Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic best mapping for 19-equal in two keyboards?

Hi Aaron - I arranged a concert with 2 pianos in 19-equal years ago. The set-up I settled on had the feature that every pitch is spelled in a way that corresponds to the performers' learned associations. That way the score, with its "correct" spelling, could be played directly by the performers (or, conversely, you can read the performing parts without having to translate any pitches). It went like this:

piano 1: C C# D D# E F F# G G# A A# B
piano 2: C Db D Eb Fb F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb

So the shared pentatonic is on C-D-F-G-A; piano 1 can play in diatonic areas from C major to B major, and piano 2 can play in diatonic areas from Cb major to Bb major. Poor F major gets left out!

This scheme gives both of the enharmonically equivalent pairs, E#/Fb and B#/Cb, to the same piano. Other variants that preserve my "correct spelling" feature are these:

piano 1: C C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb

(C-D-E-G-A shared; no C major on either piano)

piano 1: B# C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb B

(D-E-G-A-B shared; no G major on either piano)

Since I find flat key signatures easier to read than sharp signatures, I preferred the first arrangement.

Mandelbaum's arrangement, in his 19-tone book, is the one you describe. Iirc, not only do the performers have to relearn some associations (or you have to respell their parts), but the detuning on the piano strings is more uneven, which makes it less stable. And diatonic scales are very hard to find on one of the pianos. I think Mandelbaum had Db Eb Gb Ab Bb shared, then piano 1 had CDEFGAB and piano 2 had C#D#E#F#G#A#B#. The symmetry of the 5 black notes being shared is tempting but one of the pianists will have a hard job.

Best - Jon

(p.s. if you decide to go with this scheme I have a tuning chart I prepared for the tuner that minimised overall offsets from ET--but in the end he tuned an extended 1/3-comma by ear and didn't need my cents offsets. Still you might find it useful for gauging the stress on the pianos and deciding on absolute pitch of the whole scheme. I also found it easier to sell the tuning to the music Faculty--in terms of them letting us mess with the pianos--as a historical tuning rather than as the exotic-sounding (to them) equal division of the octave into 19 parts)

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:

> Anyone?
>
> I was thinking sharing black notes and making the 2 keyboards have
> different white notes would be a logical choice, but then I though it
> might be better to make the common notes to be members of the set of
> fewest accidentals key signatures....
>
> Any thoughts?

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

this is your classic model and the i would do first. i think they went with the same type of subset idea with the 17.
one thing i have noticed though, is how you place it on your keyboard effects the way you think about it so when you run out of ideas with this one you might try a less conventional one, even in the same piece.
for instance i have had experience with vibes layouts of the same set of bars.
i started with one where the major scale that just happens to be there on C and used an arrangement where it is quite easy to play.
When people would come over they would find it and unfortunately just stick wit hit.
Later i used two different ones the latter made such scale very very hard to play and so when people came up to it they went in a different direction by exploring, but accepted the language quickly and took off.

Jon Wild wrote:
>
>
> Hi Aaron - I arranged a concert with 2 pianos in 19-equal years ago. The
> set-up I settled on had the feature that every pitch is spelled in a way
> that corresponds to the performers' learned associations. That way the
> score, with its "correct" spelling, could be played directly by the
> performers (or, conversely, you can read the performing parts without
> having to translate any pitches). It went like this:
>
> piano 1: C C# D D# E F F# G G# A A# B
> piano 2: C Db D Eb Fb F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
>
> So the shared pentatonic is on C-D-F-G-A; piano 1 can play in diatonic
> areas from C major to B major, and piano 2 can play in diatonic areas > from
> Cb major to Bb major. Poor F major gets left out!
>
> This scheme gives both of the enharmonically equivalent pairs, E#/Fb and
> B#/Cb, to the same piano. Other variants that preserve my "correct
> spelling" feature are these:
>
> piano 1: C C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
> piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
>
> (C-D-E-G-A shared; no C major on either piano)
>
> piano 1: B# C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
> piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb B
>
> (D-E-G-A-B shared; no G major on either piano)
>
> Since I find flat key signatures easier to read than sharp signatures, I
> preferred the first arrangement.
>
> Mandelbaum's arrangement, in his 19-tone book, is the one you describe.
> Iirc, not only do the performers have to relearn some associations (or > you
> have to respell their parts), but the detuning on the piano strings is
> more uneven, which makes it less stable. And diatonic scales are very > hard
> to find on one of the pianos. I think Mandelbaum had Db Eb Gb Ab Bb
> shared, then piano 1 had CDEFGAB and piano 2 had C#D#E#F#G#A#B#. The
> symmetry of the 5 black notes being shared is tempting but one of the
> pianists will have a hard job.
>
> Best - Jon
>
> (p.s. if you decide to go with this scheme I have a tuning chart I
> prepared for the tuner that minimised overall offsets from ET--but in the
> end he tuned an extended 1/3-comma by ear and didn't need my cents
> offsets. Still you might find it useful for gauging the stress on the
> pianos and deciding on absolute pitch of the whole scheme. I also > found it
> easier to sell the tuning to the music Faculty--in terms of them letting
> us mess with the pianos--as a historical tuning rather than as the
> exotic-sounding (to them) equal division of the octave into 19 parts)
>
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
>
> > Anyone?
> >
> > I was thinking sharing black notes and making the 2 keyboards have
> > different white notes would be a logical choice, but then I though it
> > might be better to make the common notes to be members of the set of
> > fewest accidentals key signatures....
> >
> > Any thoughts?
>
> -- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/index.html>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main/index.asp> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

🔗Gene Ward Smith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

Thanks Jon, this sounds good, and it is probably what we'll do.

BTW, do you have a list of pieces you did (at Harvard, right?) It
might be nice to use some pre-existing stuff if our call for scores
doesn't produce enough music for the concert, which I will be
announcing formally elsewhere and shortly.

-A.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Jon Wild <wild@...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Aaron - I arranged a concert with 2 pianos in 19-equal years ago.
The
> set-up I settled on had the feature that every pitch is spelled in a
way
> that corresponds to the performers' learned associations. That way the
> score, with its "correct" spelling, could be played directly by the
> performers (or, conversely, you can read the performing parts without
> having to translate any pitches). It went like this:
>
> piano 1: C C# D D# E F F# G G# A A# B
> piano 2: C Db D Eb Fb F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
>
> So the shared pentatonic is on C-D-F-G-A; piano 1 can play in diatonic
> areas from C major to B major, and piano 2 can play in diatonic
areas from
> Cb major to Bb major. Poor F major gets left out!
>
> This scheme gives both of the enharmonically equivalent pairs, E#/Fb
and
> B#/Cb, to the same piano. Other variants that preserve my "correct
> spelling" feature are these:
>
> piano 1: C C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
> piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
>
> (C-D-E-G-A shared; no C major on either piano)
>
>
> piano 1: B# C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
> piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb B
>
> (D-E-G-A-B shared; no G major on either piano)
>
> Since I find flat key signatures easier to read than sharp
signatures, I
> preferred the first arrangement.
>
> Mandelbaum's arrangement, in his 19-tone book, is the one you describe.
> Iirc, not only do the performers have to relearn some associations
(or you
> have to respell their parts), but the detuning on the piano strings is
> more uneven, which makes it less stable. And diatonic scales are
very hard
> to find on one of the pianos. I think Mandelbaum had Db Eb Gb Ab Bb
> shared, then piano 1 had CDEFGAB and piano 2 had C#D#E#F#G#A#B#. The
> symmetry of the 5 black notes being shared is tempting but one of the
> pianists will have a hard job.
>
> Best - Jon
>
> (p.s. if you decide to go with this scheme I have a tuning chart I
> prepared for the tuner that minimised overall offsets from ET--but
in the
> end he tuned an extended 1/3-comma by ear and didn't need my cents
> offsets. Still you might find it useful for gauging the stress on the
> pianos and deciding on absolute pitch of the whole scheme. I also
found it
> easier to sell the tuning to the music Faculty--in terms of them
letting
> us mess with the pianos--as a historical tuning rather than as the
> exotic-sounding (to them) equal division of the octave into 19 parts)
>
>
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
>
> > Anyone?
> >
> > I was thinking sharing black notes and making the 2 keyboards have
> > different white notes would be a logical choice, but then I though it
> > might be better to make the common notes to be members of the set of
> > fewest accidentals key signatures....
> >
> > Any thoughts?
>

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" <hstraub64@...> wrote:

> So there is a call for scores?

Yes, there is!

Announcing MidwestMicroFest, the maiden voyage of the quest to make
one more geographic region of the US more 'micro-aware'!

2007-10-20 is the date. 7pm. The place is the Mendelsohn gallery
(perhaps the chapel if the RSVP list grows) of Temple Sholom of Chicago.

We will be focussing on 19-tone piano music, played on two pianos. The
mapping is:

piano 1: C C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb

This is the first 'alternate' (2nd mapping) Jon Wild mentioned. The
notes are spelled correctly, and I prefer the symmetry, circle of
fifths wise, to the first version whhich favors flats, that he mentions.

Start writing!

I am fronting money for the space, tuning of pianos etc. Right now
there is no grant money or private funding, etc. so I cannot pay you
to come out. Of course, you are welcome to come and pay your own way
to Chicago, and you can write it off for tax purposes, too.

Someday, we will grow and have more cash, I'm sure of it.

Best,
Aaron.

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

🔗J.Smith <jsmith9624@...>

🔗Cody Hallenbeck <codyhallenbeck@...>

Sounds great Aaron. I made a try for the 17EDO project, but I found the
tuning hard to get used to. 19EDO is a lot easier for me to wrap my brain
around. I'll try to produce a score for this.

You do a really great service putting this together!

On 3/31/07, Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...> wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com <MakeMicroMusic%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "hstraub64" <hstraub64@...> wrote:
>
> > So there is a call for scores?
>
> Yes, there is!
>
> Announcing MidwestMicroFest, the maiden voyage of the quest to make
> one more geographic region of the US more 'micro-aware'!
>
> 2007-10-20 is the date. 7pm. The place is the Mendelsohn gallery
> (perhaps the chapel if the RSVP list grows) of Temple Sholom of Chicago.
>
> We will be focussing on 19-tone piano music, played on two pianos. The
> mapping is:
>
> piano 1: C C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
> piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
>
> This is the first 'alternate' (2nd mapping) Jon Wild mentioned. The
> notes are spelled correctly, and I prefer the symmetry, circle of
> fifths wise, to the first version whhich favors flats, that he mentions.
>
> Start writing!
>
> I am fronting money for the space, tuning of pianos etc. Right now
> there is no grant money or private funding, etc. so I cannot pay you
> to come out. Of course, you are welcome to come and pay your own way
> to Chicago, and you can write it off for tax purposes, too.
>
> Someday, we will grow and have more cash, I'm sure of it.
>
> Best,
> Aaron.
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗Gene Ward Smith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Gene Ward Smith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith"
<genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson"
> <aaron@> wrote:
>
> > > > > So there is a call for scores?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, there is!
> > >
> > > Two-piano scores?
> > >
> >
> > Yes. Search recent messages for a description of the mapping....
> >
> I saw that. Using that mapping, scores could be submitted
> in the form of two Sibelius files. Is that acceptable?

I prefer that all scores be sent as PDFs. They are universal...I don't
have Sibelius, and I dont think Chris Bailey does, either...so if you
don't mind doing the conversions first.

Re: The mapping--I want to talk more with Chris and hammer this out.
Before anyone starts writing, I want to consider Joel Mandelbaum's
pieces. Unfortunatley, he used a strange mapping...a lot to think
about in the next few days....

-A.

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith"
<genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith"
> <genewardsmith@> wrote:
>
> > I saw that. Using that mapping, scores could be submitted
> > in the form of two Sibelius files. Is that acceptable?
>
> Another question: what is the length costraint? That is,
> how long can a piece be?

My initial response is that we keep things under 10 minutes. Let's see
how many people sign on to compose...maybe we can think of this
week/month as a time to do sketches, and then I can have a more
definitive answer as the program fleshes itself out. Chris and I agree
that we want to keep the concert under 80-90 minutes, with intermission.

My goal in this performance is to display a wide variety of
compositional styles and composers to keep the variety happening, and
to show how different the flavors of 19 can be, given a mass of
different compositional outlooks.

-A.

🔗Daniel Thompson <microtonaldan@...>

> Re: The mapping--I want to talk more with Chris and hammer this out.
> Before anyone starts writing, I want to consider Joel Mandelbaum's
> pieces. Unfortunatley, he used a strange mapping...a lot to think
> about in the next few days....

I'm excited about all of this. As a Midwestern microtonalist, I want to
thank you for helping to bring microtonal music to this part of the
country. I have only recently started working in 19 edo. I'm not sure
if I will be able to write anything suitable, but I will certainly try.

I'm flexible with regards to the mapping. I have a work in progress.
Given the current mapping, it would require two players on one piano.
Is this a possibility? I also like the mapping that shares the black
keys and makes the white keys different.

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Thompson"
<microtonaldan@...> wrote:
>
> > Re: The mapping--I want to talk more with Chris and hammer this out.
> > Before anyone starts writing, I want to consider Joel Mandelbaum's
> > pieces. Unfortunatley, he used a strange mapping...a lot to think
> > about in the next few days....
>
> I'm excited about all of this. As a Midwestern microtonalist, I want to
> thank you for helping to bring microtonal music to this part of the
> country.

Hey cool! Where do you live?

> I have only recently started working in 19 edo. I'm not sure
> if I will be able to write anything suitable, but I will certainly try.
>
> I'm flexible with regards to the mapping. I have a work in progress.
> Given the current mapping, it would require two players on one
> piano.

We're still hashing out the mapping, esp. since there are precedent
pieces in existence in other mappings than the one I mentioned.

re: your work in progress--do you mean three players/two pianos?

-A.

🔗Daniel Thompson <microtonaldan@...>

> > I'm excited about all of this. As a Midwestern microtonalist, I
want to
> > thank you for helping to bring microtonal music to this part of
the
> > country.
>
> Hey cool! Where do you live?

I live in Saint Paul, Minnesota.

> re: your work in progress--do you mean three players/two pianos?

No, just two players on one piano. The twelve notes on the one piano
should be sufficient (the one with flats), but it's written for four
hands. I didn't pay any attention to performance issues when I
started writing this because I figured I would just produce it with
my computer. Of course, I'm flexible and will try something else if
this piece doesn't work out.

🔗Magnus Jonsson <magnus@...>

I will try to write something too, but I find it hard enough to write for one piano, let alone two, so I can't promise I will submit anything. 19 should definitely be easier than 17 though!
/ Magnus

On Sun, 1 Apr 2007, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:

> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" <hstraub64@...> wrote:
>
>> So there is a call for scores?
>
> Yes, there is!
>
> Announcing MidwestMicroFest, the maiden voyage of the quest to make
> one more geographic region of the US more 'micro-aware'!
>
> 2007-10-20 is the date. 7pm. The place is the Mendelsohn gallery
> (perhaps the chapel if the RSVP list grows) of Temple Sholom of Chicago.
>
> We will be focussing on 19-tone piano music, played on two pianos. The
> mapping is:
>
> piano 1: C C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
> piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
>
> This is the first 'alternate' (2nd mapping) Jon Wild mentioned. The
> notes are spelled correctly, and I prefer the symmetry, circle of
> fifths wise, to the first version whhich favors flats, that he mentions.
>
> Start writing!
>
> I am fronting money for the space, tuning of pianos etc. Right now
> there is no grant money or private funding, etc. so I cannot pay you
> to come out. Of course, you are welcome to come and pay your own way
> to Chicago, and you can write it off for tax purposes, too.
>
> Someday, we will grow and have more cash, I'm sure of it.
>
> Best,
> Aaron.
>
>
>
>

🔗Jacob <jbarton@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Magnus Jonsson <magnus@...> wrote:
>
> I will try to write something too, but I find it hard enough to
write for
> one piano, let alone two, so I can't promise I will submit anything. 19
> should definitely be easier than 17 though!
> / Magnus

*scoff* Pah! How could adding two _more_ notes make it _less_
confusing? </sarcasm>

But seriously, when it comes down to it, writing pianistically is
rather hard if you haven't been doing it, especially when complicated
with the hocketing scheme...

>
> On Sun, 1 Apr 2007, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
>
> > --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" <hstraub64@> wrote:
> >
> >> So there is a call for scores?
> >
> > Yes, there is!
> >
> > Announcing MidwestMicroFest, the maiden voyage of the quest to make
> > one more geographic region of the US more 'micro-aware'!
> >
> > 2007-10-20 is the date. 7pm. The place is the Mendelsohn gallery
> > (perhaps the chapel if the RSVP list grows) of Temple Sholom of
Chicago.
> >
> > We will be focussing on 19-tone piano music, played on two pianos. The
> > mapping is:
> >
> > piano 1: C C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
> > piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
> >
> > This is the first 'alternate' (2nd mapping) Jon Wild mentioned. The
> > notes are spelled correctly, and I prefer the symmetry, circle of
> > fifths wise, to the first version whhich favors flats, that he
mentions.
> >
> > Start writing!
> >
> > I am fronting money for the space, tuning of pianos etc. Right now
> > there is no grant money or private funding, etc. so I cannot pay you
> > to come out. Of course, you are welcome to come and pay your own way
> > to Chicago, and you can write it off for tax purposes, too.
> >
> > Someday, we will grow and have more cash, I'm sure of it.
> >
> > Best,
> > Aaron.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>
wrote:
>
> if in the nature of the tuning , please share
>
> hstraub64 wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I am working on that, too. At the moment stuck in 17edo
> > counterpoint problems, though...

Sure! Alright, here is what I am currently trying to do.

First-species counterpoint (two voices, note against note) can be
described as follows: Given a melody (cantus firmus); wanted is a
second voice (descant), fulfilling certain conditions. I use the
following notation, which was essentially coined by Guerino Mazzola
(but I am not using his mathematical formulae - no worry!): A two-
voiced piece is notated as a series of pairs (a1, b1), (a2, b2,),
(a3, b3,)... where the an are the pitches of the first voice (cantus
firmus) and the bn are the intervals that are formed by the second
voice (descant). Now, many rules of classical counterpoint boil down
to the following question: Given an, bn and a(n+1), what are the
possible values for b(n+1)? For example, the famous prohibition of
fifth parallels translates as: if bn is a fifth, then b(n+1) must not
be a fifth.
A complete listings of all possible b(n+1) describes a simplified
counterpoint system and can be displayed as a set of the following
diagrams. This is one of the diagrams for 17EDO I am currently trying
to build - by trial and error merely, by composing first and taking
the steps afterwards. The idea for the diagram is, again, taken from
Guerino Mazzola.

cantus firmus +1
**********************************************************
<from interval>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
0
1
2
* * 3
4
5
* 6
* * 7
8 to
9 in-
* * * 10 ter-
11 val
12
13
14
15
16

In the title stands the pitch difference (in steps of 17EDO) from an
to a(n+1). The columns represent the possible bn, the rows represent
the possible b(n+1), and a star at column X, row Y means that if bn =
X, then Y is an allowed value for b(n+1). (You can see that, at the
moment, I do allow parallel fifths, unlike classical counterpoint
with 12 tones.) A complete counterpoint table for 17EDO consists of
33 of these diagrams, one for each possible step of the cantus firmus.
The table is not very advanced yet - if I try to harmonize a given
melody, I still quickly reach cul-de sacs. And I do not like the
results yet (here is one:
http://homepage.hispeed.ch/hsstraub/musik/Sharks17_Fugue1.mp3).
If it reaches a mature state, I will post it here, of course.
--
Hans Straub

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

Hello colleagues,

I assume most of you have only got to the "sketch stage", but I'm
rethinking this mapping thing. In any event, I hope you all knew I
was, and didn't go hardcore into writing anything heavily yet.

The temptation to give Joel Mandelbaum an easy job of transposing his
older works to the scheme Jon Wild mentioned, and have new works
reflect the same easier-to-read scheme, is giving me second thoughts
about the mapping for MidwestMicroFest's first concert that I had
announced earlier.

I think I now favor the one Jon Wild *first* mentioned, which is:

piano 1: C C# D D# E F F# G G# A A# B
piano 2: C Db D Eb Fb F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb

The shared pentatonic C-D-F-G-A allows Mandelbaum's scheme to be
slightly transposed, so is thus backwards-compatible to a very
historic mapping, while preserving legibility and allowing a very
practical mapping going forward.

If there are no major objections, I'd like to go ahead with this for
all pieces in the October 20th concert in 19-edo. Please spread the
word, hopefully all who said they would contribute will be aware of
this change.

Best,
Aaron.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson"
<aaron@...> wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" <hstraub64@> wrote:
>
> > So there is a call for scores?
>
> Yes, there is!
>
> Announcing MidwestMicroFest, the maiden voyage of the quest to make
> one more geographic region of the US more 'micro-aware'!
>
> 2007-10-20 is the date. 7pm. The place is the Mendelsohn gallery
> (perhaps the chapel if the RSVP list grows) of Temple Sholom of Chicago.
>
> We will be focussing on 19-tone piano music, played on two pianos. The
> mapping is:
>
> piano 1: C C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
> piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
>
> This is the first 'alternate' (2nd mapping) Jon Wild mentioned. The
> notes are spelled correctly, and I prefer the symmetry, circle of
> fifths wise, to the first version whhich favors flats, that he mentions.
>
> Start writing!
>
> I am fronting money for the space, tuning of pianos etc. Right now
> there is no grant money or private funding, etc. so I cannot pay you
> to come out. Of course, you are welcome to come and pay your own way
> to Chicago, and you can write it off for tax purposes, too.
>
> Someday, we will grow and have more cash, I'm sure of it.
>
> Best,
> Aaron.
>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

Aaron & all -

From my point of view, the exact mapping isn't terribly important.
Glad to see a decision though. I'll start making my next steps.

-Carl

At 01:07 PM 4/6/2007, you wrote:
>Hello colleagues,
>
>I assume most of you have only got to the "sketch stage", but I'm
>rethinking this mapping thing. In any event, I hope you all knew I
>was, and didn't go hardcore into writing anything heavily yet.
>
>The temptation to give Joel Mandelbaum an easy job of transposing his
>older works to the scheme Jon Wild mentioned, and have new works
>reflect the same easier-to-read scheme, is giving me second thoughts
>about the mapping for MidwestMicroFest's first concert that I had
>announced earlier.
>
>I think I now favor the one Jon Wild *first* mentioned, which is:
>
>piano 1: C C# D D# E F F# G G# A A# B
>piano 2: C Db D Eb Fb F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
>
>The shared pentatonic C-D-F-G-A allows Mandelbaum's scheme to be
>slightly transposed, so is thus backwards-compatible to a very
>historic mapping, while preserving legibility and allowing a very
>practical mapping going forward.
>
>If there are no major objections, I'd like to go ahead with this for
>all pieces in the October 20th concert in 19-edo. Please spread the
>word, hopefully all who said they would contribute will be aware of
>this change.
>
>Best,
>Aaron.

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

Aargh - Yahoo scrambled my formatting... Here it is again.
Would Google Groups do THAT better, BTW?

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" <hstraub64@...> wrote:

>
> cantus firmus +1
> **********************************************************
> <from interval>
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
> 0
> 1
> 2
> * * 3
> 4
> 5
> * 6
> * * 7
> 8 to
> 9 in-
> * * * 10 ter-
> 11 val
> 12
> 13
> 14
> 15
> 16
>
>
> In the title stands the pitch difference (in steps of 17EDO) from an
> to a(n+1). The columns represent the possible bn, the rows represent
> the possible b(n+1), and a star at column X, row Y means that if
> bn = X, then Y is an allowed value for b(n+1). (You can see that,
> at the moment, I do allow parallel fifths, unlike classical
> counterpoint with 12 tones.) A complete counterpoint table for 17EDO
> consists of 33 of these diagrams, one for each possible step of the
> cantus firmus.
--
Hans Straub

🔗Mykhaylo Khramov <commator@...>

Hi MMMakers,

Today I'd published the score for US Midwest Microfest 2007.
Welcome for seeing, listening and reviewing of the score and MP3.

http://www.sibeliusmusic.com/cgi-bin/show_score.pl?scoreid=104038

I'll try to make exemplar in .PDF or .DOC and link it for downloading
soon.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson"
<aaron@...> wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" <hstraub64@>
wrote:
>
> > So there is a call for scores?
>
> Yes, there is!
>
> Announcing MidwestMicroFest, the maiden voyage of the quest to make
> one more geographic region of the US more 'micro-aware'!
>
> 2007-10-20 is the date. 7pm. The place is the Mendelsohn gallery
> (perhaps the chapel if the RSVP list grows) of Temple Sholom of
Chicago.
>
> We will be focussing on 19-tone piano music, played on two pianos.
The
> mapping is:
>
> piano 1: C C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
> piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
>
> This is the first 'alternate' (2nd mapping) Jon Wild mentioned. The
> notes are spelled correctly, and I prefer the symmetry, circle of
> fifths wise, to the first version whhich favors flats, that he
mentions.
>
> Start writing!
>
> I am fronting money for the space, tuning of pianos etc. Right now
> there is no grant money or private funding, etc. so I cannot pay you
> to come out. Of course, you are welcome to come and pay your own way
> to Chicago, and you can write it off for tax purposes, too.
>
> Someday, we will grow and have more cash, I'm sure of it.
>
> Best,
> Aaron.
>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Mykhaylo Khramov <commator@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> At 12:03 PM 4/12/2007, you wrote:
> >Hi MMMakers,
> >
> >Today I'd published the score for US Midwest Microfest 2007.
> >Welcome for seeing, listening and reviewing of the score and MP3.
> >
> >http://www.sibeliusmusic.com/cgi-bin/show_score.pl?scoreid=104038
> >
> >I'll try to make exemplar in .PDF or .DOC and link it for
downloading
> >soon.
>
> Have I seen this piece before?
>
> -Carl

No, it wasn't possible. I've published it yesterday.
The link to download the .DOC score

http://www.geocities.com/sonantometry/downloads/

There was 31 EDO and 53 EDO version earlier published.
Maybe those pieces you've seen?

Michael.

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

Mykhaylo,

Hi, thanks for your contribution to MidwestMicroFest 2007. I'm not
sure if you followed the thread, but we changed the mapping to
accomodate some existing repertoire. See the following link:

/makemicromusic/topicId_16475.html#16578

In any event, is your piece workable in this updated mapping?

Best,
Aaron.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Mykhaylo Khramov"
<commator@...> wrote:
>
> Hi MMMakers,
>
> Today I'd published the score for US Midwest Microfest 2007.
> Welcome for seeing, listening and reviewing of the score and MP3.
>
> http://www.sibeliusmusic.com/cgi-bin/show_score.pl?scoreid=104038
>
> I'll try to make exemplar in .PDF or .DOC and link it for downloading
> soon.
>
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson"
> <aaron@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" <hstraub64@>
> wrote:
> >
> > > So there is a call for scores?
> >
> > Yes, there is!
> >
> > Announcing MidwestMicroFest, the maiden voyage of the quest to make
> > one more geographic region of the US more 'micro-aware'!
> >
> > 2007-10-20 is the date. 7pm. The place is the Mendelsohn gallery
> > (perhaps the chapel if the RSVP list grows) of Temple Sholom of
> Chicago.
> >
> > We will be focussing on 19-tone piano music, played on two pianos.
> The
> > mapping is:
> >
> > piano 1: C C# D D# E E# F# G G# A A# B
> > piano 2: C Db D Eb E F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb
> >
> > This is the first 'alternate' (2nd mapping) Jon Wild mentioned. The
> > notes are spelled correctly, and I prefer the symmetry, circle of
> > fifths wise, to the first version whhich favors flats, that he
> mentions.
> >
> > Start writing!
> >
> > I am fronting money for the space, tuning of pianos etc. Right now
> > there is no grant money or private funding, etc. so I cannot pay you
> > to come out. Of course, you are welcome to come and pay your own way
> > to Chicago, and you can write it off for tax purposes, too.
> >
> > Someday, we will grow and have more cash, I'm sure of it.
> >
> > Best,
> > Aaron.
> >
>

🔗Mykhaylo Khramov <commator@...>

I've remapped my piece in accordance to:
piano 1: C C# D D# E F F# G G# A A# B
piano 2: C Db D Eb Fb F Gb G Ab A Bb Cb

Link to download .DOC score:
http://www.geocities.com/sonantometry/downloads/
Link to download .MP3 and to see/listen in Sibelius format:
http://www.sibeliusmusic.com/cgi-bin/show_score.pl?scoreid=104038

Regards,
Michael

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson"
<aaron@...> wrote:
>
>
> Mykhaylo,
>
> Hi, thanks for your contribution to MidwestMicroFest 2007. I'm not
> sure if you followed the thread, but we changed the mapping to
> accomodate some existing repertoire. See the following link:
>
> /makemicromusic/topicId_16475.html#16578
>
> In any event, is your piece workable in this updated mapping?
>
> Best,
> Aaron.
>

best mapping for 19-equal in two keyboards?

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Jon Wild <wild@...>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

🔗Gene Ward Smith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

🔗J.Smith <jsmith9624@...>

🔗Cody Hallenbeck <codyhallenbeck@...>

🔗Gene Ward Smith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Gene Ward Smith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Gene Ward Smith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Daniel Thompson <microtonaldan@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Daniel Thompson <microtonaldan@...>

🔗Magnus Jonsson <magnus@...>

🔗Jacob <jbarton@...>

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗hstraub64 <hstraub64@...>

🔗Mykhaylo Khramov <commator@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Mykhaylo Khramov <commator@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Mykhaylo Khramov <commator@...>