Why does bass have a higher tendency to move objects compared to treble?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LukeeeeBennet
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sound
AI Thread Summary
Bass frequencies have a greater tendency to move objects compared to treble due to several key factors. First, human ears are less sensitive to bass sounds, requiring higher power levels for the same perceived intensity. Second, low-frequency vibrations produce larger amplitudes, making them more visually impactful, while high frequencies often do not create noticeable movement. Lastly, objects like coins have low resonance frequencies, making them more responsive to bass vibrations. These principles explain the observable effects of bass on physical objects.
LukeeeeBennet
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
So, I'm writing a music A-Level dissertation, but because of my love for physics, I've based it on the physics of sound. I didn't think this should go into the homework section because it's not so much homework that I need help with.

Whilst working through some fundamentals on my board, I puzzled myself as to why bass has a higher tendency to move objects.

For example, if I put a coin on the desk that my speaker is on and keep the speakers at volume x, why will bass cause the coin to vibrate/move and treble not?

Thanks for any help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are three reasons:

1. our ears are less sensitive to bass than to middle-C: to perceive the same intensity of sound bass acoustic waves must have much bigger power;

2. vibrations at the same energy have bigger amplitude for low frequencies. Thus coin vibrating at 20Hz may be seen as vibrating, but the wine glass vibrating at 5,000Hz make no visual effect;

3. objects like coin on a table have their resonance frequencies rather low.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top