"Dark" vs. "Bright"

[dr_jay]

Just asking for comments on something that confuses me, at the intersection of language and acoustics. So I know the difference between the sound of a flugelhorn and a trumpet. Describing the sound of the former as "dark" or "fat" and the second as "bright" is fine. But when people describe "bright" sounds as having more overtones and harmonics than "dark" or "dull" instruments, I tend to think it should be the opposite. I should think a "bright" sound should be more like a pure sine wave (i.e., one predominant frequency), while a "dark" sound should have lots of overtones (a broader frequency component). I'm a mathematician, so I'm not a stranger to thinking in terms of of Fourier transforms and frequency spectrums, but I guess I've never hooked a trumpet up to a spectrum analyzer.

Wouldn't lots of overtones produce a darker sound? I hear people talk as though it's the opposite: a piercing, lead trumpet is described as bright and full of overtones, while a flugelhorn is described as dark or flat.

Thanks in advance for your comments.

Jay
_________________
2019 Bach 180S37
1974 Olds Ambassador
2019 Mendini MPT-N pocket trumpet

[Don Herman rev2]

Harmonics are higher frequencies thus "brighter".
_________________
"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley

[LittleRusty]

Definitely a term that is hard to pin down. I am certain that some members mean the opposite of what I think.

I think more of the higher frequency overtones is a component of a brighter sound. However, if only the nearer frequencies are involved I would not necessarily include that as a brighter sound.

The mix, relative volume, of the higher overtones will also affect the perception of brightness.

[ayryq]

I was thinking about this same question with regard to piston versus rotary trumpets. I read in one place that piston trumpets have a strong fundamental with less overtones, whereas rotaries have lots of overtones and a weaker fundamental. Is that true? My experience is that rotaries are "darker" or less "brilliant."

https://www.reddit.com/r/trumpet/comments/50vthb/what_are_the_differences_in_playing_rotary_vs/
http://www.aswltd.com/rotary.htm
_________________
Yamaha YTR6345HGS Bb
Bach "Philly" C
Bach 239 Eb/D
DEG Signature 2000 Bb/A picc
Yamaha YTR-9835 Bb/A picc
Yamaha Bobby Shew flugel
Yamaha Neo cornet

[JayKosta]

The cause of 'brightness' or 'darkness' is probably due to factors in addition to the number and strength of the overtones. Perhaps the precise shape of the wave forms.

Also, any 'bell-type' vibrations of the instrument itself will have an effect.

Jay
_________________
Most Important Note ? - the next one !
KNOW (see) what the next note is BEFORE you have to play it.
PLAY the next note 'on time' and 'in rhythm'.
Oh ya, watch the conductor - they set what is 'on time'.

[kehaulani]

I wouldn't overthink or overanalyze this term. It's relative, both relative within a like-instrument and when contrasting non like instruments; somewhat subjecting depending on where your core sound lies and how you relate that with others.

I know players who hear David Sanborn's sound as the norm. Using that as your core sound, Cannonball may sound dark. OTOH, I know players who hear Cannonball as the norm. In that context, Dave's sound is bright. So not everybody is hearing the same source of reference when they use these terms.

The terms work for me because I think there is, generally speaking, similar reference points. But to be exact, you would have to agree on the same reference point.
_________________
"If you don't live it, it won't come out of your horn." Bird

Yamaha 8310Z Bobby Shew trumpet
Benge 3X Trumpet
Benge 3X Cornet
Adams F-1 Flghn

[BraeGrimes]

I was talking to a saxophonist about this ages ago. Their conception of 'dark' and 'bright' was almost the complete opposite to how I see it.

What we did agree on was that ambiguous terms we use to describe music are rarely helpful. Why is a major chord happy and a minor chord sad even though they have the same intervals, just in a different order (M3 + m3 as opposed to m3 + M3)? Especially when there's plenty of songs with major resolutions which, to me, sound heartbreaking; and the opposite. There's no consistency.

And then, what about about the idea of a 'major' interval at all? Another controversy, but why don't we name pitch relationships by the distance in semitones as ascribed to the equal-temperament 12-note scale? Even better, we can develop awareness of pitch to involve more divisions of this scale (hearing in Hz!).

Well, I've gone too far now...