Відео

Reynold Extensions

You explained the Nyquist Theorem in a few mins while my professor spent a lecture trying to break it down. Legend!

Awesome video thank you Mario. I'm quite the novice regarding both music and frequency/vibration, but your presentation and explanations were such that I was able to understand and learn a significant amount in 1 video. ❤

I have a mems microphone with16 bits digital output and -26 dbFS of sensibility. I need to make a db meter. How convert this digital output to spl db ? Thank you for your video

Liked and subscribed. Great video!

wow! very explanatory illustrations and content!! thank you

I've been working on a video to break down those cymatics experiments myself, glad to see that someone else has demonstrated the fallacies behind them!

I've got several references to a threshold of pain (130 dB SPL) equating to 2.9 psi. However, when I convert 2.9 psi to Pa and get 19994 and I plug that in to the I(dB) equation 20*log10(19994/.0000203) where 20.3uPa is the reference threshold for hearing, I get 180 db. 63.24 Pa is 130 dB SPL, but that 63.24 Pa is 0.009172992 psi which is way off the 2.9 psi. What's going on?

I’m here because of a hacking challenge, hope this pans out 😂

Excellent explanation!

Absolutely excellent explanation, I actually understand nyquist now. Time to binge watch Dan worrall 🤘🏾(after making music of course 😊) sub a dub dub

Thank you for the excellent explanation. I truly appreciate it.

VERY well explained - thank you!

спасибо

Hmmm, you Hima, right?

@AwesomeAcousticEnglish I have tried to post a reply to your comment but for some "mysterious" reason it does not let me, so I copied it and pasted it here. I wish you had elaborated instead of playing the card "you are not educated enough to talk to me" and actually replied to my points but you are right I do not have a PHD, so I will let those that have one speak for me. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29573716/ Here is a study pointing out various negative effects of wifi www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/690012/EPRS_STU(2021)690012_EN.pdf Here is a review of multiple studies done by the EU on 5G www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/690012/EPRS_STU(2021)690012_EN.pdf www.healthline.com/health/binaural-beats Here is two articles from medical journals with sources about how sound waves can effect brain waves (I guess you forgot that sound waves are transformed in EMF by your ears) Your knowledge of the subject seems to be about 10 years old I would say. www.biogeometry.ca/electrosmog-the-miracle-of-hemberg Here is the most interesting case of a town in Switzerland that protested a 5G tower in the vicinity, claiming various negative effects. It was resolved with the use of Biogeometry, something that should be a pseudoscience. But I guess none of the people in that town have a PHD nor there are any in the Swiss government, since they approved the same work to be repeated nationwide, they must have been fooled. You can contact all of those peers of yours and tell them that their years of research are nonsense, because what about round and square plates? I am sure you will blow them away. I am throwing in also the piezoelectric effect for fun as another example of mechanical waves being translated into EMF. I conclude saying that arrogance and Scientism will not bring us far as a race and are one of the main reasons why people are becoming more and more disillusioned with academic science. Knowledge is always evolving and we still understand so little. Your believe that "hard math" (whatever that is) is the language of the universe is nothing new, Pythagora came up with it and it has been disproven over and over. We are methaphysical creatures as much as we are biological ones, without our ability to turn data into experience and assign meaning to it we are nothing. If you are not even aware that you have believes and that those believes are what is used to interpret the world, you will think that you see the ultimate truth and look like a fool while you do. I hope you will give a look at the papers I shared instead of just shielding yourself beyond titles. Btw I do not have a PHD but I have studied engeneering, music performance, I am studying currently music production, I speak 3 languages, and in my free time I enjoy leanring poetry, biology, phylosophy and teology. have a good day.

Thanks for the lecture however I would like to make some points and hear your answer about it. I do not disagree with anything you say but in relation with the human body the arguments that waves travel differently in different mediums is weak, since the human body is made of the same stuff for everyone and of mostly the same shape, it stands to reason that if we are discussing the benefits of some frequencies related to the human body, that is what we should consider, not other materials. Water is a good material to study in this case being our body made mostly of water. Same goes for the argument relative to EM waves and sound waves being different, again nothing to say against this but it is a known fact that electricity plays a huge role in our bodies. From our brain, and our thought, to our muscles, all of them operate with electricity and are constantly bated in an electrical current. Our cells, and all living cells for that matter, are also constantly surrounded by a current at high voltage that allows all of the metabolic processes to take place. Therefore when talking about human bodies, there is a point to be made that EM frequencies have an impact as much as mechanical waves do. This is supported by research that has proved that EM fields from communication system actually have a negative impact on health. There is also research that has been looking into how the Schuman resonance could have played a crucial role in kick starting life, as the push and pull of the resonance might be what provided both energy and shape to allow the inert matter that makes up organic life to take on the complex geometries that we can observe. I do not say this because I support the 432 Hz theory, but because I found that your arguments tend to look at the problem in a way that is a bit sterile and purely quantitive, and not fully logically sound. I encourage everyone to look at data but not to forget that data refers only to qauntitive measures, qualitative measures are completely ignored in our current scientific system. Beauty is a qualitative measure, and it is one that is instinctual for every human, and beauty is a fundamental part in art and in spirtuality. There is also a mistake made in the argument that whole numbers are prettier and therefore should be prioritized. That is not why they are preffered, the point of number with many decible or irrational numbers is that they are not possible to be perfectly replicated physically, they have to be approximated. Of course even whole numbers cannot be perfecty replicated physically because of the constrains of the physical worls, no measure is ever perfect. Numerology is simply a different way to look at what patterns can be created using numbers and mathematics is also simply a study of patterns, there are many branches of mathematics that are considered perfectly valid and could be considered numerology but are not, the dinstinction between two fields is merely hystorical and I hard press you to find a definition for numerology that will not include proper mathematics as well. In general, I invite everyone to not look at things in a sterile way and remind you all that our way to look at things and interpret data is simply a product of our current phyloposhy and metaphysics. Creation is a mysterious process that is based on intuition and inspiration and refined by rationality, and our perception of reality is constantly changing and evolving. Staying curious and excited is fundamental to keep evolving these processes, which does not mean to believe in things without reason or not to look at inconsistencies, but keep reminding ourselves that reality is complex beyond understanding, our currently reductionist approach might put planes in the air but it will never explain the deeper mysteries that surround us at every step and from every direction.

U R THE MAN AWESOME

Great video, LOVED the Zelda reference.

good video

nice graphical interpretation

I like the video. The formulas came from describing reality not from knowing why it happens. I am very interested in the 432 vs 440 debate recently. Also I found it interesting that we encode audio at 44.1khz rather than 43.2khz when Nyquist says anything above 20k is fine. I'm still doing more research. I am not a hippy but find this topic very interesting. Thank you for your video. I am also done watching at around 8-9 minutes I know physics very well. Thanks for the lesson.

♥♥♥

The sound waves, however, are an electromagnetic interaction between the particles. The compression and decompression of the medium corresponds to waves of photons coming out of the compressed areas vs the uncompressed ones. So when the sound hits your body, photons are produced by the inelastic collisions in the rhythm of the sound. It is like turning the light on and off 432 times a second, which is what it's really about. It's about hitting the micro structure of your body with an electromagnetic pulse 432 times a second. It is not about the frequency of the electromagnetic wave itself. Conversely, light produces sound waves when it inelastically scatters with a material since some of the energy if given to the medium. The connection between sound and light is easily overlooked but quite obvious when you think about it!

Great video man- thanks for just putting out the science

THANK YOU!!! I've been looking for an explanation for this phenomenon for ages, I'm so grateful I found this video! You cover the topic in such a clear and concise way, keep up with the good work!!

do you know a software or tool to edit harmonie frequencies over a fundamental key ? I would modify « color » of any key

excellent ! where could i found more content ?

Finally. Thank you for exposing the 432 nonsense. That being said… do any Schumann resonance nodes extend high enough so that the cellular structure of the wood in trees might more freely vibrate along those lines? I think if you do the circle of fifths math, you end up at A= 422.8ish. A far cry from 432 anyway. I do wonder if tuning a wooden instrument along those lines would allow it to resonate more freely? Or is that insane? I’m a musician, an avid science fan… but sadly not scientifically inclined lol

Very well explained.

What the fuck? How do you have 94000 likes with just 720 views?

really advanced information

super chebre

Overtones and Harmonics Root - 36Hz - 1st 1st - 72 = 9 - 2nd 2nd - 108 = 9 - 3nd 3nd - 144 = 9 - 4th 4th - 180 = 9 - 5th 5th - 216 = 9 - 6th 6th - 252 = 9 - 7th 7th - 288 = 9 - 8th 8th - 324 = 9 - 9th 9th - 360 = 9 - 10th 10th - 396 = 9 - 11th 11th - 432 = 9 - 12th 12th - 468 = 9 - 13th 13th - 504 = 9 - 14th 14th - 540 = 9 - 15th 15th - 576 = 9 - 16th Note: The sum of each frequency is 9 because each harmonic interval is separated by 36Hz 3 + 6 = 9

Helpful, thank you!

Love it!

I love your videos! You should be a physics teacher or something

Great lesson! There are not many who manage to explain theory in such an accessible way.

Wouldnt 432 make more sense mathematically? Pythagorean tuning sucks. Irrelevant.

Excellent knowledge provided to clarify the mind about a signal

Thank you

TY

great tutorials my dude

Loving the FF prelude ;)

Audio Mario

U R the man

i am the 16th viewer, please pin me

Psst... The spectrogram in the thumbnail actually says "Spectrograms in Audacity"

Audacity has had some updates since I made this video. Some changes are: • Input and output devices are now in a button at the top called "Audio Setup", as "Recording devices" and "Playback devices" respectively • Project sample rate is now under "Audio Setup" > "Audio Settings" • The recording and playback monitors have been combined with the recording and playback level sliders, respectively • To change the time display from "Start and End" to "Start and Length", you now click on a gear button • "Add/Remove plug-ins" is renamed to "Plugin manager"

You avoid talking about the digital dB values of peak and rms, and that there are two different ways of defining them. This is making it difficult to handle crest factors when going from analog to digital domain. A sine wave with 0dBFS peak should logically have an rms value of -3dBFS rms.. However some companies and also some standards say that a sine wave of 0dBFS peak also has an rms level of 0dBFSrms, which is making everything complicated. For instance, you get different crest factor calculations in analog and digital domain. You also can create signals that have positive rms value, like a full scale square wave that would have +3dBFS rms. Life would be much easier if we consider a full scale sinusoidal as 0dBFS peak and -3dBFS rms.