- #36
someGorilla
- 97
- 1
sophiecentaur said:Would it not be inconsistent to use the term Harmonic sometimes and Overtone on other occasions? Where would you draw the line?
Usage, tradition, history. Musicians do call them harmonics, even if formally they are not. Study of harmonics began far before precise instrumentation was available to show the difference between an 880 Hz and an 880.03 Hz overtone. "Harmonics" was used in this sense at least from the Renaissance while a glance at a dictionary gives me "overtone" as a 19th century calque from German (so I suppose from Helmholtz). So let musicians and physicists use whatever term they like!
Of course, strictly speaking vibrating bodies don't generate exact pure harmonics.
To answer the OP, you won't get a naturally-sounding waveform like an instrument's just by adding more frequencies. Check attack-decay-sustain-release (which is however a very poor model if you want very realistical results.) For many instruments the attack phase of the sound is very important to make it recognizable. A piano doesn't sound like a piano if you cut away the attack phase (when the hammer hits the string). Try to listen to a piano recording backwards. The overtones are the same but their evolution is time-reversed, and what counts more, the attack phase is lost. You would never guess it's a piano.