6 ms·

Tell me more about the other properties.

by PaulDavisThe1st 10d ago

chrisjj 10d ago
You really don't know?
- PaulDavisThe1st 10d ago
  I really don't know what you're referring to, no.
  - chrisjj 10d ago
    Try https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_note https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_note .
    - PaulDavisThe1st 9d ago
      Ah, sure, OK. There are "notes as the name of certain pitches", and "notes as things musicians play". The former is a relatively simple concept, the latter much less so. I do see that the vast majority of the wikipedia article is concerned with "notes as the name of certain pitches".
      - chrisjj 9d ago
        > There are "notes as the name of certain pitches" The article doesn't say that. If it did, it would be incorrect. Notes aren't pitched. Notes aren't pitch names. Notes have pitch.
        PaulDavisThe1st 9d ago
        "A" is the name of a note. So is "Sa" and so is "Ke" (in different traditions). They all denote a specific pitch, though precisely which pitch they denote is not always clear (e.g. among traditions in which all pitch is relative to a root, or in a context where the accepted mapping between frequency and note names is unspecified). When someone plays an "A" they have more choices than just its pitch, and the result is also a note. "Dog" is the name of a pet often found among humans. So is "cat" and so is "mouse". They denote a specific pet, though precisely which pet they denote may not be clear. When someone chooses a "dog", they have many more choices than just it being a dog, but the result is still a dog. Names of things, and the things themselves are different, but when we write and talk about them, whether we using the name or attempting to describe the thing itself is not always clear. When I say "it was an "A"" to refer to the sound someone made, I may be trying to refer to every aspect of the sound in a rather anemic way, or I may be trying to denote its pitch. In English, the use of "A" to denote a pitch is widely, formally and colloquially, capturing that "there is a note we call A". The fact that the sound itself had other properties besides those captured by this pitch designation doesn't change that. When a teacher tells a student to play an "A", nobody would sensibly quibble and say "I don't know what to play". They would say "my teacher told me to play an A and I did". The fact that the language used by the teacher named only the pitch and did not convey any information about dynamics or articulation wouldn't stop any sensible person from agreeing that the teacher told the student to play "the note we call A".
        chrisjj 9d ago
        > "A" is the name of a note. So is "Sa" and so is "Ke" (in different traditions). They all denote a specific pitch Not true. There are multiple pitches named A. One (or more) per octave, in fact. That's why A is termed a pitch class.
        PaulDavisThe1st 9d ago
        That's fair ... among music theorists. Almost nobody else would ever say that "A is a pitch class". Just like nobody would ever say "a Chihuaha is a class of dogs", even though that's just as true. They'd point to a particular Chihuaha and say "that's a Chihuaha". I'm really done splitting hairs here. I thought that we were discussing important things, not semantic details. Performed notes are more than their pitch, but the names of notes are considered by almost everyone to be notes.
        chrisjj 9d ago
        > That's fair ... among music theorists. This is a music theory article, remember. > Almost nobody else would ever say that "A is a pitch class". Just like nobody would ever say "a Chihuaha is a class of dogs" Not like, because pitch doesn't work at all like dogs. Dogs don't come in anythink like octaves or enharmonics e.g. C# Db.

Tell me more about the other properties.

chrisjj 10d ago

You really don't know?

PaulDavisThe1st 10d ago
I really don't know what you're referring to, no.
- chrisjj 10d ago
  Try https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_note https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_note .
  - PaulDavisThe1st 9d ago
    Ah, sure, OK. There are "notes as the name of certain pitches", and "notes as things musicians play". The former is a relatively simple concept, the latter much less so. I do see that the vast majority of the wikipedia article is concerned with "notes as the name of certain pitches".
    - chrisjj 9d ago
      > There are "notes as the name of certain pitches" The article doesn't say that. If it did, it would be incorrect. Notes aren't pitched. Notes aren't pitch names. Notes have pitch.
      - PaulDavisThe1st 9d ago
        "A" is the name of a note. So is "Sa" and so is "Ke" (in different traditions). They all denote a specific pitch, though precisely which pitch they denote is not always clear (e.g. among traditions in which all pitch is relative to a root, or in a context where the accepted mapping between frequency and note names is unspecified). When someone plays an "A" they have more choices than just its pitch, and the result is also a note. "Dog" is the name of a pet often found among humans. So is "cat" and so is "mouse". They denote a specific pet, though precisely which pet they denote may not be clear. When someone chooses a "dog", they have many more choices than just it being a dog, but the result is still a dog. Names of things, and the things themselves are different, but when we write and talk about them, whether we using the name or attempting to describe the thing itself is not always clear. When I say "it was an "A"" to refer to the sound someone made, I may be trying to refer to every aspect of the sound in a rather anemic way, or I may be trying to denote its pitch. In English, the use of "A" to denote a pitch is widely, formally and colloquially, capturing that "there is a note we call A". The fact that the sound itself had other properties besides those captured by this pitch designation doesn't change that. When a teacher tells a student to play an "A", nobody would sensibly quibble and say "I don't know what to play". They would say "my teacher told me to play an A and I did". The fact that the language used by the teacher named only the pitch and did not convey any information about dynamics or articulation wouldn't stop any sensible person from agreeing that the teacher told the student to play "the note we call A".
        chrisjj 9d ago
        > "A" is the name of a note. So is "Sa" and so is "Ke" (in different traditions). They all denote a specific pitch Not true. There are multiple pitches named A. One (or more) per octave, in fact. That's why A is termed a pitch class.
        PaulDavisThe1st 9d ago
        That's fair ... among music theorists. Almost nobody else would ever say that "A is a pitch class". Just like nobody would ever say "a Chihuaha is a class of dogs", even though that's just as true. They'd point to a particular Chihuaha and say "that's a Chihuaha". I'm really done splitting hairs here. I thought that we were discussing important things, not semantic details. Performed notes are more than their pitch, but the names of notes are considered by almost everyone to be notes.
        chrisjj 9d ago
        > That's fair ... among music theorists. This is a music theory article, remember. > Almost nobody else would ever say that "A is a pitch class". Just like nobody would ever say "a Chihuaha is a class of dogs" Not like, because pitch doesn't work at all like dogs. Dogs don't come in anythink like octaves or enharmonics e.g. C# Db.