I thought I’d share some of the books that were my sources of information, whether it was Sound Healing, Chakras or just life in general.
Sound Healing
The Magic of Tone and the Art of Music -Dane Rudhyar
Healing Sounds: The Power of Harmonics - Jonathan Goldman
Singing Bowl Exercises for Personal Harmony - Anneke Huyser
Shifting Frequencies - Jonathan Goldman
The Lost Chord - Jonathan Goldman
Chakras
Chakras for Beginners - David Pond
Chakra Meditation - Layne Redmond
Miscellaneous
Conversations With God Books 1, 2 & 3 - Neale Donald Walsch
The Celestine Prophesy - James Redfield
The Tenth Insight - James Redfield
The Secret of Shambhala - James Redfield
The Vagina Monologues - Eve Ensler
The Matrix and Philosophy - William Irwin (edited by)
Ishmael - Daniel Quinn
The Story of B - Daniel Quinn
My Ishmael - Daniel Quinn
Anthem - Ayn Rand
The Fountainhead - Ayn Rand
Demian - Hermann Hesse
Chi: Energy of Harmony - Solala Towler
The Ancient Secret of the Flower of Life - Drunvalo Melchizedek
The Alchemist - Paulo Coelho
Color Medicine - Charles Klotsche
These are some films that I either learned a lot from, or they at least was reminded me of something important. I hope they do the same for you, too.
The Matrix Trilogy
Fight Club
Koyaanisqatsi
Powaqqatsi
Naqoyqatsi
I Heart Huckabees
What the Bleep Do We Know?
The Fountain
The Secret
The Last Mimzy
Peaceful Warrior
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Pythagorean Scale Part 2
Long before the 12 different chromatic notes that we know of on the piano, Pythagoras had developed his own scale with much less notes. It could be compared to our C Major scale, but with a few differences.
When I began researching the Pythagorean Scale and how it was constructed, something didn’t sit well with me. The most common description is that it is a projection of Perfect Fifths. A Perfect Fifth is starting on one note and going to the fifth note of that scale (C,D,E,F,G). It is also seven half steps in equal temperament (C,C#,D,D#,E,F,F#,G), or the ratio of 3/2 in the overtone series (C,C,G). A projection of fifths is to keep going up Perfect Fifths until you have all the notes of the scale, for example, C,G,D,A,E,B,F#. This brings us to our first problem. If we put this scale in order, we get C,D,E,F#,G,A,B,C, but the C Major scale that we know of has an F, not F#. Most explanations I’ve read say that you have to stop at B (C,G,D,A,E,B) and then for the last note, go to a fifth BELOW C (F). Why? I agree that this fits into what we know as the C Major scale, but it seems to me that whomever thought of this was more concerned with reverse-engineering the major scale, than putting him/herself in Pythagoras’ shoes.
Disclaimer: What follows has not been extensively researched, but is only based on my educated guesses.
Pythagoras experimented with a monochord, or put more simply, a string. By holding this string at certain specific points, he could make different notes when he plucked it (we know these today as overtones). If he held it ½ way, he got an octave higher than the fundamental. If he held it 1/3 of the way in, it was an octave and a fifth above the fundamental, ¼ of the way, it was two octaves, etc.
After checking with my Solar Harmonic Spectrum tuners, I developed a theory of my own. The frequencies of the notes are as follows:
C=256, D=288, E=320, F=341.3, G=384, A=426.7, B=480, C=512. I found that the projection of fifths wouldn’t work. When I went up a fifth from C (256 * 3/2 = 384) and got G: OK. A fifth up from G (384 * 3/2 = 576. 576/2 = 288 (down an octave)) is D: OK. A fifth up from D (288 * 3/2 =432) DID NOT equal the frequency of the A in the tuning fork scale (427.7). So where did they get this frequency for the A? After some trial and error I found that one way to get that frequency for the A is to go a Perfect Fifth BELOW E (320 * 2 = 640 (up an octave). 640 * 2/3 = 426.66666), or a Perfect Fourth above E (320 * 4/3 = 426.66666). So the relationship of the fifth is still important.
Then it occurred to me. OK, I’m Pythagoras and I’ve got a string (C). I find that if I hold the string in the middle, I get a new note, so I get another string and tune it to this new note. I hold the string away from the center, dividing it in thirds and I get another note (G). I get another string and tune it to this new note. I move a little further away from the center, dividing the string in quarters and get yet another note (C). Get a new string, tune it, you get the idea. I do this until these new notes get kind of hard to hear (probably at the 7th partial. That’s where I start to lose them on my guitar anyway). So my “Harp” looks like this:
C C G C E G
After some time of experimenting with the harmonics on the new strings, Pythagoras probably notices the similarities in the C’s and G’s and acknowledged the significance of the ½ and 2/3 ratios. He also probably noticed by using his voice that there was a huge gap in between the C’s where many notes could fit. He probably noticed that as the strings went higher, there were smaller and smaller gaps where he could fit less and less notes. If he wanted to fill in these gaps with new strings, he would have wanted to have them be mathematically related to the original strings. Since the first overtone or 1:2 ratio (the Octave) produces the “same note” it wouldn’t have gotten him very far in filling in the gaps. So he went to the next overtone, the 2:3 ratio or Perfect Fifth. He already had the Perfect Fifth above C, so if he did the Perfect Fifth above G and E, he would get:
C C G C E G D B
The D and B are an Octave higher because the overtone is actually an OCTAVE and a Perfect Fifth above the fundamental. Pythagoras could then use his knowledge that the 1:2 ratio is the “same” note and use that to find the notes in the lower octave and upper octave, giving him this:
C C G C D E G B C D E G B C
Now He probably wouldn’t want to do a Perfect Fifth above D and B, because that would take him too far away from the original notes. But what if he went back to the original notes and went DOWN a fifth instead of up? This would be a lot trickier, because it requires tuning the harmonic of the new string to the existing string open, as opposed to tuning the new string open to the existing harmonic. The P5 below C gave him our F, the P5 below E gave him our A and the P5 below G is C which he already had, giving him this:
C C F G A C D E G B C D E G B C
After finding the upper octaves of F and A, his harp looks like this:
C C F G A C D E F G A B C D E F G A B C
Now that there are two octaves of a full scale with no gaps, it was at this point that he stopped looking for more notes and used the lower octaves to fill in the lower range of his harp:
C D E F G A B C D E F G A B C D E F G A B C D E F G A B C
Let’s apply this to the tuning forks. If C is 256 Hz, to get G, we multiply by 3, then divide by 2, to bring it down an octave and we get 384 Hz. To find E, we multiply 256 Hz by 5, then divide by 4 to bring it down two octaves and we get 320 Hz. Now we have our triad. We already have our fifth above C, so we do a fifth above E by multiplying 320 Hz by 3 then dividing by 2 and we get 480 Hz. To get D from G, we multiply 384 Hz by 3 but then divide by 4 to bring it down two octaves because in the scale it is below G, not above G. Again we already have a fifth below G, so we skip to our F below C. To get a fifth below, we multiply by 2 then divide by 3. 256 Hz times 2 divided by 3, then times 2 again to bring it above C instead of below it, is 341.33333etc. We do the exact same thing to E to get A (because we also want A to be above E), and from 320 Hz we get 426.66666etc. This doesn’t necessarily prove my theory, but it provides interesting discussion.
There are also many more relationships to the overtone series in the tuning fork frequencies. If we look at some of the other intervals in the overtone series, we see that the exact ratios work in other places. For example, the Major 3rd ratio of 5/4 works for F to A and G to B. The minor 3rd ratio of 6/5 works for A to C and B to D, but not D to F. This show that the F Major chord and the G Major chord are the exact same quality as the C Major chord. The Major 2nd ratio of 9/8 works for C to D, F to G and A to B, but not for D to E or G to A. The minor 2nd ratio of 16/15 works for E to F and B to C.
Another important point to mention is that Pythagoras probably didn’t call this a “C” scale. Why would he call the first, main note he worked with after the third letter of the alphabet? Actually, in the Greek alphabet, it’s alpha, beta, gamma, delta, etc. There isn’t even a “C”. I believe that where the “C” originated was from the monks doing Gregorian Chant music. The clef they used to designate the main note, or “Do”, looked like the letter C. I believe that this led to people calling it C and the C Scale grew from there. I also believe that C wasn’t always the exact same frequency. I believe that the “Do” of a particular chant was always the same pitch as the resonant frequency of the church or building that they were chanting in. That way, when they ended a chant, the last note would resonate the entire room, creating a huge amount of energy. If you don’t know what I’m referring to, try this. Next time you are in a public bathroom, or some other big room with echo, start humming a note. Gradually slide this note up and down in pitch. When you get to a certain pitch, the note will get louder and you will feel this vibration all through the room. This is because the note you are humming is the same as the resonant frequency of that room. This is a very powerful sound.
When I began researching the Pythagorean Scale and how it was constructed, something didn’t sit well with me. The most common description is that it is a projection of Perfect Fifths. A Perfect Fifth is starting on one note and going to the fifth note of that scale (C,D,E,F,G). It is also seven half steps in equal temperament (C,C#,D,D#,E,F,F#,G), or the ratio of 3/2 in the overtone series (C,C,G). A projection of fifths is to keep going up Perfect Fifths until you have all the notes of the scale, for example, C,G,D,A,E,B,F#. This brings us to our first problem. If we put this scale in order, we get C,D,E,F#,G,A,B,C, but the C Major scale that we know of has an F, not F#. Most explanations I’ve read say that you have to stop at B (C,G,D,A,E,B) and then for the last note, go to a fifth BELOW C (F). Why? I agree that this fits into what we know as the C Major scale, but it seems to me that whomever thought of this was more concerned with reverse-engineering the major scale, than putting him/herself in Pythagoras’ shoes.
Disclaimer: What follows has not been extensively researched, but is only based on my educated guesses.
Pythagoras experimented with a monochord, or put more simply, a string. By holding this string at certain specific points, he could make different notes when he plucked it (we know these today as overtones). If he held it ½ way, he got an octave higher than the fundamental. If he held it 1/3 of the way in, it was an octave and a fifth above the fundamental, ¼ of the way, it was two octaves, etc.
After checking with my Solar Harmonic Spectrum tuners, I developed a theory of my own. The frequencies of the notes are as follows:
C=256, D=288, E=320, F=341.3, G=384, A=426.7, B=480, C=512. I found that the projection of fifths wouldn’t work. When I went up a fifth from C (256 * 3/2 = 384) and got G: OK. A fifth up from G (384 * 3/2 = 576. 576/2 = 288 (down an octave)) is D: OK. A fifth up from D (288 * 3/2 =432) DID NOT equal the frequency of the A in the tuning fork scale (427.7). So where did they get this frequency for the A? After some trial and error I found that one way to get that frequency for the A is to go a Perfect Fifth BELOW E (320 * 2 = 640 (up an octave). 640 * 2/3 = 426.66666), or a Perfect Fourth above E (320 * 4/3 = 426.66666). So the relationship of the fifth is still important.
Then it occurred to me. OK, I’m Pythagoras and I’ve got a string (C). I find that if I hold the string in the middle, I get a new note, so I get another string and tune it to this new note. I hold the string away from the center, dividing it in thirds and I get another note (G). I get another string and tune it to this new note. I move a little further away from the center, dividing the string in quarters and get yet another note (C). Get a new string, tune it, you get the idea. I do this until these new notes get kind of hard to hear (probably at the 7th partial. That’s where I start to lose them on my guitar anyway). So my “Harp” looks like this:
C C G C E G
After some time of experimenting with the harmonics on the new strings, Pythagoras probably notices the similarities in the C’s and G’s and acknowledged the significance of the ½ and 2/3 ratios. He also probably noticed by using his voice that there was a huge gap in between the C’s where many notes could fit. He probably noticed that as the strings went higher, there were smaller and smaller gaps where he could fit less and less notes. If he wanted to fill in these gaps with new strings, he would have wanted to have them be mathematically related to the original strings. Since the first overtone or 1:2 ratio (the Octave) produces the “same note” it wouldn’t have gotten him very far in filling in the gaps. So he went to the next overtone, the 2:3 ratio or Perfect Fifth. He already had the Perfect Fifth above C, so if he did the Perfect Fifth above G and E, he would get:
C C G C E G D B
The D and B are an Octave higher because the overtone is actually an OCTAVE and a Perfect Fifth above the fundamental. Pythagoras could then use his knowledge that the 1:2 ratio is the “same” note and use that to find the notes in the lower octave and upper octave, giving him this:
C C G C D E G B C D E G B C
Now He probably wouldn’t want to do a Perfect Fifth above D and B, because that would take him too far away from the original notes. But what if he went back to the original notes and went DOWN a fifth instead of up? This would be a lot trickier, because it requires tuning the harmonic of the new string to the existing string open, as opposed to tuning the new string open to the existing harmonic. The P5 below C gave him our F, the P5 below E gave him our A and the P5 below G is C which he already had, giving him this:
C C F G A C D E G B C D E G B C
After finding the upper octaves of F and A, his harp looks like this:
C C F G A C D E F G A B C D E F G A B C
Now that there are two octaves of a full scale with no gaps, it was at this point that he stopped looking for more notes and used the lower octaves to fill in the lower range of his harp:
C D E F G A B C D E F G A B C D E F G A B C D E F G A B C
Let’s apply this to the tuning forks. If C is 256 Hz, to get G, we multiply by 3, then divide by 2, to bring it down an octave and we get 384 Hz. To find E, we multiply 256 Hz by 5, then divide by 4 to bring it down two octaves and we get 320 Hz. Now we have our triad. We already have our fifth above C, so we do a fifth above E by multiplying 320 Hz by 3 then dividing by 2 and we get 480 Hz. To get D from G, we multiply 384 Hz by 3 but then divide by 4 to bring it down two octaves because in the scale it is below G, not above G. Again we already have a fifth below G, so we skip to our F below C. To get a fifth below, we multiply by 2 then divide by 3. 256 Hz times 2 divided by 3, then times 2 again to bring it above C instead of below it, is 341.33333etc. We do the exact same thing to E to get A (because we also want A to be above E), and from 320 Hz we get 426.66666etc. This doesn’t necessarily prove my theory, but it provides interesting discussion.
There are also many more relationships to the overtone series in the tuning fork frequencies. If we look at some of the other intervals in the overtone series, we see that the exact ratios work in other places. For example, the Major 3rd ratio of 5/4 works for F to A and G to B. The minor 3rd ratio of 6/5 works for A to C and B to D, but not D to F. This show that the F Major chord and the G Major chord are the exact same quality as the C Major chord. The Major 2nd ratio of 9/8 works for C to D, F to G and A to B, but not for D to E or G to A. The minor 2nd ratio of 16/15 works for E to F and B to C.
Another important point to mention is that Pythagoras probably didn’t call this a “C” scale. Why would he call the first, main note he worked with after the third letter of the alphabet? Actually, in the Greek alphabet, it’s alpha, beta, gamma, delta, etc. There isn’t even a “C”. I believe that where the “C” originated was from the monks doing Gregorian Chant music. The clef they used to designate the main note, or “Do”, looked like the letter C. I believe that this led to people calling it C and the C Scale grew from there. I also believe that C wasn’t always the exact same frequency. I believe that the “Do” of a particular chant was always the same pitch as the resonant frequency of the church or building that they were chanting in. That way, when they ended a chant, the last note would resonate the entire room, creating a huge amount of energy. If you don’t know what I’m referring to, try this. Next time you are in a public bathroom, or some other big room with echo, start humming a note. Gradually slide this note up and down in pitch. When you get to a certain pitch, the note will get louder and you will feel this vibration all through the room. This is because the note you are humming is the same as the resonant frequency of that room. This is a very powerful sound.
Friday, August 3, 2007
Pythagorean Scale Part 1
Before I get into discussion of the Pythagorean Scale, there are some basics that I want to review.
First off, basic modern music notation. We’ll start with the basic C Major Scale: C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C. If we look at this scale on the piano, we notice that there are black notes in between C and D, D and E, F and G, G and A, A and B, but not E and F or B and C. These black notes are known as Sharps or Flats, depending on context. The smallest space between two notes on the piano is called a Half Step (E to F, B to C, F to F#, C# to D). If we put two Half Steps together, we get a Whole Step (C to D, D to E, F to G, B to C#, Bb to C, E to F#, Eb to F). The C Major scale is made up of a pattern of Whole Steps and Half Steps, specifically: Whole, Whole, Half, Whole, Whole, Whole, Half. We can also create a Major scale by starting on any note and applying this formula. To review: C (Whole) D (Whole) E (Half) F (Whole) G (Whole) A (Whole) B (Half) C. Now I am going to discuss intervals. An interval is measuring the distance between two notes. There are two elements to an interval, quality and number. The number refers to the distance between letter names of the notes, the quality refers to the alteration of the notes from its original appearance in the Major scale. For example, C to D is a 2nd, because if we start on C and count C as 1, D would be 2. C to E is a 3rd, C to F is a 4th, C to G is a 5th, C to A is a 6th, C to B is a 7th, C to C is called an Octave (8). Also, if we started on C and played the same C again, it would be called a Unison. As far as quality, there are five basics: Perfect, Major, minor, diminished and Augmented. In a Major scale, Unisons, 4ths, 5ths and Octaves start out as Perfect. 2nds, 3rds, 6ths and 7ths start out as Major. If you make a Major interval smaller, it becomes minor. If you make a Perfect interval smaller, it becomes diminished. If you make a Perfect interval bigger, it becomes Augmented. So in the C Major scale: C to C is a Perfect Unison (PU), C to D is a Major 2nd (M2), C to E is a Major 3rd (M3), C to F is a Perfect 4th (P4), C to G is a Perfect 5th (P5), C to A is a Major 6th (M6), C to B is a Major 7th (M7), C to C is a Perfect Octave (P8). Also, C to Db is a minor 2nd (m2), C to Eb is a minor 3rd (m3), C to F# is an Augmented 4th (A4), C to Gb is a diminished 5th (d5), C to Ab is a minor 6th (m6), C to Bb is a minor 7th (m7). I will refer to these notes and intervals often.
Next is the Overtone series. The Overtone Series is a series of notes created naturally whenever a note is sounded. Usually these notes, referred to as “Harmonics”, are hard to hear, but there are ways to bring them out. They are based on specific mathematic ratios in relation to the original, or ‘fundamental’ note. Each overtone gets higher and higher, and as they go up, the space in between them gets smaller and smaller. If we were to start on C, the overtone series would be (1)C, (2)C, (3)G, (4)C, (5)E, (6)G, (7)B flat (slightly flat from the one on the piano, or should I say, the one on the piano is slightly sharp), (8)C, (9)D, (10)E, (11)F sharp (slightly flat from the one on the piano), (12)G, (13)a note in between A flat and A, (14)B flat (slightly flat from the one on the piano), (15)B, (16)C. So the intervals in between the overtones are 1C (PO) 2C (P5) 3G (P4) 4C (M3) 5E (m3) 6G (smaller m3) 7flat Bb (bigger M2) 8C (M2) 9D (M2) 10E (smaller M2) 11flat F# (bigger m2) 12G (bigger m2) 13between Ab and A (bigger m2) 14flat Bb (bigger m2) 15B (m2) 16C. (Notice how numbers of the binary sequence (1,2,4,8,16) are all C’s. Binaries starting on 3 (3,6,12) are G’s, 5’s (5,10) are E’s, etc. This is where ratios of intervals come from. A Perfect Fifth, or C up to G is 3/2, because it’s the 3rd partial over the 2nd partial, or the frequency of G is three times, half the frequency of C.
First off, basic modern music notation. We’ll start with the basic C Major Scale: C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C. If we look at this scale on the piano, we notice that there are black notes in between C and D, D and E, F and G, G and A, A and B, but not E and F or B and C. These black notes are known as Sharps or Flats, depending on context. The smallest space between two notes on the piano is called a Half Step (E to F, B to C, F to F#, C# to D). If we put two Half Steps together, we get a Whole Step (C to D, D to E, F to G, B to C#, Bb to C, E to F#, Eb to F). The C Major scale is made up of a pattern of Whole Steps and Half Steps, specifically: Whole, Whole, Half, Whole, Whole, Whole, Half. We can also create a Major scale by starting on any note and applying this formula. To review: C (Whole) D (Whole) E (Half) F (Whole) G (Whole) A (Whole) B (Half) C. Now I am going to discuss intervals. An interval is measuring the distance between two notes. There are two elements to an interval, quality and number. The number refers to the distance between letter names of the notes, the quality refers to the alteration of the notes from its original appearance in the Major scale. For example, C to D is a 2nd, because if we start on C and count C as 1, D would be 2. C to E is a 3rd, C to F is a 4th, C to G is a 5th, C to A is a 6th, C to B is a 7th, C to C is called an Octave (8). Also, if we started on C and played the same C again, it would be called a Unison. As far as quality, there are five basics: Perfect, Major, minor, diminished and Augmented. In a Major scale, Unisons, 4ths, 5ths and Octaves start out as Perfect. 2nds, 3rds, 6ths and 7ths start out as Major. If you make a Major interval smaller, it becomes minor. If you make a Perfect interval smaller, it becomes diminished. If you make a Perfect interval bigger, it becomes Augmented. So in the C Major scale: C to C is a Perfect Unison (PU), C to D is a Major 2nd (M2), C to E is a Major 3rd (M3), C to F is a Perfect 4th (P4), C to G is a Perfect 5th (P5), C to A is a Major 6th (M6), C to B is a Major 7th (M7), C to C is a Perfect Octave (P8). Also, C to Db is a minor 2nd (m2), C to Eb is a minor 3rd (m3), C to F# is an Augmented 4th (A4), C to Gb is a diminished 5th (d5), C to Ab is a minor 6th (m6), C to Bb is a minor 7th (m7). I will refer to these notes and intervals often.
Next is the Overtone series. The Overtone Series is a series of notes created naturally whenever a note is sounded. Usually these notes, referred to as “Harmonics”, are hard to hear, but there are ways to bring them out. They are based on specific mathematic ratios in relation to the original, or ‘fundamental’ note. Each overtone gets higher and higher, and as they go up, the space in between them gets smaller and smaller. If we were to start on C, the overtone series would be (1)C, (2)C, (3)G, (4)C, (5)E, (6)G, (7)B flat (slightly flat from the one on the piano, or should I say, the one on the piano is slightly sharp), (8)C, (9)D, (10)E, (11)F sharp (slightly flat from the one on the piano), (12)G, (13)a note in between A flat and A, (14)B flat (slightly flat from the one on the piano), (15)B, (16)C. So the intervals in between the overtones are 1C (PO) 2C (P5) 3G (P4) 4C (M3) 5E (m3) 6G (smaller m3) 7flat Bb (bigger M2) 8C (M2) 9D (M2) 10E (smaller M2) 11flat F# (bigger m2) 12G (bigger m2) 13between Ab and A (bigger m2) 14flat Bb (bigger m2) 15B (m2) 16C. (Notice how numbers of the binary sequence (1,2,4,8,16) are all C’s. Binaries starting on 3 (3,6,12) are G’s, 5’s (5,10) are E’s, etc. This is where ratios of intervals come from. A Perfect Fifth, or C up to G is 3/2, because it’s the 3rd partial over the 2nd partial, or the frequency of G is three times, half the frequency of C.
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Back from Colorado
I just got back from Colorado a few days ago where I attended Jonathan Goldman’s Healing Sounds Intensive. It was definitely life changing. Much of the information I already knew from reading his books and CD inserts, but I went for the experience. It was wonderful being around so many like-minded people and learning little tidbits from all of them. Also, the meditations with toning were amazing and they gave me a huge boost. I probably learned more about toning than anything else, because that’s something which is hard to understand and absorb fully when you are just reading a book. In general, I have a much clearer perspective on what I’m doing and where I’m going.
I also bought some new toys! A very low Tibetan bowl, a small crystal bowl, D n’ A# (8:13) tuning forks, lower octave D n’ A# tuning forks, C 64 and G 96 OTTO tuners and a crystal resonator tuning fork. I have big plans for all of these…
My next entry will be my theory of how the Pythagorean scale came about.
I also bought some new toys! A very low Tibetan bowl, a small crystal bowl, D n’ A# (8:13) tuning forks, lower octave D n’ A# tuning forks, C 64 and G 96 OTTO tuners and a crystal resonator tuning fork. I have big plans for all of these…
My next entry will be my theory of how the Pythagorean scale came about.
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
Music
I have been a composer for about eleven years and, as I said earlier, have a degree in Music Composition. It was originally through researching world music for the sake of composition that I stumbled across Sound Healing. Now, my main focus, in addition to being a Sound Healing practitioner, is to use Sacred Sound in my compositions.
This was first done accidentally when I was collaborating with a visual artist friend of mine named Joe Perna. We wanted to combine visual and sonic art by finding ways to relate the two. I had recently read a book that explained how the colors of the spectrum: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet, correlate to the notes: G, A, Bb, C, D, D# and E, respectively. I also came up with sound associations for certain shapes. I incorporated these ideas into a work entitled Yellow Background, Blue Spheres, Black Segments and White Circles based on a painting of Joe’s. I used Didgeridoo (home-made out of pvc pipe), my frame drum and friction mallet, a rain stick as a shaker, and two of my Tibetan bowls, which I bowed. After this was finally recorded, I noticed its meditative quality (I actually almost had an out-of-body experience and had intense visualizations while listening to it with headphones once).
I have also since incorporated the color/light correlation in my piece IndigoCrystalRainbow for the Bellingham Middle School. My most recent Sound Healing works are a CD I made using the Brain Tuners (which I give free with your first paid Sound Healing session with me) and a CD called Fibonacci Spiral Meditation which is a fifteen minute intro followed by an hour of C drone, where you can meditate, tone, do mantras, etc. (this CD costs $15). (I also have a few other CD’s from before I was into sound healing for anyone who is interested.)
This was first done accidentally when I was collaborating with a visual artist friend of mine named Joe Perna. We wanted to combine visual and sonic art by finding ways to relate the two. I had recently read a book that explained how the colors of the spectrum: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet, correlate to the notes: G, A, Bb, C, D, D# and E, respectively. I also came up with sound associations for certain shapes. I incorporated these ideas into a work entitled Yellow Background, Blue Spheres, Black Segments and White Circles based on a painting of Joe’s. I used Didgeridoo (home-made out of pvc pipe), my frame drum and friction mallet, a rain stick as a shaker, and two of my Tibetan bowls, which I bowed. After this was finally recorded, I noticed its meditative quality (I actually almost had an out-of-body experience and had intense visualizations while listening to it with headphones once).
I have also since incorporated the color/light correlation in my piece IndigoCrystalRainbow for the Bellingham Middle School. My most recent Sound Healing works are a CD I made using the Brain Tuners (which I give free with your first paid Sound Healing session with me) and a CD called Fibonacci Spiral Meditation which is a fifteen minute intro followed by an hour of C drone, where you can meditate, tone, do mantras, etc. (this CD costs $15). (I also have a few other CD’s from before I was into sound healing for anyone who is interested.)
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Instruments
Over the years I have acquired many sound healing tools. I began with a collection of hand drums, wind chimes, cymbals, shakers, etc. from being a percussionist, before I even began to explore sound healing. My first venture into purchasing instruments for sacred sound was six Tibetan Singing Bowls. Of these, two produce lots of overtones so they are good to use for harmony and four produce single tones so they are good for melody. At a sound healing conference a couple of years ago, I purchased an Otto 128 tuning fork, a frame drum and a friction mallet to go with it, and a crystal practitioner bowl. Not too long ago I bought Tingshas that work nicely with my Tibetan Bowls. My Most recent purchases are the Solar Harmonic Spectrum tuning forks, Fibonacci tuning forks and Brain Tuners, all from BioSonics.com. In addition to all these toys, I use my voice to do toning, mostly based on Jonathan Goldman’s Chakra/Vowel association, and also to chant mantras. I utilize any number of these in individual sessions, group meditation, demonstrations and recordings.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
What Is Sound Healing? part 2
Last time I kind of jumped around a lot, so I figured I’d try to explain a few things, mostly from the technical side. As I said before, we call the frequency 440 Hz, “A” in our musical alphabet. This is the note orchestras tune to. The A below (to the left) has a frequency of 220 Hz (440/2). The next A below that would be 110 Hz and the one below that would be 55 Hz, etc. The A above (to the right) 440 Hz would be 880 Hz (440*2), and above that would be 1760 Hz, and above that would be 3520 Hz, etc. The point of all this is that when we divide a frequency in half or double it, we consider it the same note, but in a different octave (the ratio of these notes would be 1:2 or 2:1). Why is this important? Remember all those frequencies outside of human hearing? This is how we can be in tune with them. Even though we can’t create the exact frequency of our organs or cells or atoms, we can create those notes in a lower octave, within our hearing and singing range, and tune them that way.
Here is probably the coolest example (if you thought there was a lot of math involved so far, just you wait). OK, a frequency is measured in cycles per second (cycles/1 second). The Earth takes 365.242 days to make one “cycle” around the Sun. If we translate 365.242 days into seconds, we get 31,556,908.8 seconds in one Earth year (60 seconds * 60 minutes = 3600 seconds per hour. 3600 seconds * 24 hours = 86,400 seconds per day. 86,400 seconds * 365.242 days = 31,556,908.8). So the frequency (cycles/1 second) of the Earth going around the Sun is 1 cycle/ 31,556,908.8 seconds. Now this is obviously not in our hearing range, so to find a comparable frequency, we need to bring it up a few octaves (actually, 32 octaves). 1/31,556,908.8 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 = 4,294,967,296/31,556,908.8 = 136.102282 Hz (to make it a little more simple, I’ll round it to 136.1 from now on).
This frequency of 136.1 Hz is close to, but not quite, the note C Sharp on the piano. Spiritual Masters in India referred to this as sadja or sa, resonating with the primordial vibration, OM. Indian musicians will tune their instruments to this frequency to be in tune with the Earth, and increase the meditative quality of their music. Wouldn’t it be great if we could be in tune with Mother Earth in addition to being in tune with ourselves?
In Harmony,
(((Tim)))
Here is probably the coolest example (if you thought there was a lot of math involved so far, just you wait). OK, a frequency is measured in cycles per second (cycles/1 second). The Earth takes 365.242 days to make one “cycle” around the Sun. If we translate 365.242 days into seconds, we get 31,556,908.8 seconds in one Earth year (60 seconds * 60 minutes = 3600 seconds per hour. 3600 seconds * 24 hours = 86,400 seconds per day. 86,400 seconds * 365.242 days = 31,556,908.8). So the frequency (cycles/1 second) of the Earth going around the Sun is 1 cycle/ 31,556,908.8 seconds. Now this is obviously not in our hearing range, so to find a comparable frequency, we need to bring it up a few octaves (actually, 32 octaves). 1/31,556,908.8 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 = 4,294,967,296/31,556,908.8 = 136.102282 Hz (to make it a little more simple, I’ll round it to 136.1 from now on).
This frequency of 136.1 Hz is close to, but not quite, the note C Sharp on the piano. Spiritual Masters in India referred to this as sadja or sa, resonating with the primordial vibration, OM. Indian musicians will tune their instruments to this frequency to be in tune with the Earth, and increase the meditative quality of their music. Wouldn’t it be great if we could be in tune with Mother Earth in addition to being in tune with ourselves?
In Harmony,
(((Tim)))
Thursday, June 7, 2007
What is Sound Healing? part 1
Some of you may not have heard of Sound Healing. Even if you have heard of it, you may not know exactly what it is. There have been many to come before me whom I have learned from and I suggest that you look into them and their definitions as well. (They include Zacciah Blackburn, Dr. John Beaulieu, N.D., Ph.D., R.P.P., Layne Redmond and Jonathan Goldman, to name a few). I will try to convey my understanding, in my own words.
First of all, what is sound? Everything in the Universe is in motion. Galaxies, stars, planets, life-forms, organs, cells, molecules, atoms, etc. Planets revolve around stars just like electrons revolve around the nucleus of an atom: as above, so below.
The sound that our ears perceive is created the same way. If you pluck the string of a guitar, it vibrates or cycles at a certain speed that creates a sound wave. A visual representation of this sound wave would be a wavy line that goes up and down. The speed at which the string vibrates, or the speed that it takes for the wave to go from all the way at the top to all the way at the bottom, to all the way at the top, is its frequency. Frequencies are measured in cycles per second, or hertz (Hz).
Let's look at this musically. A frequency of 440 Hz would create what we Westerners recognize as the note "A" (the note orchestras tune to). An interesting fact is that if you went to a piano and plays A 440, and then played the next A down (to the left), the frequency of that A would be 220 Hz: exactly half of the original A! If you then went back to A 440 and went to the next A up (to the right), its frequency would be 880 Hz: exactly double that of the original A! So if we divide the frequency IN HALF, we get the same note, but DOWN an octave. If we DOUBLE the frequency, we get the same note, but UP an octave. This will be very important later.
Can you hear a dog whistle? No. That doesn't mean that it isn't making any sound though. The same goes for planets and electrons. Human hearing is in the range of about 16 to 16,000 Hz, but frequencies exist well below and above that range (dolphins can make and hear sounds at around 180,000 Hz).
Now that we have a more broad understanding of what sound actually is, lets see how that applies. Our atoms, our cells, our organs, our bodies, (the Earth, the solar system, the galaxy, the Universe…) are all vibrating, creating frequencies/sounds. When we are at peak health, all of those frequencies are “in tune” and sound good together. That is why the orchestra, or piano, or guitar must be tuned before it can be played. If something is out of tune, no matter what is played it will not sound good. The same goes for our bodies. If we have an illness, it is because a part of us is out of tune.
I heard an interesting comparison (made by Jonathan Goldman). Lets compare our body to an orchestra. If we have a dis-ease, it is like one of the violinists lost his sheet music, so he is just playing what he thinks is the right music, making the entire orchestra sound terrible. One solution is to drug him so that he falls asleep (medication), another solution is to kill him (surgery), but what if, instead of all that, we simply give him the music he is supposed to be playing. Now he can go back to functioning the way he is supposed to and the orchestra can return to its original, intended magnificence.
This is what Sound Healing does. It “gives you your music back”. The Sacred Sounds are used to put your body, mind and spirit back in tune, so that you can create the music you were intended to create.
In Harmony,
(((Tim)))
First of all, what is sound? Everything in the Universe is in motion. Galaxies, stars, planets, life-forms, organs, cells, molecules, atoms, etc. Planets revolve around stars just like electrons revolve around the nucleus of an atom: as above, so below.
The sound that our ears perceive is created the same way. If you pluck the string of a guitar, it vibrates or cycles at a certain speed that creates a sound wave. A visual representation of this sound wave would be a wavy line that goes up and down. The speed at which the string vibrates, or the speed that it takes for the wave to go from all the way at the top to all the way at the bottom, to all the way at the top, is its frequency. Frequencies are measured in cycles per second, or hertz (Hz).
Let's look at this musically. A frequency of 440 Hz would create what we Westerners recognize as the note "A" (the note orchestras tune to). An interesting fact is that if you went to a piano and plays A 440, and then played the next A down (to the left), the frequency of that A would be 220 Hz: exactly half of the original A! If you then went back to A 440 and went to the next A up (to the right), its frequency would be 880 Hz: exactly double that of the original A! So if we divide the frequency IN HALF, we get the same note, but DOWN an octave. If we DOUBLE the frequency, we get the same note, but UP an octave. This will be very important later.
Can you hear a dog whistle? No. That doesn't mean that it isn't making any sound though. The same goes for planets and electrons. Human hearing is in the range of about 16 to 16,000 Hz, but frequencies exist well below and above that range (dolphins can make and hear sounds at around 180,000 Hz).
Now that we have a more broad understanding of what sound actually is, lets see how that applies. Our atoms, our cells, our organs, our bodies, (the Earth, the solar system, the galaxy, the Universe…) are all vibrating, creating frequencies/sounds. When we are at peak health, all of those frequencies are “in tune” and sound good together. That is why the orchestra, or piano, or guitar must be tuned before it can be played. If something is out of tune, no matter what is played it will not sound good. The same goes for our bodies. If we have an illness, it is because a part of us is out of tune.
I heard an interesting comparison (made by Jonathan Goldman). Lets compare our body to an orchestra. If we have a dis-ease, it is like one of the violinists lost his sheet music, so he is just playing what he thinks is the right music, making the entire orchestra sound terrible. One solution is to drug him so that he falls asleep (medication), another solution is to kill him (surgery), but what if, instead of all that, we simply give him the music he is supposed to be playing. Now he can go back to functioning the way he is supposed to and the orchestra can return to its original, intended magnificence.
This is what Sound Healing does. It “gives you your music back”. The Sacred Sounds are used to put your body, mind and spirit back in tune, so that you can create the music you were intended to create.
In Harmony,
(((Tim)))
Sunday, June 3, 2007
Greetings
Hello to all! My name is Tim Girard and I am a Sound Healing Practitioner. I have also done level I of Shambhala and Level I & II of the Melchizedek Method, as well as a degree in Music Composition. I am setting up this blog so that anyone who is interested can check for updates for sessions, classes, demonstrations or CD's. More to follow, check back often!
In Harmony,
(((Tim)))
In Harmony,
(((Tim)))
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)