Periodic sound by a violin string

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the analysis of the periodic sound wave produced by a violin's G string, specifically focusing on the frequencies involved: 392 Hz, 588 Hz, and 980 Hz. Participants are exploring the concept of fundamental frequency and harmonics within the context of standing wave patterns on a string.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the relationship between the given frequencies and whether 588 Hz and 980 Hz are harmonics of the fundamental frequency of 392 Hz. There is also a discussion about the multiples of these frequencies and their harmonic relationships.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with some participants providing insights into the harmonic relationships while others are questioning the validity of those relationships. There is no explicit consensus yet, but the discussion is exploring different interpretations of the frequencies involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants are operating under the assumption that the fundamental frequency is the lowest frequency in a harmonic series, and there is confusion regarding the identification of harmonics and their multiples.

mikefitz
Messages
155
Reaction score
0
Analysis of the periodic sound wave produced by a violin's G string includes three frequencies: 392, 588, and 980 Hz. What is the fundamental frequency? [Hint: The wave on the string is the superposition of several different standing wave patterns.]

The fundamental frequency is the lowest frequency in a harmonic series; in this case it is 392 Hz. I know that for the first harmonic series that the wavelength is equal to 2xLength of the string (according to a site I found on google). Knowing this information I am a little confused as to where I should start to solve this problem. Can anyone offer me some guidance? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are 588 and 980 Hz harmonics of 392 Hz?
 
That would be false, they are not multiples of 392...
 
mikefitz said:
That would be false, they are not multiples of 392...
Are the three all multiples of something?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
13K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K