Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic For the 17 tone piano project

Alright, here is my contribution now. (Phew, I madde it after all!)
My previous piece was in 5EDO with 5/8 meter - this one is in 17EDO
and 17/8 meter. Deeper background is still the question about whether
there is a perceivable dependency between tuning and rhythm that I
once asked in tuning-math - this time, however, there is no math in
the piece. And the rhythm is not even as weird as the number may
suggest - it is always subdivided into smaller parts, such as 6/4 -
5/8 or 4/4 - 9/8.
The title refers to the piece "Escualo" by Astor Piazzolla, from which
it was partly inspired - namely quick melodic lines with alternating
fifth and second steps, and also rhythmical complexity.
Here is the score:
http://homepage.hispeed.ch/hsstraub/musik/sharks_2006-08-24.pdf
And here is how it is supposed to sound (mechanical, not an "artistic"
performance):
http://homepage.hispeed.ch/hsstraub/musik/sharks_2006-08-24.mp3
--
Hans Straub

🔗c.m.bryan <chrismbryan@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

At 02:33 AM 8/25/2006, you wrote:
>Alright, here is my contribution now. (Phew, I madde it after all!)
>My previous piece was in 5EDO with 5/8 meter - this one is in 17EDO
>and 17/8 meter. Deeper background is still the question about whether
>there is a perceivable dependency between tuning and rhythm that I
>once asked in tuning-math - this time, however, there is no math in
>the piece. And the rhythm is not even as weird as the number may
>suggest - it is always subdivided into smaller parts, such as 6/4 -
>5/8 or 4/4 - 9/8.
>The title refers to the piece "Escualo" by Astor Piazzolla, from which
>it was partly inspired - namely quick melodic lines with alternating
>fifth and second steps, and also rhythmical complexity.
>Here is the score:
>http://homepage.hispeed.ch/hsstraub/musik/sharks_2006-08-24.pdf
>And here is how it is supposed to sound (mechanical, not an "artistic"
>performance):
>http://homepage.hispeed.ch/hsstraub/musik/sharks_2006-08-24.mp3
>--
>Hans Straub

That score looks pretty nice! Lilypond, eh? Sounds good, too.

-Carl

🔗yahya_melb <yahya@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" wrote:
>
> Alright, here is my contribution now. (Phew, I madde it after all!)
> My previous piece was in 5EDO with 5/8 meter - this one is in 17EDO
> and 17/8 meter. Deeper background is still the question about
whether
> there is a perceivable dependency between tuning and rhythm that I
> once asked in tuning-math - this time, however, there is no math in
> the piece. And the rhythm is not even as weird as the number may
> suggest - it is always subdivided into smaller parts, such as 6/4 -
> 5/8 or 4/4 - 9/8.
> The title refers to the piece "Escualo" by Astor Piazzolla, from
> which it was partly inspired - namely quick melodic lines with
> alternating fifth and second steps, and also rhythmical complexity.
> Here is the score:
> http://homepage.hispeed.ch/hsstraub/musik/sharks_2006-08-24.pdf
> And here is how it is supposed to sound (mechanical, not an
> "artistic" performance):
> http://homepage.hispeed.ch/hsstraub/musik/sharks_2006-08-24.mp3
> --

Good stuff! I especially like the "creepy" sequence in mm. 17-20,
and the jagged chords should inspire a feeling of disquiet in any
listener. And the tension is scarcely resolved at the end most
disturbing!

Also, I'm inclined to pinch your melodies at mm. 27-29, 52, and 56 a
raw motives for something throughly contrapuntal.

Thanks for sharing this, Hans!

Regards,
Yahya

🔗yahya_melb <yahya@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" wrote:
>
> Alright, here is my contribution now. (Phew, I madde it after
all!) My previous piece was in 5EDO with 5/8 meter - this one is in
17EDO and 17/8 meter. Deeper background is still the question about
whether there is a perceivable dependency between tuning and rhythm
that I once asked in tuning-math ..

Hans,

I had meant to ask: did you get a satisfactory reply last time?

FWIW, here's my thoughts on the topic.

a) A composer using formal, eg serial, techniques, might well
create interdependencies between tuning (or scale) and rhythm. Eg,
a 17-note scale in any tuning might supply a series, which could be
used as the raw materials of a 17-note tone sequence, against a 17-
beat duration sequence, the two together creating a melody in a
particular rhythm.

b) The composer's choices may deliberately expose or obscure the
connections between the numbers.

c) Generally, simpler uses of the raw material will expose, and
more complex manipulations will obscure, these connections.

d) Only the simplest uses of numerical materials are at all likely
to give rise to connections which hearers may apprehend directly.
This is because we do not have an innate sense of exact number,
although we can probably distinguish "few" from "many" without any
specific training.

e) For similar reasons, only those with a developed (ie trained)
sense of exact number are likely to perceive connections arising
from the more complex uses of numerical materials.

f) In practical terms, some hearers will probably resolve (become
consciously aware of) 2 in tone against 2 in metre, and 3 in tone
against 3 in metre. Some fewer hearers will resolve 5 against 5;
very few will ever resolve larger groupings. As evidence, I adduce
the fact that very few pianists ever manage to make the playing of 7-
note diatonic scales in equal notes appear *musical* as distinct
from mechanical.

g) The simplest way to expose such connections is to play ascending
or descending scales exemplifying your chosen numbers, in notes of
equal duration. This way has correspondingly the greatest chance of
having the resulting metre being perceived as equalling in number
the full set of tones chosen. Eg, in 5/8 metre, playing figures
consisting of all 5 steps of a pentatonic scale in ascending
sequence, in equal notes and repeated several times without pause,
may establish both the metre and scale unequivocally.

h) Very small departures from an established pattern are enough to
disrupt its coherence in the hearer's mind. This seriously limits
what the composer can do to continually expose a numerical
connection for the length of even a typical short piece of two to
three minutes.

I've tried doing this kind of thing before, with very limited
success; however your question, and the opportunity for reflection
it gave me, spur me to consider a fresh attack on "number made
manifest".

Regards,
Yahya

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

Thanks a lot for your comments!

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "yahya_melb" <yahya@...> wrote:
>
> Good stuff! I especially like the "creepy" sequence in mm. 17-20,
> and the jagged chords should inspire a feeling of disquiet in any
> listener. And the tension is scarcely resolved at the end most
> disturbing!
>

This may not be exactly purpose - originally the piece was not meant
to end here...

> Also, I'm inclined to pinch your melodies at mm. 27-29, 52, and 56 a
> raw motives for something throughly contrapuntal.
>

Interesting! I had indeed thought the melody in measure 52 might be a
good nucleus for a fugue or something alike. Eventually there will be
one - but probably not this year any more...

Regards,

Hans Straub

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "yahya_melb" <yahya@...> wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" wrote:
> >
> > Alright, here is my contribution now. (Phew, I madde it after
> all!) My previous piece was in 5EDO with 5/8 meter - this one is in
> 17EDO and 17/8 meter. Deeper background is still the question about
> whether there is a perceivable dependency between tuning and rhythm
> that I once asked in tuning-math ..
>
> Hans,
>
> I had meant to ask: did you get a satisfactory reply last time?
>

Not really. There was no clear trend, in any case - but in a way, I
had not really expected there would be one.

> FWIW, here's my thoughts on the topic.
>
> a) A composer using formal, eg serial, techniques, might well
> create interdependencies between tuning (or scale) and rhythm. Eg,
> a 17-note scale in any tuning might supply a series, which could be
> used as the raw materials of a 17-note tone sequence, against a 17-
> beat duration sequence, the two together creating a melody in a
> particular rhythm.
>
> b) The composer's choices may deliberately expose or obscure the
> connections between the numbers.
>

Yes - dependencies between pitch and time components are definitively
and undoubtedly an exciting field for composers, especially (but not
only) of the serial species. As for listeners (and performers), that's
a quite different matter...

> c) Generally, simpler uses of the raw material will expose, and
> more complex manipulations will obscure, these connections.
>
> d) Only the simplest uses of numerical materials are at all likely
> to give rise to connections which hearers may apprehend directly.
> This is because we do not have an innate sense of exact number,
> although we can probably distinguish "few" from "many" without any
> specific training.
>
> e) For similar reasons, only those with a developed (ie trained)
> sense of exact number are likely to perceive connections arising
> from the more complex uses of numerical materials.
>
> f) In practical terms, some hearers will probably resolve (become
> consciously aware of) 2 in tone against 2 in metre, and 3 in tone
> against 3 in metre. Some fewer hearers will resolve 5 against 5;
> very few will ever resolve larger groupings.

Training is a good keyword. An analog question arises already when we
just consider classical motif manipulations, such as inversions or
retrogrades - especially (but not only) the latter is not very likely
to be recognized directly/consciously by "untrained" listeners.

One of the key question behind all this is: How much of music
perception is "training" (and hence dependent on culture), and how
much is "universal"? Maybe initiatives like the seventeen tone piano
project can contribute something here - the greater the number of
persons exposed to involved in microtonal music, the better the
question can be investigated!
--
Hans Straub