Talk:Tuning fork

message: Removed: 
:Invented in 1752 by George Friderich Handel's trumpeter John Shore,
The Oxford Companion to Music says 1711. -- Tarquin
1711 is correct. Handel left one of his tuning forks to some musical society of the other in London in 1751 (the details escape me), so it could hardly have been invented a year later. --Camembert
-------
the prongs of a fork for eating are certainly called "tines", but is the same true of a tuning fork?
------
Sergeant Trumpeter to the court Which court - the royal British one? /Habj 11:00, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The speed of sound depends on the density of the surrounding medium. Therefore, the frequency should also depend on the surrounding medium as the length of the standing wave that forms on the tuning fork remains constant. For example, one would imagine that if the tuning fork were struck under water, say, for tuning an underwater guitar ;-), that its frequency would differ from that in air? Then again, the tuning fork appears to behave diffently to a classic resonant cavity as its frequency also depends on the material it's made from. Ga2re2t 10:14, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Density of the surrounding medium? 

message: Dr. John Beaulieu discovered BioSonic Repatterning while sitting in an anechoic chamber in New York University, and recognized the vibration patterns that correlated to musical notes at different octaves. He tried tuning forks at different octaves and could feel his body aligning with the tones.
What on earth is this supposed to mean?  The whole paragraph has the ring of pseudo-scientific (and commercially-motivated) mumbo-jumbo and unless it can be expressed rationally it should be deleted. Flapdragon (talk) 12:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: BioSonic Repatterning

message: The given frequency formula provides estimates of the 1st mode quite a bit on the high side. I checked this with a lassical compuation on a cantilevered beam and using an FEA program. A much closer match for the cylindrical case is f/2*pi (to get Hz)=alpha/2*pi(sqrt(E*I/m*l^3)), where alpha is 22.66 or so for a fixed restraint. ref Marks Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, 9th ed. pg 569 & 570.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.200.53 (talk) 21:55, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the formula and added references. --Edgar.bonet (talk) 16:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frequency formula not all that close 

message: The frequencies of the overtones of the tuning fork are not integer multiplies of the base frequency. Is it correct then to call them "harmonics"?!178.36.173.141 (talk) 19:17, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right: The overtones are not harmonics.  So the word "(harmonics)" should be removed from the end of the second sentence in the Description section.  For a vibrating string, the overtones are harmonics.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.81.69 (talk) 17:21, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote that sentence; I thought the word "harmonics" might be more familiar to introductory readers than "overtones".  However I agree, "harmonics" is incorrect.  Removed it.  Thanks.--ChetvornoTALK 20:02, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harmonics? 

message: Using forks of known frequency and a value of 5200 m/s for (E/density)^1/2, I get results 17-21% too high with the pitch formula in its present form. It appears that the value 1.875 might be better replaced by something around 1.70. The main problem in determining an exact value is deciding on the location of the nodal point at the base. Carl S R. carl s (talk) 21:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy of formula 

message: Ragg and John Walker seem to be the same company. (John Walker is a brand of Ragg.) They may have been separate companies earlier in their history, I suppose.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.117.162.44 (talk) 22:51, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ragg and John Walker 

message: Could I ask how the writer was able to derive the equation? This was because there wasn't any reference to an external source when stating the equation. Also maybe include why I/A can be rewritten as a^2/12. Thank you Jansonsport (talk) 11:56, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equation for the frequency of a tuning fork