MakeMicroMusic

last saturday i posted about a site i had just put online featuring 24
microtonal compositions. Today I noticed there had been 32 responses,
not one of which mentioned the microtonal music. What did I expect?
well, about what i got. And fair enough I say, because the truth is
that i honestly can't complain, as i'd encourage people to post only
about what it is that most interests them, otherwise what's the point?
That said, I hope it's clear that when i refer to the microtonal
community as a cult--a cult of terminology, ideology, neo-
Pythagoreanism and age of reason fetishism--i'm only doing so based on
real life experiences…but to quote the once-great Jeff Fenech, "I luvs
youse all"! Long live MMM (day).

On 4/27/06, daniel_anthony_stearns <daniel_anthony_stearns@...> wrote:
> last saturday i posted about a site i had just put online featuring 24
> microtonal compositions. Today I noticed there had been 32 responses,
> not one of which mentioned the microtonal music. What did I expect?
> well, about what i got. And fair enough I say, because the truth is
> that i honestly can't complain, as i'd encourage people to post only
> about what it is that most interests them, otherwise what's the point?
> That said, I hope it's clear that when i refer to the microtonal
> community as a cult--a cult of terminology, ideology, neo-
> Pythagoreanism and age of reason fetishism--i'm only doing so based on
> real life experiences…but to quote the once-great Jeff Fenech, "I luvs
> youse all"! Long live MMM (day).

I had noticed that, but I wasn't going to say anything because I was
one of the worst offenders. In truth, I loved what I heard, but I'm
rather inept at saying what about something I loved. I'm far better at
describing the making than the music.

--TRISTAN
(http://dreamingofeden.smackjeeves.com/)

Dan,

Boy, you know I love you dearly, so I just *have* to write (as soon as the email blipped in)...

I'm certainly guilty for not splitting it off into a separate thread, and keeping your posting for comments on the music. But I want you to know that a couple things have kept me from commenting directly on these 24 pieces:

1. Zebox isn't the easiest thing to deal with, in terms of coordinating downloads, what with multiple screens. It does take some time to get them all here (I happen to like dl'ing them and giving a listen in a suite when I've got the quiet time).

2. There isn't much in terms of description, but boy some of those looked familiar. And knowing that I had turntable pieces, the old music, etc, I thought I'd look through my Stearns folder to see what I already had, and had commented on many moons ago when first posted.

3. One of my Achilles heels is to get pulled into a technical discussion to, in effect, argue on the side of the artist (as opposed to technician). Done with the best of intentions, but there you go.

I actually thought you had some kind of rotating image deal going on that page, but I think I must have been one of the first to visit, and then at some point you changed to the picture of the score. Which maybe your son did his magic on.

I'll try to get some cogent thoughts together, but it may not be immediate. Empty-headed blather is always much easier. I also hope that others give a listen, too - they might not know what they are missing.

What I WILL heartily second is where did the energy go from MMM day????? What about Jacob and Prent and all the contributors - no commentary after the fact? Is that all there is? Are we back to stasis already?

Off to mend my ways...

Cheers,
Jon

At 08:29 PM 4/27/2006, you wrote:
>last saturday i posted about a site i had just put online featuring 24
>microtonal compositions. Today I noticed there had been 32 responses,
>not one of which mentioned the microtonal music. What did I expect?
>well, about what i got. And fair enough I say, because the truth is
>that i honestly can't complain, as i'd encourage people to post only
>about what it is that most interests them, otherwise what's the point?
>That said, I hope it's clear that when i refer to the microtonal
>community as a cult--a cult of terminology, ideology, neo-
>Pythagoreanism and age of reason fetishism--i'm only doing so based on
>real life experiences…but to quote the once-great Jeff Fenech, "I luvs
>youse all"! Long live MMM (day).

I personally hate talking about music, especially with the person
who made it. What really can be said? Wow, I liked it. Or, I liked
it, but... I bet I have said more of these on these lists than any
other poster ever. I also bet I have systematically listened to (and
archived) more music posted to the lists than any other reader.

Even with dead composers, talking about stuff like, Wow man, Bach
really [insert something that fails to describe what's good about
his music], is super-lame. Otherwise, composers could just run focus
groups to determine their compositions. Oh, the guy with the crappy
comb-over wants more development in the B-section of the chorus,
no prob. They actually do this in Hollywood, with many screenplays
heavily modified during production based on test-screening feedback.
The results of this practice speak for themselves.

I'd much rather see discussion of, like

1. Load Sonar.
2. Go to Tools -> Options -> Interface -> Monday -> Dennis -> Use
non-suckoid GUI.
3. Load tracks 1-23 with z3ta+ instances.
etc.

Or, Hey Dan, how do you get such visceral-sounding recordings?
-> A: Well, I never give the time of day to a compressor, and...

-Carl

i rejoined after you had posted the link, which i kept expecting to resurface.
i also have dial up so often i wait till late and down load them then

daniel_anthony_stearns wrote:
> last saturday i posted about a site i had just put online featuring 24 > microtonal compositions. Today I noticed there had been 32 responses, > not one of which mentioned the microtonal music. What did I expect? > well, about what i got. And fair enough I say, because the truth is > that i honestly can't complain, as i'd encourage people to post only > about what it is that most interests them, otherwise what's the point? > That said, I hope it's clear that when i refer to the microtonal > community as a cult--a cult of terminology, ideology, neo-
> Pythagoreanism and age of reason fetishism--i'm only doing so based on > real life experiences�but to quote the once-great Jeff Fenech, "I luvs > youse all"! Long live MMM (day).
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> -- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

for me this--"this" being the disproportionate emphasis put on the
microtonal terms and minutia of terms etc, as opposed to the music--
has been a longstanding source of grumbling. I started posting to
these forums back in the late 90s and steadily saw my enthusiasm wane
due to this to the point where i hardly ever post anymore; and as you
may or may not know, this very forum was a kind of splinter group
brought about by some people in the community/cult who had a similar
feeling. I know it's harder to talk about the actual music than it is
about the terminology and that like, but i participate in quite a few
other forums where this kind of disproportion just doesn't happen,
ever. everybody who composes enough and posts enough music online
ought to be used to the feast and famine of responses, and i'm no
different there and don't really have a problem with that per se. So
for my part, a post like this has a history and is louder in places i
normaly wouldn't be to make a particular point relative to that
history.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "daniel_anthony_stearns"
> <daniel_anthony_stearns@> wrote:
> >
> > last saturday i posted about a site i had just put online
> featuring 24
> > microtonal compositions. Today I noticed there had been 32
> responses,
> > not one of which mentioned the microtonal music. What did I
> expect?
>
>
> A standing ovation, apparently. But look on the bright side; you
had
> thirty-two responses to your music, microtonal or not -- exactly
> thirty-three MORE responses than I got after posting my last four
> compositions. You should complain, you lucky devil.
>
>
>
> > well, about what i got. And fair enough I say, because the truth
> is
> > that i honestly can't complain, as i'd encourage people to post
> only
> > about what it is that most interests them, otherwise what's the
> point?
>
>
> I'm glad you're taking this rather manfully. Once upon a time, I
> used to take the deafeningly silent responses to my work as a clear
> indication that I was writing BAD MUSIC. Ooops, back to the ol'
> keyboard again, with much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
>
> However, after 30 years of composition, it dawns on me that one's
> music may indeed be less exciting than cult terminolgy, ideology,
> neo-Pythagoreanism (that is, non-[NON-just/octave/equal-tuning]-
> tuning), and the fetishism of reason (as opposed to the fetishism
of
> UN-reason?). Nowadays, in my old age and senility -- I just shrug
> and continue writing music.
>
>
>
> > That said, I hope it's clear that when i refer to the microtonal
> > community as a cult--a cult of terminology, ideology, neo-
> > Pythagoreanism and age of reason fetishism--i'm only doing so
> based on
> > real life experiences…
>
>
> Hey, I'd be more careful if I were you. That's the unspeakable Cult
> of Tuning Theorists you're bad-mouthing....and they have spies
> everywhere. They are a cabal of Dang Scientists and Evil
> Mathematicians -- and more vile and depraved than the Cult of
> Cthulhu and the Republican Party combined....
>

I can't argue that, and in the overall I guess you're right too. And
probably the only thing that keeps me swimming up river on this is
that I honestly never get this particular feeling in any other
forum/ niche group type places I post too…so it's something specific
to this community. I suspect a part of it is that it's a subject
frontloaded with a never-ending pile of interesting theoretical
angles, and I'm not theory phobic either, as that's one of the things
that really fired me up early on and still interests me today. But
after all these years I'm sure that there's some" issue" here, and
while I may be in the minority in my view of it I know I'm not alone
either as I've seen a lot of contributors walk away from the
community relative to this "problem" . In the end none of it is too
important anyway, and everybody can,will and should post what they
like, but I think I'm not out of line to say there was a reason a
place like this (MMM) splintered off from other similar groups, and
that maybe that's a point worth mentioning every once in a while .

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> At 08:29 PM 4/27/2006, you wrote:
> >last saturday i posted about a site i had just put online
featuring 24
> >microtonal compositions. Today I noticed there had been 32
responses,
> >not one of which mentioned the microtonal music. What did I
expect?
> >well, about what i got. And fair enough I say, because the truth
is
> >that i honestly can't complain, as i'd encourage people to post
only
> >about what it is that most interests them, otherwise what's the
point?
> >That said, I hope it's clear that when i refer to the microtonal
> >community as a cult--a cult of terminology, ideology, neo-
> >Pythagoreanism and age of reason fetishism--i'm only doing so
based on
> >real life experiences…but to quote the once-great Jeff Fenech, "I
luvs
> >youse all"! Long live MMM (day).
>
> I personally hate talking about music, especially with the person
> who made it. What really can be said? Wow, I liked it. Or, I
liked
> it, but... I bet I have said more of these on these lists than any
> other poster ever. I also bet I have systematically listened to
(and
> archived) more music posted to the lists than any other reader.
>
> Even with dead composers, talking about stuff like, Wow man, Bach
> really [insert something that fails to describe what's good about
> his music], is super-lame. Otherwise, composers could just run
focus
> groups to determine their compositions. Oh, the guy with the crappy
> comb-over wants more development in the B-section of the chorus,
> no prob. They actually do this in Hollywood, with many screenplays
> heavily modified during production based on test-screening feedback.
> The results of this practice speak for themselves.
>
> I'd much rather see discussion of, like
>
> 1. Load Sonar.
> 2. Go to Tools -> Options -> Interface -> Monday -> Dennis -> Use
> non-suckoid GUI.
> 3. Load tracks 1-23 with z3ta+ instances.
> etc.
>
> Or, Hey Dan, how do you get such visceral-sounding recordings?
> -> A: Well, I never give the time of day to a compressor, and...
>
> -Carl
>

Dan,

Your last post contains some extremely important and valid points. I've got to run off right now, but I'll post more on this later in the morning/afternoon. You aren't alone...

{you wrote...}
>And probably the only thing that keeps me swimming up river on this is
>that I honestly never get this particular feeling in any other
>forum/niche group type places I post to ... so it's something specific
>to this community. [snip] ... but I think I'm not out of line to say there was a reason a place like this (MMM) splintered off from other similar groups, and
>that maybe that's a point worth mentioning every once in a while .

Oh yeah.

Cheers,
Jon

At 03:53 AM 4/28/2006, you wrote:
>I can't argue that, and in the overall I guess you're right too. And
>probably the only thing that keeps me swimming up river on this is
>that I honestly never get this particular feeling in any other
>forum / niche group type places I post too…so it's something specific
>to this community. I suspect a part of it is that it's a subject
>frontloaded with a never-ending pile of interesting theoretical
>angles, and I'm not theory phobic either, as that's one of the things
>that really fired me up early on and still interests me today. But
>after all these years I'm sure that there's some" issue" here, and
>while I may be in the minority in my view of it I know I'm not alone
>either as I've seen a lot of contributors walk away from the
>community relative to this "problem" . In the end none of it is too
>important anyway, and everybody can,will and should post what they
>like, but I think I'm not out of line to say there was a reason a
>place like this (MMM) splintered off from other similar groups, and
>that maybe that's a point worth mentioning every once in a while .

I don't think you're in the minority. I think almost everyone
agrees there's more theory than music and that it's somehow
regrettable. Thing is, pro musicians (who don't have day jobs)
are completely invested in / tied to a market that assumes 12,
and it's a very hard / competitive business. So it's no wonder
that most folks who are into this are going to have day jobs.
Even folks like Haverstick who teach -- how many parents do you
think want their kids learning some freak experimental thing?
People like Paul E. can post theory from work, but can hardly
record music at work. People like him who want to play in a group
have a hard time finding bandmates. So his band plays in 12 (last
I heard). etc. etc.

-Carl

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "daniel_anthony_stearns"
<daniel_anthony_stearns@...> wrote:
>
>....I started posting to
> these forums back in the late 90s and steadily saw my enthusiasm
> wane due to this to the point where i hardly ever post anymore; ...

It is all kind of sad. I really liked the Ives mp3 you have, but
because I didn't have anything "technical" to say about it, I posted
nothing at all.

As a fan of experimental music I love lurking here and getting an
insight into what goes on behind the scenes. But the discussions here
get so overly focused on the technical side it does approach
a 'creepy' level at times.

Maybe as a fan I'm better off not knowing this whole side of it.
Sometimes it's good just to enjoy the hot dog, just don't ask how they
make it!

too bad we don't have harry to recite this for us.
J.Smith wrote:
>
>
> It would be like finding a cool, refreshing oasis of Art in the > midst of an arid and suffocating desert of decimal points, > logarithmic calculations, and nomadic hordes of savage, Evil > Mathematicians on camels...... >
>
> >
> -- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

one thing is that pieces are often introduced in technical terms.
This is in this tuning, etc. so it becomes a logical thing to talk about

Maybe if the music was introduced as say.
This is for my dead dog, people would respond on that level

It is one reason i have always played to liner notes, something to shift the context in which how i want someone to here it.

there are so many different world views that frankly i am sometimes a bit slow catching where someone is at from the get go.

In Dan Sterns Case i have gotten more out of it in the collective body of his work than in any particular pieces,
What he does the same and different being more than any one part.
plopper6 wrote:
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "daniel_anthony_stearns" > <daniel_anthony_stearns@...> wrote:
> >> ....I started posting to >> these forums back in the late 90s and steadily saw my enthusiasm >> wane due to this to the point where i hardly ever post anymore; ...
>> >
> It is all kind of sad. I really liked the Ives mp3 you have, but > because I didn't have anything "technical" to say about it, I posted > nothing at all.
>
> As a fan of experimental music I love lurking here and getting an > insight into what goes on behind the scenes. But the discussions here > get so overly focused on the technical side it does approach > a 'creepy' level at times.
>
> Maybe as a fan I'm better off not knowing this whole side of it. > Sometimes it's good just to enjoy the hot dog, just don't ask how they > make it!
>
>
>
>
>
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
>
> -- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@...> wrote:

> I find that endless discussions of math/tuning theory effectively
> smoke-screens a gaping lack of talent, not to mention a lack of
> compositions....don't you?

I think if you two characters want support and acknowledgment
insulting other people and their music is not the way to get it.

> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@> wrote:
>
> > I find that endless discussions of math/tuning theory effectively
> > smoke-screens a gaping lack of talent, not to mention a lack of
> > compositions....don't you?

Must we all be composers? Should the talentless (should they exist at
all) compose?

At any rate, I demand that you cry "smokescreen" the next time you
perceive it.

Jon Szanto (who has since taken a vow of silence) wrote:
> What I WILL heartily second is where did the energy go from MMM
> day????? What about Jacob and Prent and all the contributors - no
> commentary after the fact? Is that all there is? Are we back to
stasis already?

Hmm...commentary...I Would say "Thanks to all contributors for making
MMM day a success!" But 1) I would really really hope you weren't
MMMing on my behalf (though if you were, infinite thanks!). The
concept of MMMday is more a gift than burden. 2) Was it a success? I
can only answer "maybe"

In related news, the wiki (xenharmonic.wikispaces.org) is yours for
the taking, if you think that you have any words or music or pictures
that deserves more than the ephermeral Yahoo venue. I demand that as a
community we begin to amass a directory of scales more comprehensive
and/or useful than the Scala directory, a database of music reviews
that gives the average web-surfer a clue into what to listen to and
listen for, etc. etc. It's mine, it's yours!

As for me, busy busy busy. Got a seventeen-tone-acoustic-pianos
concert tomorrow to plan and rehearse for. Come on over if you're in
the area. Of Houston, that is.

plopper6 (Bill Westfall?) wrote:
> Maybe as a fan I'm better off not knowing this whole side of it.
Sometimes it's good just to enjoy the hot dog, just don't ask how they
make it!

That's a wonderful image! "Enjoy your hot dog!" what a slogan! though
i wonder if my vegetarianism is related to my numerological obsessions...

"daniel_anthony_stearns" wrote:
> (some music)

Doubleplusgood. With extra emphasis on the turntable pieces - I want
that sound! - and the clarinet dronescapes. We must collaborate
sometime, somehow.

kraig grady wrote:
> I tend to side with this outlook, that i am more interested in what
> people can do more than methods or machinery.

I'm getting there, after thinking for the twentieth time, "Listen to
that sound that THEY got (sometimes even ACCIDENTALLY) without as much
as a nod towards my explanations and number doodles!"

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jacob" <jbarton@...> wrote:

> In related news, the wiki (xenharmonic.wikispaces.org) is yours for
> the taking, if you think that you have any words or music or
pictures
> that deserves more than the ephermeral Yahoo venue. I demand that as
a
> community we begin to amass a directory of scales more comprehensive
> and/or useful than the Scala directory, a database of music reviews
> that gives the average web-surfer a clue into what to listen to and
> listen for, etc. etc. It's mine, it's yours!
>
> As for me, busy busy busy. Got a seventeen-tone-acoustic-pianos
> concert tomorrow to plan and rehearse for.

Hipkins wrote a little about one: "the oldest Zumpe piano know is
dated 1766, was formerly Sir George Smart's, and is now owned by
Messrs. Broadwood. No number has been found in it ; yet it can hardly
be the first of Zumpe's make, since he would not have been so bold as
to begin with dividing his black notes and thus have 18 keys in the
octave, as he has in this case." http://www.geocities.com/
threesixesinarow/oldgrove.htm (Laminated soundboard, too, till the
eighties)

/makemicromusic/files/keyboard/
zumpe17k.gif

Clark

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@...> wrote:

> No one person, nor any particular music, was ever mentioned, Gene. So
> far, no one else seems to be insulted.

Nor did I become specific. However, your comment was inherently rude
and insulting to *anyone* who attempts to both discuss tuning theory
and perform or compose.

> But I'm definitely
> interested in the musical results, and look to this forum for the
> fruits of those computations....if any are to be had. Are there?

I dunno--did Harry Partch ever compose anything? Let me check. I'm
pretty sure I've tried my hand at composing...

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@...> wrote:

> You're right, Gene, and I'm sorry. I can see that sardonic humor --
> as usual -- is lost in the translation, especially when lifted
> entirely out of context. I apologize to any and all if my jocularity
> has offended their sensibilities.

Your humor was noted and appreciated. The hostility I can do without.
I think things are much better all around if we don't go there.
Anyway, here's to composing and may you continue and florish.