M&A A

[RicB]

Ric, and all:

I cannot applaud loudly enough the skeptical questioning that is 
happening and particularly the questioning of the use of brain-numbing 
concepts like "cause" which get in the way of clear observation of 
phenomena which may or may not be interconnected. It reminds me of the 
argument that I have been making for years that we should be calling the 
phenomenon of "false" beating what it really is which is "real" beating, 
that is, the interference of two frequencies. If frequency is a 
resultant of mass, tension and length in their varying proportional 
relationships, then it follows that the frequency variation is the 
resultant of something involving one the three, mass or tension or 
length. This is independent of the interrelationship with the 
termination structure; i.e. the result is a real beat with real physical 
properties attributable to a variation in one (or more) of the three 
components of the frequency. Maybe the bridge pin is a factor, maybe the 
bridge notch is a factor, maybe string springiness is a factor (and 
here, Ric, I'd urge you to look at cycloidal pendula as an interesting 
and maybe contributing factor with "springiness"; cycloidal pendula are 
another class of pendulum where the "termination" is not a pivot with a 
bearing but one or more curved surfaces on either side of the period of 
the pendulum which foreshorten the period as the pendulum swings in 
contact with the curvature--can you see the picture of the string and 
bridge pin here at all?).

It is entirely sensible (and provable over and over again) that shifting 
the bridge pin fore and aft will alter the "real" beating and sometimes 
allow you to quell it entirely. What this tells me is that there is 
relationship between the pin position and the string contact with the 
bridge top as "definitions" of the length of the string. What, after 
all, does termination mean here other than a defined end point for the 
sole purpose of measuring speaking length? I have no conclusions (and 
remain entirely skeptical) but tend in the direction of a length 
variation as the underlying phenomenon and primary factor in "real" beats.

On the other hand, I will also offer a total disclaimer and demurrer to 
my own observations that false beats are real. Perhaps they're not. What 
in fact are we hearing? It sounds like a frequency beat. Is it? Is a 
chime pulse a frequency beat or an amplitude phenomenon? Maybe we need 
to question even further back to begin.

Paul