The Technology of music

Introduction

What the following does not reveal until the end: an obsession with music?
What do I mean by technology? Technology has always been a part of music, not that this takes us much further. The origin of technology is not in objects that we consider to be technological, but rather in technique. Technology in music could be read as the technique needed to allow an individual to full develop their relationship to music according to the basis for that relationship; Bearing in mind that an individual can have one or many different, so called, relationships: the playing of a particular instrument, the creation of music, the recording of music, the transcribing of music, and perhaps listening.

There is an aspect of of this that draws me, but there is also the science, and perhaps even more importantly for me, the mathematics of music That is a unfortunate, for me, as I do not know much about the mathematics of music, but even more problematic, what I know I do not understand.

An S Wave calculated through Mathmatica

But is it not extraordinary, that while the fundamental notes of all instruments can be expressed in sinusoidal waves, but the differences between the instruments does not lie in the fundamentals but in the expression of it harmonics; the differences between the instruments is is not just expressed in the differences between a violin and violin-cello but also in the difference between this violin and that violin.and the same can be said of the human voice. I venture in speculating that the difference between a good player and a great player, is that great players great players have not only the technique, but the have an ability to play with awareness of the fully dynamic harmony of their instruments, even to the extent that they create conflicted harmonies to travel into regions of music that others would not dare to tread even if they could.

I Could, ohh if I could, relate the technology of music to the more recent move towards synthesizers, at least more recent that the development of the monophonic in in its European form attributed in part or in whole to Hidegaard Of Bingen, Monophony, as it at least as it applies to the already mention European history of music begins, or at least that is the time, and when we get overexcited the place where it begins. Synthesizers, can be traced to the 1960's, perhaps even 1964 with the release of the one of the first practical synth.

If I could I would state that the first impractical synth, built ten years, the RCA Mark II, (indicating but not proving that there may have been Mark I, but if you check the previous link, you will find out). There is also a history of using main-frames for music, not that the mainframe music counts as synthesized music. Playing but not producing tones, they were closer to the Organs of the fairground with their various mechanically based systems for triggering different notes, pipes and bells, or in current terms to a midi sequencer.

It is not that easy, for me to produce a history of this kind because I get bored by the detailed investigation that is required. At times I will mock certain articles in Wikipedia, but at least they tried and sometimes or more than often, when it comes to the history of things like the synth they will always be better than me. This History that they offer is far better than mine, but it also reflects the problem of my attempt, to produce a history of the synth, explain technology and why I am so drawn to it, whilst wondering about music.

The Wikipedia page for the Moog modular system proudly declares that it was capable of "an almost limitless range of sounds"; Its less dramatic than declaring its range of sound was limited. It would not be the first time that someone connected to the design, construction, building and playing of these machines has both declared this or that synth could produce every sound, or an infinite range of sounds, or that it would replace the orchestra, or room full of musicians, although there are some specific circumstances where this does happen, I wonder how many times this is because the particularly sound that is sought is the sound produced by the synth.

I read from many different sources as I was preparing to write this, whatever this is so called second introduction so that I could say something about the synthesis and the different types. I don't know why but I wanted to write this, not just in the hope that someone would find it interesting, I wrote this because I wanted to understand the underlying ideas. For a reason unknown to me, I found it difficult to understand subtraction synth until today

Subtraction synthesis begins with the voltage controlled oscillator (VSO) which produces an a waveform, the most basic of which is the S Wave. Now I am not going into the details of that, all that matters is what happens after this wave is produced.

Imagine a crying baby, if you have one around it will make the effort easier, but if you don't have one, and a have a terrible imagination, don't go out and steal one, it is very rude to steal them, just find a recording of one of them on one of those useful video services on the on the web-inter-foot-thingy. Start again;

Imagine a loud sound like a baby. or a belligerent cow, yes they can be a touch sensitive. This is the sound from the VSO, now think of this sound traveling through different types of filters. In fact just think of your voice. This poorly written Wikipage does use the voice and an example. The filters cut down the sound, rather than build the sound the source is akin to noise, and the filters are the handy whittler, carving away at the excess sound until it is shaped to whats needed. Perhaps Addictive synth will be the potter and clay; these mixed metaphors are addictive.