Freddie Mercury and Subharmonics

SR2: Freddie Mercury uses subharmonics as a distortion effect to the voice. Ratio cited is 3:1 which assumes the subharmonic as the fundamental; in the case of how we understand subharmonics here, he is using a 4:3 ratio and the 2nd level of subharmonics which puts the note he sings, G4, as the fundamental and the result is a C3 as the 2nd subharmonic. All singers “distort” the sound wave with articulation, vowel shape, dynamics, and adding notes with additional singers, or by producing two or more notes individually; understanding this can lead to higher understanding and success.

 

In this post, let’s take a look at the legendary Freddie Mercury. Recently, the Taylor & Francis Group’s Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology did an acoustical analysis of his voice. Click here to read the abstract and there is a PDF available as well for you to download if you like by clicking here.

Since this is a subharmonic-focused site, I will keep it to just that. On page 6 of the article, you will notice Figure 5 showing signs of subharmonics which is analyzed from the song Let’s Turn It On (The Acappella Collection) at about 67 seconds into the piece. The analysis is take from a G4 note on the word “on.”

 

Here is the video and audio of the song Let’s Turn It On (The Acappella Collection) – it starts at about 1:05 on the word “on”:

 

Here is a link to Freddie Mercury’s song Let’s Turn it On on iTunes. Click here to buy this track and other songs from him. Thanks for your support!

 

This sound is not the same kind of sound you hear me and others sing with, but nonetheless, these are subharmonics at play. One could say that it is more of the Louis Armstrong (but with a rock flare) approach to subharmonics.

In this case, Mercury is using the subharmonics as an effect of “distortion” to the voice. This is very similar to guitarists using a pedal to add the distortion/tube saturation effect; what the pedal does is increase the voltage gain of the guitar signal, add a perfect fifth or an octave to the note being played, and then dialing back the output volume to compensate for the increased gain – essentially what happens is that you get a warmer sound.

 

My brother’s first distortion pedal – I would connect my mic to this and loved using it on my voice. This was before DAWs were hot on the market and accessible (not to mention way out of my price range at the time). Danelectro French Toast Octave Distortion.

Click here to check out the Danelectro on Ebay.com – your support for this site is appreciated!

 

Technically, what Mercury is doing is creating a 3:1 ratio with his normal folds and false folds (Herbst, et al., 7) which makes it sound like there are two, or even three, voices singing (though he overdubs his voice on the phrase before, the analyzed vocal line only has his voice singing as a solo). Mercury seems to have achieved it this without the use of digital effects or a pedal. It also seems that to get this type of sound, it only works within that range of the voice. I would suspect that singing any lower would become closer to the sound that we understand as subharmonics or its relative, kargyraa.

 

What do those ratios mean? How does this relate to subharmonics?

 

By this point, you may have already noticed that subharmonics do follow the undertone series (Wikipedia), which is essentially the overtone series, but inverted.

In case you need a quick note to frequencies, Wikipedia has a great frequency chart here.

Rounding up to the tenth, we have:

D5 = 587.3 Hz

C5 = 523.0 Hz

G4 = 392.0 Hz

G3 = 196.0 Hz

C3 = 130.8 Hz

A 3:1 ratio with him singing on a G4 would result in a C3. It looks like their take on ratio is x:y where x is the “fundamental” note being sung and y is the lowest subharmonic frequency of x, being x= 1/3y. I have a feeling that this article is assuming that the fundamental note is the subharmonic, which would make sense if you are approaching it as an absolute value. However, it removes the notion of Mercury singing a G4; using a 3:1 ratio means that Mercury was singing a C3 and resonating a G4 really loudly, which could be misconstrued; let’s approach this matter differently.

If we were to relate it to what we know as subharmonics in terms of different levels, he is singing in the second level subharmonic where it is a 4:3 ratio. This would result in the C3 as the second subharmonic, the G3 as the first subharmonic and G4 as the true fundamental. (rounding it off: C3 = 130.8Hz; 130.8 x 3 = 392Hz, G4; 130.8 x 4 = 523Hz, C5). A 3:2 ratio (x:y) is what I usually use when I sing, which in this case would be the notes G4 (as y) and D5 (as x), resulting in a G3, which is the first subharmonic. (I don’t have a usable G4 that I like so let’s go ahead and move on. :D)

When singing subharmonics, using the second level subharmonics is a 4:3 ratio (in this case, the singer is singing the notes G4 and C5 at the same time with either the normal folds only or both normal and false folds together). The result is a C3 as the second subharmonic.

So what does all this mean?

It means that subharmonics exists and is a natural part of our speech. This means that it happens more often than we think. If you were to listen back to your favorite artists, can you hear some subharmonics in their voices? Maybe yes, maybe no. The idea of “distortion” comes off as something that is horrible for the voice, but if we were to approach the term distortion as simply a manipulation of the sound waves, it changes things. Singers manipulate sound waves all the time by changing vowels, dynamics, words, and articulations. Aren’t they also distorting the sound? Again, the product is not always an indicator of bad technique; I firmly believe that even those who sing, whether jazz, pop, or classical, are exposed to the same risks of a flat tongue, bad position and form of vocal alignment, breath issues, dark and bright issues, and more. If we take a step back and think about a proper core of our vocal instrument and that different styles are just variances in text, articulation, and frequency shapes, we can take music to a whole different level of understanding and success.

 

Hopefully this article helps you discover and appreciate the use of subharmonics. In Mercury’s case, he is using it as a vocal color and effect. In the case of my journey as a bass vocalist, I am seeking to make it a part of my voice, range, and timbre. Each to their own, right? Enjoy science, math, and art.

-Thou

 

______________________

1     Christian T. Herbst, Stellan Hertegard, Daniel Zangger-Borch & Per-Åke Lindestad (2016): Freddie Mercury—acoustic analysis of speaking fundamental frequency, vibrato, and subharmonics, Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology, DOI: 10.3109/14015439.2016.1156737