
xen = xenharmonic
microtonal is the slightly more popular (but less precise) term
also we're mostly talkin in a very western context
tuning theory is all encompassing and microtones or xen is a subcategory
I have NO idea what you just said, but its FASCINATING!
Anyone else fascinated with how mathematically perfect music on account of its pitch drift is naturally ascendant / transcendent?
No wonder those great choral pieces make you feel the way they do. They quite literally lift up your mind and heart.
Hey Adam, I recently designed something I called "Monkey Tuning" (because of jacob collier's tuning system swinging analogy in one of his June Lee interviews) and I've been thinking for a while now about making my own VST. The idea is to allow musicians using midi controllers to change their tuning systems in real time (while performing). I've noticed that the tuning always climbs slowly upwards (as opposed to downwards), but I've never understood why. Mathematically, is it because an interval's ratio to the root is on average greater than the inverse of the ratio which corresponds to its inversion in the octave? For example, if I'm playing in C JI, retune to D JI keeping the note D the same between the two tuning systems, then tune back down to C JI now keeping C the same, the new C is higher than the original C. Is this because the interval ratio of a major second greater than the inverse of the interval ratio of the minor seventh?
Thanks for the cool vid. Very helpful to know what to look up now to read more about this. Cheers
That's an interesting point about rising in pitch. I think this is because a JI fifth is slightly wider than an ET fifth, so if you are ascending in fifths then the pitch will slowly rise. However, if you descend through fifths then surely the pitch would drop... interesting
You can drop in pitch in a very similar way that Benedetti's example rises in pitch. For example: G5-G5sus4-Amin-Dmaj-G drops by a syntonic comma every repetition.
Can I ask what Ji stands for. Dose that mean just intonation?
@@kadendiggs9267 Yes, JI = just intonation.
Concerning playing C-D-C, keep in mind that in just intonation, a "whole step" can be 8:9, or 9:10, or one of several other options as well (although, those two are the most commonly found). Similarly, a minor seventh can be 9:16 or 5:9 or another set of options. Note that 5:9 and 9:10 are a kind of octave-reduced inversions of each other. But, it sounds to me like you're trying to do something like move up by 8:9 and then down by 9:10. Of course you'll end up in a different place.
you're pretty much keeping me sane during this quarantine bro, what a great video
I’m curious how this relates to musical traditions that use a drone. In that context, we don’t get drawn offsides by harmonic progression and are free to play with just intervals with an anchor. Fascinating!
As soon as he mentioned Gödel’s incompleteness theorem, I thought, “Of course! It’s exactly like Perry Fernalia’s gramixious obstacle!” and it all made sense.
@@snowwsquire Well, your comment made me fall out of my chair...and land on my head!
So true that you rarely have an opportunity to learn this stuff in music school. I always had a conceptual idea of the difference in just and equal temperament, but never actually learned the underlying mathematical difference, so I’m all about these tuning theory and temperament focused videos.
The "ce" at the end of "coup de grâce" is sounded as an S. French doesn't drop every single consonant at the end. Other than that, great video! I like learning about Renaissance theoretical problems like this.
Well, there are certain English pronunciations of French words you will just have to accept. It's frustrating and telling that they ever came to be but it is how it is. "Coup de gras" instead of "coup de grace" is one (and yes, making the "strike of mercy" into a "strike of fat" is especially, well, ungraceful); "fem" instead of "femme" is another. The latter is especially aggravating in "femme fatale" where the nice flow of the three /a/ sounds is abandoned in favour of one /e/ and two /a/s for no good reason.
@@unvergebeneid lol yeah, I know I'm being a pedant. Definitely way worse to hear that in Mike Duncan's Revolutions Podcast, through several French revolutions, than here.
Yeah, I also checked that, on Wiktionary they state that the standard English pronunciation is /kuː də ɡɹæs/ and pronouncing it as /kuː də ɡɹɑː/ is "hyperforeign" en.wiktionary.org/wiki/coup_de_grâce
@@unvergebeneid And a "fem fatale" is presumably the kind of woman who wears "lonjeray". :-(
@@gcewing There are literally thousands of originally French words which are now part of English, all of which are "mispronounced" by the majority of speakers. That's just how language works, things drift and change constantly. You don't complain that modern Italians are always "mispronouncing" Latin words, do you?
Next time someone tells me my guitar is out of tune I can say 'Fractions and commas!' No need to tune ever again, thanks Benedetti!
The D chord sounds slightly 'off' on a guitar in many contexts, so it's not completely wrong.
Best way to explain in simple mathematical terms: 5 ^ 3 (5 to the 3rd power) is 125, but 2 ^ 7 (2 to the 7th power) is 128.
Multiplying a frequency by 5 is equivalent (in just intonation) to two octaves plus a major 3rd. So, going up 2 octaves + maj 3rd 3 times should give us precisely 7 octaves.
But, an octave is achieved by multiplying frequency by 2; do this 7 times and you get 128, not 125.
So to 'fix' this, a tempered major third + 2 octaves is actually multiplying a frequency by 5.0397.
Fascinating stuff! This all became clear to me when a woodworker/bassist friend of mine decided to build bass guitars. The first one was fretless, and came out great. The next one was supposed to be fretted. One day he called me in a panic: "Dude -- where do I put the frets??!!!"
I'm not sure why, but whenever I hear pianos tuned to just intonation like this, I think the equal temperament version sounds better. Not sure if it's just what I'm used to or of its just that I find the electronic artifacts of retuning the piano sounds bad.
This is the greatest video on music theory from Adam so far for me (a complete noob). This puzzle reveals lots of aspects about tuning so succinctly!
9:58 "The Lick Comma Pump" Exquisite work Adam, bravo!
in ancient Chinese this imperfection is called the "wolf tune"
I listened to this before bed, and all I can hear now is an infinitely drifting puzzle playing in my ears.
I’ve been looking for the reason behind why I’ve found myself trending sharp over time in unaccompanied singing since being introduced to Just Intonation and Tuning Theory (outside of music school). This may just be part of it...
.
.
.
.
.
Or maybe I just haven’t been practicing enough and have been listening to way too much Ben Johnston.
Benedetti: I can show the dangers of just intonation by making this melody that will shift due to singers relying on each other to find pitches!
Me, who has perfect pitch: *You have no power here.*
Thanks for all your amazing videos! As a Theory teacher, it's so great to have student-friendly resources like this to help tackle the "why" of music.
"... maybe just to flex on your math teacher." -- yeah as a math teacher that's what impresses me... multiplying fractions. Ooooh.
My instructor: play in tune
Me: about that...
My instructor: play in tune
Me: Excuse me, I thought this school accepted other cultures. Why are you infringing on my cultural rights and insisting that your American tuning system is superior?
Ethan Rops lol
I'm one of those musicians who started very "left-brained", so though I haven't thought about the technical acoustics behind the music lately, this video was genuinely enlightening. Good work, Adam!