Learning 30 tones from 20hz to 20khz

[Tom]

I would like to work on learning the tones from 20hz to 20khz. Are
there any good quality public domain .wav files around on the web for
this purpose? If not, how could these be constructed in a home studio?

Thanks,

Tom

[Arny Krueger]

"Tom" > wrote in message

> I would like to work on learning the tones from 20hz to 20khz. Are
> there any good quality public domain .wav files around on the web for
> this purpose? If not, how could these be constructed in a home
> studio?

Got a computer with a CD burner?

Find software that generates tones, generate .wav files with tones you
desire, and burn audio CD from .wav files.

[Sean Conolly]

"Tom" > wrote in message
...
> I would like to work on learning the tones from 20hz to 20khz. Are
> there any good quality public domain .wav files around on the web for
> this purpose? If not, how could these be constructed in a home studio?

I wrote a set of C++ classes for generating tones some time back that will
do this. In fact they'll let you create tones based on a pitch plus X number
of harmonics, with an adjustable slope for the harmonic amplitude, and
adjustable phase shift per harmonic. You can create a tone based on scale
step or a specific frequency. If there's any collective interest in this I
could put together a user interface for it and donate it to the masses.

And yes, I am just the sort of sick individual who writes crap like this
just for fun.

Sean

[RichardP]

> I would like to work on learning the tones from 20hz to 20khz. Are
> there any good quality public domain .wav files around on the web for
> this purpose? If not, how could these be constructed in a home studio?

Take a look at the Simple Feedback Trainer from Ian Gregory (
http://www.ians-net.co.uk/software/ ). I'm not sure if it is exactly what
you want but it IS rather nice :-)

Richard

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> I would like to work on learning the tones from 20hz to 20khz. Are
> there any good quality public domain .wav files around on the web for
> this purpose? If not, how could these be constructed in a home studio?

Many DAW programs have waveform generators in them. If you're using a
DAW, look through its menus. You might already have one.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article <znr1069379702k@trad> (that's me!) writes:

> In article >
> writes:
>
> > I would like to work on learning the tones from 20hz to 20khz. Are
> > there any good quality public domain .wav files around on the web for
> > this purpose? If not, how could these be constructed in a home studio?
>
> Many DAW programs have waveform generators in them. If you're using a
> DAW, look through its menus. You might already have one.

I'd like to add that, depending on why you want to learn those tones,
you may actually want to learn something else. If you want to become
one of those live sound guys who pulls down exactly the right slider
on the graphic equalizer when he hears feedback, then yes, pure tones
is the way to learn. Feedback is at single frequencies (though there
often is more than one feedback frequency that you'll hear at about
the same gain).

If you want to become one of those producers or engineers who can say
(and be correct) "The guitar needs another 2.6 dB at 318 Hz." then
rather than training yourself with pure tones, you should train
yourself using program material (music or speech) with frequency bands
boosted or cut using a parametric or graphic equalizer. Some people
find that learning using pink noise with frequency bands boosted can
also be effective ear training.

You might consider Dave Moulton's Golden Ears ear training CD set.
It's kind of expensive and really boring, and you'll only get
something out of it if you really work at it (same with any other ear
training method), but if you feel committed, Moulton's set is at least
organized in a way that has worked for his students for 20 years or so.

There's a web site for the Golden Ears that you should be able to find
easily with a web search. It has a K and a Q in it and I can never
remember it. They also show up on eBay occasionally, from someone
who's learned or given up.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Fletcher]

Mike Rivers wrote:

> I'd like to add that, depending on why you want to learn those tones,
> you may actually want to learn something else. If you want to become
> one of those live sound guys who pulls down exactly the right slider
> on the graphic equalizer when he hears feedback, then yes, pure tones
> is the way to learn. Feedback is at single frequencies (though there
> often is more than one feedback frequency that you'll hear at about
> the same gain).

Uhhh... being one of "those guys"... no. The only way to learn that particular
skill set is by doing it... repeatedly. You can't learn that particular skill
set sitting around and listening to "tones"... fuggedaboudit.

>
>
> If you want to become one of those producers or engineers who can say
> (and be correct) "The guitar needs another 2.6 dB at 318 Hz." then
> rather than training yourself with pure tones, you should train
> yourself using program material (music or speech) with frequency bands
> boosted or cut using a parametric or graphic equalizer. Some people
> find that learning using pink noise with frequency bands boosted can
> also be effective ear training.

Really? While I'm sure you're correct, I honestly can't imagine anyone in
their right mind sitting around listening to pink noise... for any reason other
than tuning a sound reinforcement system with a real time analyzer. If you
want to become one those producers or engineers who can say (and be correct)
"the ____ needs another ___ at ___"... the only way I know of is to do it until
you learn what it is that you want to hear.

--
Fletcher
Mercenary Audio
TEL: 508-543-0069
FAX: 508-543-9670
http://www.mercenary.com
"this is not a problem"

[Brian Takei]

Mike Rivers )
in article <znr1069417405k@trad> wrote:
> You might consider Dave Moulton's Golden Ears ear training CD set.
> It's kind of expensive and really boring, and you'll only get
> something out of it if you really work at it (same with any other ear
> training method), but if you feel committed, Moulton's set is at least
> organized in a way that has worked for his students for 20 years or so.


I founding the Golden Ears to be helpful, and worth the money/time I've
put into it (and I would benefit from pulling it out again). What's been
even more useful is spending time just turning the dials on an EQ with
music going through it. For one thing (among others), most of the EQ
I've done is with the Speck ASC, which is not alone in having very rough
frequency markings on the sweep controls (not to mention the Q). Even if
I _did_ have the ability to know that I wanted to make a narrow or wide
cut at n Hz, that is of pretty limited use to me when I put my hand on
the knobs. Conversely, if I dial up a filter setting, the faceplate is
of limited use in indicating precise numbers.

Maybe it's like riding a bike, in that having meters and precise controls
for velocity, fork position, angular momentum, et.al. would be of really
limited use in keeping my face out of the dirt. But after enough saddle
time, I could pretty much tell if I was 'falling' or 'biking'. And it
was such a blast, so I'd push the envelope, fall, and repeat...

- Brian

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> > If you want to become
> > one of those live sound guys who pulls down exactly the right slider
> > on the graphic equalizer when he hears feedback, then yes, pure tones
> > is the way to learn.

> Uhhh... being one of "those guys"... no. The only way to learn that particular
> skill set is by doing it... repeatedly. You can't learn that particular skill
> set sitting around and listening to "tones"... fuggedaboudit.

Of course learning by doing will get your motor skills up to the level
where you can accurately hit the right slider without thinking "hmmm,
that's 1.2 kHz, now where's that darn 1.2 kHz slider?" It's like
learning to play from sheet music. I can (and have) learned that a dot
on a line on the staff is a certain note, but I don't yet have the
skill to see that dot and put my finger on the right fret of the
guitar. I can fumble through a written melody line with my "book
learning" but I don't consider myself musically literate.

> Really? While I'm sure you're correct, I honestly can't imagine anyone in
> their right mind sitting around listening to pink noise... for any reason other
> than tuning a sound reinforcement system with a real time analyzer. If you
> want to become one those producers or engineers who can say (and be correct)
> "the ____ needs another ___ at ___"... the only way I know of is to do it until
> you learn what it is that you want to hear.

This is the Ineternet Generation. You have to make allowances for
people who want to live in a vacuum. There are tools that make them
think that they're learning something.

I took a short remote recording class that was sponsored by NPR many
years ago, and Dave Moulton (Golden Ears training CDs) was one of the
instructors. He was just developing his ear training technique at the
time and used the class as guinea pigs. Twice each day we spent 15
minutes on ear training, listening to music with octave bands (that's
the beginner's program) boosted or cut, and keeping score as to how
many we got correct. After two weeks, the average score of the class
was raised much better than by chance. So something was working.

The idea isn't simply to recognize frequency bands and be able to name
them (that's like developing perfect pitch - a good party trick) but
to hear them in context of music so you can relate the markings on the
knobs of the console to what you hear, or want to hear.

Of course another approch to such learning is like the way I learned to
type in school. We had typewriters in the classroom with no markings
on the keys, so you had to learn to do what you wanted without relying
on an intemediate relationship.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo