Content deleted Content added
Fixed an incorrect statement I made about Persichetti's book, but my opinion (I'm against keeping it as the ONLY reference) still stands. |
Re: ring modulation |
||
Line 24:
I'm the same guy of the FIXME note above. Thanks for fixing it, at least partially. (The comment above was anonymous because I didn't have an account. I just made it now). I have a few doubts about including the reference to Persichetti. His book does not deal with common-practice tonality and therefore does not have any treatment of modulation as it is described here (in the dominant/tonic sense). Wouldn't it be better to pick another primary reference such as Piston or some other more traditional harmony text? Persichetti could be left as additional reading. [[User:Rikypedia|Rikypedia]] 02:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
== Re: ring modulation ==
Having learned the signal-processing meaning of 'modulation' before the key-change meaning, I'm interested in the background of this dual usage. To me it's an ongoing source of confusion, though not nearly as bad as the way guitarists reverse 'vibrato' and 'tremolo'. Many musicians know about 'ring modulation' and 'frequency modulation', but then there's plain 'modulation' that doesn't seem to have anything to do with them. At least not in the sense of being a more general term.
There are some algorithms that use signal-processing modulation to achieve musical modulation, but I'd expect musical modulation to be a much earlier term. Any ideas?
[[User:TeknoHog|TeknoHog]] 16:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
| |||