Ears, defective and otherwise

Margo, I know everybody on this list is saddened to learn of your
hearing challenges. I have more thoughts, and an offer, that I'll save
for another post, but one passage struck my attention from a different
perspective:

>To me, the idea of a "defective ear" is not an insult or a putdown:
>it's a simple medical fact.

That reminded me that mclaren and I had had a sharp exchange on PM not
long before its death, and I think that exchange has resulted in some
misunderstandings, which I would like to correct.

It started with my rather ill-considered statement that 12-tET major
thirds "suck". This is one of those off-the-cuff remarks which, in
hindsight, I might have wished to word more carefully. Nevertheless,
it _does_ reflect my own bias, if nothing else.

In his response, mclaren said something like, "Well then, you must be
saying that my ear is defective, since I like 12-tET major thirds."
(apologies for any mis-quoting from memory). My response to that was,
IIRC, "You have the ear you have."

In a much more recent post, mclaren includes this on a list of
grievances against me.

In fact, mclaren, my guess is that your ear is probably, if anything,
more sensitive than mine. I make that guess without having much
knowledge about you from this standpoint, but I know you've worked with
a lot of different tunings, which would both require and foster an
ear sensitive to small nuances. My own talent in this regard is perhaps
average or at most a notch above.

It _is_ true that I love to adaptively tune works that have begun life
in 12-tET. My ear is sensitive enough to discern the difference (as I'm
sure yours is as well). We apparently disagree as to whether the effect
is pleasing or not; I happen to think it's wonderful! Other people
think it's a mistake even to consider touching works in this way, and
I respect their views, even if I don't let that disapproval stop from
pursuing what _I_ think is beautiful.

If I have come off as insulting your abilities, I sincerely apologize,
and hope that I have succeeded in correcting that implication.

On a somewhat related topic: that 19th century guy we've quarreled
about recently. Please understand, I _do_ recognize that consonance is
not the be-all and end-all in music. You have files which "prove" that
the ear can be fooled; I don't doubt that's true. Also I don't doubt
that wonderful music can be written without a single consonance from
beginning to end. In this regard, I still have a lot of learning to do,
since I've concentrated so much on achieving the highest possible
consonance, both in my own music and in my treatments of others'. I
don't doubt that you have much to teach, and I'd be a fool to let any
disagreements block me from learning all I can from you, or from anyone
else for that matter.

JdL