'Guys Dressed Like Girls' by Carl Lumma

Hi,

Back in--2004, was it Carl?--when I first met Carl in the flesh in Berkeley,
this piece was sitting on his piano, and I played it, and immediately found
it to be attractive; in a way, the angular lines and vertical spikes remind
me of neo-classical Stravinsky, but with a bit more disturbing (in a good
way!) urgency perhaps, and a touch of jazz sensibility.

Anyway, I told Carl I liked it and wanted to record it. I finally lived up to
my promise, and in the future, maybe you'll see 2 other of his pieces played
by yours truly.

My real acoustic piano is suffering from unstable tuning due to heat, humidity
and new-ish strings, so I opted to record my P-200, which is fairly nice. I
had to overtrack single channel audio files, and reassemble them in Audacity,
alas, Yamaha P-200 no do multi-channel MIDI....

I hope you enjoy this little piece as much as I enjoyed preparing it! The
tuning is Johnson/Secor rational WT.

http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/LummaGuys.ogg
http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/Lummaguys.mp3
(0'37" in length)

Best,
Aaron.

On 7/28/06, Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,

> I hope you enjoy this little piece as much as I enjoyed preparing it! The
> tuning is Johnson/Secor rational WT.
>
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/LummaGuys.ogg
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/Lummaguys.mp3
> (0'37" in length)
>
> Best,
> Aaron.

The mp3 wouldn't download, and the OGG was only 9 seconds long. What I
heard fit quite well with the title, though.

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

>> Hi,
>
>> I hope you enjoy this little piece as much as I enjoyed preparing it!
>> The tuning is Johnson/Secor rational WT.
>>
>> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/LummaGuys.ogg
>> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/Lummaguys.mp3
>> (0'37" in length)
>>
>> Best,
>> Aaron.
>
>The mp3 wouldn't download, and the OGG was only 9 seconds long. What I
>heard fit quite well with the title, though.

Hi Tristan,

Thanks for trying. I got the complete ogg just now -- maybe your
download just stalled -- the 2nd link should be

http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/LummaGuys.mp3

-Carl

http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/LummaGuys.ogg

Aaron wrote...
>Back in--2004, was it Carl?--when I first met Carl in the flesh in
>Berkeley, this piece was sitting on his piano, and I played it, and
>immediately found it to be attractive;

Yup, summer 2004.

>My real acoustic piano is suffering from unstable tuning due to heat,
>humidity and new-ish strings, so I opted to record my P-200, which is
>fairly nice. I had to overtrack single channel audio files, and
>reassemble them in Audacity, alas, Yamaha P-200 no do multi-channel
>MIDI....

Plus it's difficult to play. :)

There's lots of stuff I could say, but let me just that I can't
imagine a better performance for this piece. The dynamics and
rubato are different than how I usually (try) to play them, but
fit perfectly. One of the reason I seldom mark scores with tempi
or other performance indications is to force performers to be
creative; because musical performance should be a creative act,
because the music will surely benefit from a perspective beyond
my own, and because I like to be surprised when I hear it!

I wrote this in about 15 minutes in 1997, using Encore and a
mouse.

-Carl

For anyone interested, the score can be downloaded from:

http://lumma.org/music/score/GuysDressedLikeGirls.pdf

The MIDI file (in 12) from:

http://lumma.org/music/score/mid/GuysDressedLikeGirls.mid

And 7-limit retuned with John deLaubenfels' BGE adaptive
tuning software:

http://lumma.org/music/score/mid/GuysDressedLikeGirls_x7_human.mid

-Carl

Thank you, Carl and Aaron!

That is definitely a surprise ending.

Looking forward to hearing more.

Regards,
Yahya

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
> Back in--2004, was it Carl?--when I first met Carl in the flesh in
Berkeley, this piece was sitting on his piano, and I played it, and
immediately found it to be attractive; in a way, the angular lines
and vertical spikes remind me of neo-classical Stravinsky, but with
a bit more disturbing (in a good way!) urgency perhaps, and a touch
of jazz sensibility.
>
> Anyway, I told Carl I liked it and wanted to record it. I finally
lived up to my promise, and in the future, maybe you'll see 2 other
of his pieces played by yours truly.
>
> My real acoustic piano is suffering from unstable tuning due to
heat, humidity and new-ish strings, so I opted to record my P-200,
which is fairly nice. I had to overtrack single channel audio files,
and reassemble them in Audacity, alas, Yamaha P-200 no do multi-
channel MIDI....
>
> I hope you enjoy this little piece as much as I enjoyed preparing
it! The tuning is Johnson/Secor rational WT.
>
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/LummaGuys.ogg
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/Lummaguys.mp3
> (0'37" in length)
>
> Best,
> Aaron.

At 09:49 PM 7/28/2006, you wrote:
>
>Thank you, Carl and Aaron!
>
>That is definitely a surprise ending.

I usually roll that chord, but I think it works well this way,
too.

Thanks for listening!

-C.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Aaron Krister Johnson
<aaron@...> wrote:
> ...
> I hope you enjoy this little piece as much as I enjoyed preparing
it! The
> tuning is Johnson/Secor rational WT.
>
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/LummaGuys.ogg
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/Lummaguys.mp3
> (0'37" in length)
>
> Best,
> Aaron.

Hi Aaron,

I'm eagerly looking forward to listening to this tonight.

Please clarify which version of "ratwell" this is:

1) Your original:
/tuning/topicId_66654.html#66654

2) Your original, with "A" modified per a_sparschuh's suggestion:
/tuning/topicId_66654.html#66672

3) My modification to your original, with more complex ratios (for G,
D, and A), but simpler brats:
/tuning/topicId_66654.html#66728

Thanks,

--George

On Monday 31 July 2006 1:48 pm, George D. Secor wrote:
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Aaron Krister Johnson
>
> <aaron@...> wrote:
> > ...
> > I hope you enjoy this little piece as much as I enjoyed preparing
>
> it! The
>
> > tuning is Johnson/Secor rational WT.
> >
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/LummaGuys.ogg
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/Lummaguys.mp3
> > (0'37" in length)
> >
> > Best,
> > Aaron.
>
> Hi Aaron,
>
> I'm eagerly looking forward to listening to this tonight.
>
> Please clarify which version of "ratwell" this is:
>
> 1) Your original:
> /tuning/topicId_66654.html#66654
>
> 2) Your original, with "A" modified per a_sparschuh's suggestion:
> /tuning/topicId_66654.html#66672
>
> 3) My modification to your original, with more complex ratios (for G,
> D, and A), but simpler brats:
> /tuning/topicId_66654.html#66728

George-

It's choice '3', which is why I called it 'Johnson/Secor' :)

All best,
Aaron.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Aaron Krister Johnson
<aaron@...> wrote:
>
> On Monday 31 July 2006 1:48 pm, George D. Secor wrote:
> > --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Aaron Krister Johnson
> >
> > <aaron@> wrote:
> > > ...
> > > I hope you enjoy this little piece as much as I enjoyed
preparing
> >
> > it! The
> >
> > > tuning is Johnson/Secor rational WT.
> > >
> > > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/LummaGuys.ogg
> > > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/Lummaguys.mp3
> > > (0'37" in length)
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Aaron.
> >
> > Hi Aaron,
> >
> > I'm eagerly looking forward to listening to this tonight.
> >
> > Please clarify which version of "ratwell" this is:
> >
> > 1) Your original:
> > /tuning/topicId_66654.html#66654
> >
> > 2) Your original, with "A" modified per a_sparschuh's suggestion:
> > /tuning/topicId_66654.html#66672
> >
> > 3) My modification to your original, with more complex ratios
(for G,
> > D, and A), but simpler brats:
> > /tuning/topicId_66654.html#66728
>
> George-
>
> It's choice '3', which is why I called it 'Johnson/Secor' :)
>
> All best,
> Aaron.

Okay, I wondered because you said that choice '1' was at least
partially inspired by some of my recent efforts. Since one of the
major brats (on D) in choice '3' is only approximate, I thought you
might be interested in three nice things that happen if you change
the ratio for 'D' from 3629/3240 to 1093/976:

1) The ratio is composed of smaller numbers (obviously);
2) It results in a better distribution of the tempering of the
fifths; and
3) It results in two approximate major brats (on G and D) that are
very close to exact:

Major -----Beat Ratios------
Triad M3/5th. m3/5th. m3/M3
----- ------- ------- ------
old:
G.... 2.5207 6.2810 2.4918
D.... 3.3333 7.5000 2.2500
new:
G.... 2.3358 6.0038 2.5703
D.... 3.6694 8.0041 2.1813

--George

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/LummaGuys.ogg
>
> Aaron wrote...
> >Back in--2004, was it Carl?--when I first met Carl in the flesh in
> >Berkeley, this piece was sitting on his piano, and I played it, and
> >immediately found it to be attractive;
>
> Yup, summer 2004.
> ...
> There's lots of stuff I could say, but let me just that I can't
> imagine a better performance for this piece. The dynamics and
> rubato are different than how I usually (try) to play them, but
> fit perfectly. One of the reason I seldom mark scores with tempi
> or other performance indications is to force performers to be
> creative; because musical performance should be a creative act,
> because the music will surely benefit from a perspective beyond
> my own, and because I like to be surprised when I hear it!

How refreshing to read that!

> I wrote this in about 15 minutes in 1997, using Encore and a
> mouse.
>
> -Carl

It left me wanting to hear more, so I'm offering a couple of
suggestions. You might consider using this as the main theme of a
rondo; I think it would work well in 19-ET.

--George

>It left me wanting to hear more, so I'm offering a couple of
>suggestions. You might consider using this as the main theme of a
>rondo; I think it would work well in 19-ET.

Now that you mention it, it probably *would* sound good in 19.

Thanks for listening!

-Carl

>It left me wanting to hear more, so I'm offering a couple of
>suggestions. You might consider using this as the main theme of a
>rondo;

Thanks for the contructive crit, but I'll have to disagree on
this, for a few reasons

1. My portfolio is small enough that I think I'd be better off
writing new material than expanding existing material.

2. I think the piece sits well on its own. The theme and its
reflection seem well-explored.

3. Most music I hear is, for me, way too long and boring. Who
has time to listen to this stuff, anyway? And there's just so
much music. Go to a rock concert, they play recorded music
in between sets. Give my ears a rest so they're ready to listen
when the band comes back on!

Ok, now I'm rambling. Anyway,

-Carl