Does the "Partch system" exist anywhere in software?

I'm currently working on a piece using what I call the "Partch
system" -- essentially using 11-limit JI, Partch's 43-tone scale and
the principles and concepts laid out in "Genesis of a Music". Before
I do a lot of programming, I'd like to know if this particular wheel
has already been invented.

That is, is there some software out there that has these concepts
more or less built in? I know Scala has the Partch scale available,
but I'm not really interested in MIDI. I've made a few preliminary
stabs at some Perl scripts to generate tables, but that's as far as
I've gone at the moment. Essentially I read through "Genesis" and
translate things I find and want to use into code -- a bottom-up
approach :-).

BTW, if I do end up doing this myself, I'm planning to make the Perl
version freely available under GPL. Later, more integrated, versions
will be either C or SAOL and may be packaged as shareware for a
nominal ($20 US or thereabouts) fee, but will always be distributed
with source.
--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Chief Scientist, Borasky Research
http://www.borasky-research.net http://www.aracnet.com/~znmeb
mailto:znmeb@... mailto:znmeb@...

If there's nothing to astrology, how come so many famous men were
born on holidays?

--- In crazy_music@y..., "Ed Borasky" <znmeb@a...> wrote:

/crazy_music/topicId_145.html#145

> I'm currently working on a piece using what I call the "Partch
> system" -- essentially using 11-limit JI, Partch's 43-tone scale
and
> the principles and concepts laid out in "Genesis of a Music".
Before
> I do a lot of programming, I'd like to know if this particular
wheel
> has already been invented.
>

Hello Ed!

It seems that Prent Rodgers has done this with CSOUND, although the
program, from what I can gather, is just something personal for him
to use, rather than commercially distributed.

You may want to, at some point, discuss these concepts with him,
since he seems to have done quite a bit of work with CSOUND and
Partch's "tonality diamonds..."

His e-mail address is available from his page on mp3.com:

www.mp3.com/PrentRodgers

__________ _______ _________
Joseph Pehrson

Ed,

I want to second Joe P's mention of Prent Rodgers (sp?). He has
worked it all up in Csound, had done a complete realization of the 43
limit but made it work for him, and when I wrote him about it he
readily shared info and tools. Check out his stuff on mp3.com (can't
remember if it is a separate page, I think it is, but might be part
of the Tuning Punks).

Highly recommended!

Cheers,
Jon

(Besides, he's right up above you in the Seattle area...)

Yes, I re-discovered Prent's site a week or so ago. I think with a *lot* of
work his software could be adapted to what I'm trying to do, given a Pascal
compiler (he wrote most of his code in Pascal). The bad news is that his
materials are scattered on his web page. I could do a "wget" on it to
collect everything in one chunk and see if I can work with it. He uses
sample-based synthesis heavily, and I'd much rather use physical models.

I also need to check copyright / license issues before I go much further
with Prent's code / data -- I'm not interested in ripping anyone off. I know
the samples are copyrighted by McGill University, for example, and he put a
lot of effort on top of that into getting the sound he wanted out of them.
So I may not be able to use the site "as is".
--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Chief Scientist, Borasky Research
http://www.borasky-research.net http://www.aracnet.com/~znmeb
mailto:znmeb@... mailto:znmeb@...

If there's nothing to astrology, how come so many famous men were born on
holidays?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Szanto [mailto:JSZANTO@...]
> Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 11:35 AM
> To: crazy_music@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [crazy_music] Re: Does the "Partch system" exist anywhere in
> software?
>
>
> Ed,
>
> I want to second Joe P's mention of Prent Rodgers (sp?). He has
> worked it all up in Csound, had done a complete realization of the 43
> limit but made it work for him, and when I wrote him about it he
> readily shared info and tools. Check out his stuff on mp3.com (can't
> remember if it is a separate page, I think it is, but might be part
> of the Tuning Punks).
>
> Highly recommended!
>
> Cheers,
> Jon
>
> (Besides, he's right up above you in the Seattle area...)
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> crazy_music-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

--- In crazy_music@y..., "M. Edward Borasky" <znmeb@a...> wrote:

/crazy_music/topicId_145.html#148

> I also need to check copyright / license issues before I go much
further with Prent's code / data -- I'm not interested in ripping
anyone off. I know the samples are copyrighted by McGill University,
for example, and he put a lot of effort on top of that into getting
the sound he wanted out of them. So I may not be able to use the
site "as is".

Hello Ed!

Oh! I only mentioned you might correspond with Prent Rodgers about
it and figure out what kind of programming you would want to do,
etc., not necessarily use _specifically_ something he has done...

I believe he's pretty responsive... I think I recall receiving at
least one message from him at one time...

Good luck with it. I think it might make an interesting post to the
Tuning List, or to Tuning Math, whatever....

Please add a little "general" commentary, though, if you don't mind
so that non-programmers (well, that's not fair... I've dabbled a
little -- I mean non-professional programmers) like myself can
understand a bit of it...

Thanks!

_______ _______ ______
Joseph Pehrson

Ed Borasky schrieb:
>
> I'm currently working on a piece using what I call the "Partch
> system" -- essentially using 11-limit JI, Partch's 43-tone scale and
> the principles and concepts laid out in "Genesis of a Music". Before
> I do a lot of programming, I'd like to know if this particular wheel
> has already been invented.

This won't do much you for probably (unless perhaps if you have a
handy way of contacting him), but nevertheless:

George Lewis's interactive improvisation software (written in Forth,
I think) will resolve the pitches it "hears" according to a number
of tuning systems. Partch's 43 is one of them.

Klaus

I have Forth ... where might I find the George Lewis software? There are
plenty of references to him on the web, but I don't see any code.

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Chief Scientist, Borasky Research
http://www.borasky-research.net http://www.aracnet.com/~znmeb
mailto:znmeb@... mailto:znmeb@...

If there's nothing to astrology, how come so many famous men were born on
holidays?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: klaus schmirler [mailto:KSchmir@...]
> Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 7:09 PM
> To: crazy_music@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [crazy_music] Does the "Partch system" exist
> anywhere in software?
>
>
> Ed Borasky schrieb:
> >
> > I'm currently working on a piece using what I call the "Partch
> > system" -- essentially using 11-limit JI, Partch's 43-tone scale and
> > the principles and concepts laid out in "Genesis of a Music". Before
> > I do a lot of programming, I'd like to know if this particular wheel
> > has already been invented.
>
> This won't do much you for probably (unless perhaps if you have a
> handy way of contacting him), but nevertheless:
>
> George Lewis's interactive improvisation software (written in Forth,
> I think) will resolve the pitches it "hears" according to a number
> of tuning systems. Partch's 43 is one of them.
>
> Klaus
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> crazy_music-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Hey Ed,

--- In crazy_music@y..., "M. Edward Borasky" <znmeb@a...> wrote:
> I have Forth ... where might I find the George Lewis software?
> There are plenty of references to him on the web, but I don't see
> any code.

I have to say you have me real curious! So if you plot in Partch's
tonality diamond, or whatever you are inputing, what are you planning
on outputing, and how? Are you talking algorithmic composition here?
Are you improvising? Are you creating a score and having software
realize it?

I can understand the math end of it up front, to do the tuning
calculations, but why all the custom code? If what you are doing is
not possible to do with tools that exist, would you care to shed
light on just a little bit of the path you plan on strolling down?

Not necessary, of course, but you sure are on a quest of some kind!

Cheers,
Jon

Yes, indeed, I'm talking algorithmic composition. The working title is "When
Harry Met Iannis". I'm using Xenakis' stochastic composition techniques,
limited to pitches from the "Partch System" -- 11-limit JI with 1/1 = G392,
the 43-degree scale, Otonalities and Utonalities, intervals of power,
emotion, suspense and approach, etc. What I'm trying to do is define all
these concepts from _Genesis of a Music_ as functions / subroutines /
tables, then have the algorithmic composition work at a high level in the
space thus defined.

I looked again at the Prent Rogers website. He is using the Partch scale and
sample-based CSound instruments. I think some of his music is created using
algorithmic composition, but that wasn't clear from the web page. I'm using
physical models in SAOL rather than sample-based CSound instruments, and the
"score" will be generated live in SAOL rather than with a macro preprocessor
like Prent Rogers.

I had originally planned to do the offline planning work -- table
generation, etc. -- in Perl, but since Derive can output C code and SAOL is
very much like C, it's just as easy or easier for me to do it in Derive. The
only tricky part is going to be that the Xenakis' methods are heavily
matrix-oriented and SAOL only allows one-dimensional arrays. Essentially I
have to compute indexing functions if I want to do anything with
two-dimensional arrays.

I've already discovered one interesting fact. The whole Sethares thing
started because I was trying to duplicate the One-Footed Bride. But when I
plotted the curve, I found consonances -- sharp valleys -- only at the
following intervals: 1/1, 7/6, 6/5, 5/4, 4/3, 7/5, 3/2, 5/3, 7/4 and of
course 2/1. What is interesting is that the One-Footed Bride includes all of
these as consonances, but it *also* includes their *complements*: 12/7, 8/5,
10/7 and 8/7 in addition to the ones listed. These last four *don't* show as
consonances on the Sethares curve. And there's nary a 9 or 11 to be found
amongst the Sethares consonances. So I am dying to hear what the other
Partch intervals sound like!
--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Chief Scientist, Borasky Research
http://www.borasky-research.net http://www.aracnet.com/~znmeb
mailto:znmeb@... mailto:znmeb@...

If there's nothing to astrology, how come so many famous men were born on
holidays?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Szanto [mailto:JSZANTO@...]

> Hey Ed,

> I have to say you have me real curious! So if you plot in Partch's
> tonality diamond, or whatever you are inputing, what are you planning
> on outputing, and how? Are you talking algorithmic composition here?
> Are you improvising? Are you creating a score and having software
> realize it?
>
> I can understand the math end of it up front, to do the tuning
> calculations, but why all the custom code? If what you are doing is
> not possible to do with tools that exist, would you care to shed
> light on just a little bit of the path you plan on strolling down?
>
> Not necessary, of course, but you sure are on a quest of some kind!

Ed,

Thanks for the background on "When Harry Met Iannis" (gad, I *love*
that title!). If nothing else, you and Prent have one thing in
common: it's the preperatory work that takes the longest, and the
final generation is an "implimentation detail"! He said he worked on
his last Csound/Partch work for about 6 months.

I've spent so much of my life in 'real-time' performance that I
wouldn't have nearly the patience for that, but I do admire and find
interest in it. Well, as long as it sounds good and kicks butt... <g>

I'm going to have a go at some of this stuff, probably 6 mos to a
year myself, but that is just for fitting it into the rest of life.
Different paths, so it will be interesting, and I'll look forward to
when I can hear some of your beginning noises!

Cheers,
Jon

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: M. Edward Borasky <znmeb@...>
> To: <crazy_music@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 9:00 PM
> Subject: RE: [crazy_music] Re: Does the "Partch system" exist anywhere in
software?
>
>
> I've already discovered one interesting fact. The whole Sethares thing
> started because I was trying to duplicate the One-Footed Bride. But when I
> plotted the curve, I found consonances -- sharp valleys -- only at the
> following intervals: 1/1, 7/6, 6/5, 5/4, 4/3, 7/5, 3/2, 5/3, 7/4 and of
> course 2/1. What is interesting is that the One-Footed Bride includes all
of
> these as consonances, but it *also* includes their *complements*: 12/7,
8/5,
> 10/7 and 8/7 in addition to the ones listed. These last four *don't* show
as
> consonances on the Sethares curve. And there's nary a 9 or 11 to be found
> amongst the Sethares consonances. So I am dying to hear what the other
> Partch intervals sound like!

Hi Ed,

You should be aware that Sethares's goal is to find tuning systems which
harmonize specific timbres. Thus, his curve has an otonal bias.
Partch's does not - it is strictly a dyadic interval measure, which
exhibits the dualistic (otonal/utonal) properties that are fundamental
to Partch's theories.

IMO, the harmonic entropy curve is much closer to what you're trying
to do. Sethares's curves are implemented with larger collections
of pitches in mind (triads, tetrads, pentads, hexads, etc.).

BTW, as you should be aware, I'm interested in implementing a
number of Partch's theoretical procedures in JustMusic. I just
posted something to that group last week about creating a window
to display his "Field of Attraction":
/justmusic/topicId_unknown.html#144

-monz
http://www.monz.org
"All roads lead to n^0"

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Well, going from 7 unit amplitude partials to 11 unit amplitude partials got
me some more consonances, including 10/7! I renamed the files and added
gridlines to the 11-partial plot. 10/9, 9/8 and 8/7 now take their rightful
place between 1/1 and 7/6, 7/5 and 10/7 are both represented now with
roughly equal dissonance scores, 11/9 is there, looking slightly less
dissonant than its neighbor 6/5, and quite a few more of the 43 degrees of
the Partch scale are now located at consonances.

As to the differences between these curves and the harmonic entropy curves,
my conjecture is that for purely harmonic spectra, aside from the fact that
the consonances in the HE curves are round rather than pointed, for most
practical purposes the curves will be the same if one tweaks the parameters
correctly. I personally prefer the pointed consonances to the rounded ones.

Incidentally, when I used partials with amplitudes equal to 1/n rather than
1, the curves were nowhere near as dramatic. Since the Sethares theory is
supposedly based on psychoacoustics, I question whether the "average
untrained ear" perceives consonance and dissonance the way the harmonic
entropy curve and the unit-amplitude Sethares curve show, or more the way
the 1/n scaled amplitude curve shows.

Clearly we musical folk can hear these things, but can our more naive
listeners? The relative smoothness of the curve for harmonic sounds with
descending-amplitude partials might explain why the masses have little
trouble enjoying 12-TET music on conventional instruments, despite the
theory that says the equal tempered major third, for example, is "woefully
out of tune". I'm going to plot the two curves on the same graph and upload
the picture a little later.

One other note: I haven't said much about Xenakis in this discussion, and
his theories and techniques share equal footing with those of Partch in this
work. In passing, though, I would like to note that there is a section in
_Formalized Music_ about the evolution of music from the Ancient Greek
tetrachords that I think is highly relevant. I doubt if there is anything in
it that the folks here haven't already seen, but it was one of the things
that triggered my interest in combining Xenakis and Partch.
--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Chief Scientist, Borasky Research
http://www.borasky-research.net http://www.aracnet.com/~znmeb
mailto:znmeb@... mailto:znmeb@...

If there's nothing to astrology, how come so many famous men were born on
holidays?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: monz [mailto:joemonz@...]

> You should be aware that Sethares's goal is to find tuning systems which
> harmonize specific timbres. Thus, his curve has an otonal bias.
> Partch's does not - it is strictly a dyadic interval measure, which
> exhibits the dualistic (otonal/utonal) properties that are fundamental
> to Partch's theories.

Well, as the title of Sethares' book is _Tuning, Timbre, Spectrum, Scale_, I
think his goals are somewhat broader than that, and indeed, broader than
mine at the moment. My goal is to produce a piece and the tools to create
the piece. I don't see the "otonal bias" in the Sethares curves. The bias I
*do* see there is that the Sethares equations depend, as does the underlying
theory, on the absolute frequencies at which the notes are played. The
harmonic entropy curves, IIRC, are purely based on ratios. My curves were
generated with 1/1 equal to Partch's G 392. Since my piece will use the
Partch scale, I intend to use purely harmonic timbres to maximize the
consonances, and it will probably be centered at G392. And I certainly
intend to use both Otonalities and Utonalities.

> IMO, the harmonic entropy curve is much closer to what you're trying
> to do. Sethares's curves are implemented with larger collections
> of pitches in mind (triads, tetrads, pentads, hexads, etc.).

My intention is to use all of these (although there is only one hexad in
each tonality).

> BTW, as you should be aware, I'm interested in implementing a
> number of Partch's theoretical procedures in JustMusic. I just
> posted something to that group last week about creating a window
> to display his "Field of Attraction":
> /justmusic/topicId_unknown.html#144

Once I get my code working and my piece in construction, I'll contribute it
to JustMusic. It will most likely be in C, since "sfront" is written in C
and creates output files in C and Derive can write C code. The Field Of
Attraction is one element I will be using.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: M. Edward Borasky <znmeb@...>
> To: <crazy_music@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 1:07 PM
> Subject: RE: [crazy_music] Re: Does the "Partch system" exist anywhere in
software?
>
>
> Well, going from 7 unit amplitude partials to 11 unit amplitude partials
got
> me some more consonances, including 10/7! I renamed the files and added
> gridlines to the 11-partial plot. 10/9, 9/8 and 8/7 now take their
rightful
> place between 1/1 and 7/6, 7/5 and 10/7 are both represented now with
> roughly equal dissonance scores, 11/9 is there, looking slightly less
> dissonant than its neighbor 6/5, and quite a few more of the 43 degrees of
> the Partch scale are now located at consonances.

OK, that made me realize another aspect of what you are doing.
You were clearing thinking before in terms of *odd*-limit, yes?
(or maybe prime-limit?)

But Partch's curve is based on *integer*-limit, I suppose with some
qualification based on odd- or prime-limit (?).

So expanding your limit to 11 (whether integer-, odd-, or prime-)
automatically included all numbers under 11, thus you got those
"octave" complements.

-monz
http://www.monz.org
"All roads lead to n^0"

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

--- In crazy_music@y..., "M. Edward Borasky" <znmeb@a...> wrote:

/crazy_music/topicId_145.html#164

> Well, going from 7 unit amplitude partials to 11 unit amplitude
partials got
> me some more consonances, including 10/7! I renamed the files and
added
> gridlines to the 11-partial plot. 10/9, 9/8 and 8/7 now take their
rightful
> place between 1/1 and 7/6, 7/5 and 10/7 are both represented now
with
> roughly equal dissonance scores, 11/9 is there, looking slightly
less
> dissonant than its neighbor 6/5, and quite a few more of the 43
degrees of
> the Partch scale are now located at consonances.
>
> As to the differences between these curves and the harmonic entropy
curves,
> my conjecture is that for purely harmonic spectra, aside from the
fact that
> the consonances in the HE curves are round rather than pointed, for
most
> practical purposes the curves will be the same if one tweaks the
parameters
> correctly. I personally prefer the pointed consonances to the
rounded ones.
>

Hello Ed...

I believe there is some discussion of the harmonic entropy curves as
they relate to Partch's "One Footed Bride" in Paul Erlich's recent
paper, "The Forms of Tonality..."

You may be interested in contacting Paul about it...

_______ _______ _______
Joseph Pehrson