Talk:String harmonic

This article is WRONG

This page needs to be edited and cleaned up by someone who knows DETAILS about guitar harmonics - it shouldn't read like it was written by a ZZ Top fan: "Billy Gibbons is the master of the low overdrive pinch harmonic" is not a fact. "Guitar harmonics are really fun" is not a fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.160.5.25 (talk) 09:12, 19 January 2007‎

I agree. I changed the "other techniques" section to "harp harmonics" and moved the section up towards the middle of the page, before the 3rd bridge section. I did so because harp harmonics are like natural, pinch, and tapped harmonics in that they can be performed on any fretted instrument, whereas the 3rd Bridge device is its own instrument. Flanger001 23:04, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

1) "Guitar harmonics are fun sounds to produce" --> Very encyclopedic!

2) "Pinch harmonics: Also known as Artificial Harmonics" --> WHAAAAAAAAA? It doesn't take a guitar expert to know that pinch (or pick) harmonics and artificial (or false) harmonics are two totally different things. And I don't see the need for capitalization

3) "This is an advanced technique and was popularized by [...] Zakk Wylde" --> EHHHHHHHH? Advanced? Popularized by Zakk Wylde?! Was the guitar also popularized by Zakk Wylde?

This article needs to be rewritten by someone who can at least distinguish a guitar from a dog. F15x28 05:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

4)References to natural harmonic songs need to be added —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.12.194.82 (talk) 10:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC).

Another error, I believe, is in a chart for artificial harmonics. It shows circles on the music staff for where to press down the fingers. It has diamond shapes for where to lightly touch the strings. But the numbers listed (which I believe are for a relationship between the notes) have an ererror. The first 4 makes sense: The C is a fourth above G. The next 4 does not make sense, as D is not a fourth above G (C is...). The last number, 3, makes sense. MusicHuman (talk) 19:12, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Terms

I believe the technical term for "harp harmonics" is "artificial harmonics". And the "3rd Bridge" section is absolutely ridiculous. It doesn't belong in this article -- it seems like an advertisement. A real guitarist needs to rewrite this article from scratch... it really blows! Winky the tinkler 06:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Source needed

Yeah, "artificial" harmonics have been around a long time, used in classical and flamenco guitar. There should be some sort of source for that. (JM)

Source warning

I put up an Unreferenced warning since this article also seems to have major copyvio (or at least informal writing) issues. Ianthegecko 17:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Mistake in Harmonics Chart

On the G-String the P4 Position harmonic should not be E but G! This matches the logical patter and is also shown like that here: http://www.freakguitar.com/gfret.html

Some please fix. I have no idea how to contact or change the chart. This is rather important shince the chart is used in many Wiki pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.238.229 (talk) 05:27, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Table of harmonics Image

Table of harmonics, indicating in colors on which positions the same overtones occur

What do the minus signs mean in the image? For example in the image I see a D-. I'm not familliar with that notation. Is it explained in the article and I just missed it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.252.47.236 (talk) 18:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I believe it stands for "-" or "less" and is not standardized notation. Hyacinth (talk) 21:22, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Not formatted like an encyclopedia

I don't know how to put up a "not formatted like an encyclopedia" sign and I think someone should put one or format this article properly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.36.139.69 (talk) 10:10, 16 May 2007

Cleanup Aug 2007

I have ascertained that this article was very likely transplanted here from a Wikibook [mis]"instruction" manual. I've excised most of the dodgy material allowing future editors to rebuild as required. I think a facsimile of F Sor's study in harmonics from Op29 would be a welcome addition, I'll see what I can do. RichardJ Christie 01:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Who?

The Double Attack Harmonics section attributes that technique to 'Henry Deazeta of Jhojie Carnate'. Searching those names on google gives me seemingly random pairs of names. Nothing anywhere relating to a band or group of any sort. I presume it might be vandalism, because this page used to have the same technique attributed to a 'J.K. Hays' of 'Stidham-Hays', however that was also unsourced, and google searches seem to give me links to articles with text copied from this article. Neither of these people or groups have a website or even a myspace music page to work off, so I'm suggesting they aren't notable enough to be mentioned. Is this technique simply someone's original research? 58.161.121.200 (talk) 05:45, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Upon reading through that and actually doing what it explains, it seems alot like somebody thinks they invented something that they may not have. It seems to describe something I've been doing for a long time (without so much thought) and very similar to the style of bass harmonics used by Jaco Pastorius, however done with a pick instead of fingers.58.161.121.200 (talk) 05:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, I read this and thought the same thing. I'm removing 'Henry Deazeta of Jhojie Carnate' because it's clearly utter crap that has remained in the article for over 8 months. Actually, I've changed my mind and I'm going to remove the whole thing when I'm finished here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.109.160.225 (talk) 21:53, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Fundamental Freq Strength

"When a guitar string is plucked, the string vibrates most prominently at its fundamental frequency,"

As someone who has programmed a guitar tuner and looked at the frequency properties, I'm fairly certain this is untrue. Depending on the instrument the 2nd harmonic and even 3rd harmonic can have more power than the fundamental frequency. I'm not sure how I would change the current presentation though so I won't edit it. Any ideas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.170.69.166 (talk) 15:35, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Agree. Cello strings are about as long as guitar strings, and part of a cellist's early training has to do with getting the string to speak with a strong fundamental. Without a strongly defined attack and with poorly chosen bow speed, weight and sounding point, it is easy to get a whispery sound with lots of of upper partials and little to no fundamental.

How about this:

"When a guitar string is plucked normally, the ear tends to hear the fundamental frequency most prominently, colored by the presence of integer multiples of that frequency. The lowest frequency of vibration along the entire length of the string is known as the fundamental, while higher frequencies are referred to as overtones. The fundamental and overtones, when sounded together, are perceived by the listener as a single tone, though the relative prominence of the frequencies varies among instruments, contributing to timbre. A harmonic overtone has evenly spaced nodes along the string, where the string does not move from its resting position."

Comment? __ Just plain Bill (talk) 16:57, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I made a slight change in the pinch harmonic section, there was a slight bit of misinformation that they are always played with the thumb. I did not cover all possible ways, just changed some words and added a few to make it not seem like the thumb was the only way. I prefer my fingers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.0.112.58 (talk) 15:13, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Notation

It'd be nice if there were a section on how harmonics are written in music notation. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 19:26, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Siegel Harmonic

This section has been added, removed, and added again a few times. I have pointed its author at WP:BRD and some core WP policies. I don’t want to bite the dude with a 3RR warning yet. Calling for other eyes to help with this... Just plain Bill (talk) 22:39, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

See User_talk:Heydan_Seegil#Original research and verifiability. I have asked him to discuss his changes here on the article's talk page. Just plain Bill (talk) 18:35, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Details on nodes in the lede

The second half of the lede currently discusses details on nodes. There are several problems with that text:

1. It is badly written. It starts talking about x and y without ever defining these,
2. It discusses things at detail that rather belong in the appropriate section in the main part of the article.
3. It appears like the writer of that text has not read the section on nodes, which uses different variables m and n instead of the ideosyncratic x and y.
4. It contains errors. One typo, which consisted in needlessly defining the frequency so that it is always ≤0, has just been corrected. Another one is a more grave factual error: It claims that "the node at ⁠1/3⁠ produces a perfect fifth (⁠3/2⁠ = ⁠3/(3-1)⁠)", which is wrong, since, regardless whether I hold down the string at 1/3 or 2/3, I get the same result, namely the perfect twelfth, a.k.a. compound fifth. (I'm taking the liberty of saying so without a reference, since it is something anyone with a stringed instrument with accessible strings can easily verify for themself.) I will therefore merge the little that is salvageable from this text into the Nodes section. ◄ Sebastian 11:49, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Guitar section should go

I think the Guitar section of this article should be blanked, or at the very least, severely shortened. There is no reason for the article to focus so disproportionately on guitar (in my experience, harmonics are more common on bowed instruments anyway), and the section is almost entirely unreferenced. If no one opposes this, I'll clear or cut back the section soon. Noahfgodard (talk) 21:25, 23 August 2020 (UTC)