Rediscovered JI in speech?

Re: Researchers rediscover just intonation by analyzing speech forma
Posted by: "Rick McGowan" rick@... rick_at_unicode
Sat May 26, 2007 11:55 am (PST)

> I'd love to see their evidence that "throughout history and
> across cultures" people use 12 tones/octave.

>Yup. They always seem to just take is as postulated. A bit
annoying, eh.

> There are so many of these neuroscience/music papers now
> that get the basics wrong I've given up caring.

It's not only the neuroscience/music people who get the basics wrong.
Many on the tuning associated lists have the same problem.

>Maybe time for someone to take a crack at debunking such papers? Or at
>least debunking the assumptions. Why not a letter to the editor of
PNAS?

Go for it.

Rick

I have even more problems with this paper that Carl does.

The author(s) seem to have managed to think beyond 12edo.
They have acknowledged that something interesting is happening at
integer frequency ratios.
Yet like Carl and many of the other "JI-blinded" (or should it be "JI-
deafened") experts, they have failed to think past this paradoxical
anomaly to the next stage.

Most people will agree that integer frequency ratios produce
intervals which can be heard as having zero-beating when compared to
very close intervals, and that as a string
or other vibrating source is progressively tuned towards an integer
frequency ratio, the perceived beat rate reduces.

At this stage, Carl, and many other naive or lazy thinkers jump (or
should that I say "stumble") to the conclusion that these points must

also be the intervals at which the musical "harmonics" occur.

Hence many people still fallaciously believe that Just Intonation
must be the only possible reference grid from which "harmonious"
music can be mapped.

Charles Lucy lucy@...

----- Promoting global harmony through LucyTuning -----

For information on LucyTuning go to: http://www.lucytune.com

LucyTuned Lullabies (from around the world):
http://www.lullabies.co.uk

Skype user = lucytune

http://www.myspace.com/lucytuning

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

>At this stage, Carl, and many other naive or lazy thinkers jump (or
>should that I say "stumble") to the conclusion that these points must
>
>also be the intervals at which the musical "harmonics" occur.
>
>Hence many people still fallaciously believe that Just Intonation
>must be the only possible reference grid from which "harmonious"
>music can be mapped.
>
>Charles Lucy lucy@...

I say, Charles, Q.E.D. Perhaps we should move this to the
tuning list.

-Carl

Carl Lumma wrote:
>> At this stage, Carl, and many other naive or lazy thinkers jump (or >> should that I say "stumble") to the conclusion that these points must
>>
>> also be the intervals at which the musical "harmonics" occur.
>>
>> Hence many people still fallaciously believe that Just Intonation >> must be the only possible reference grid from which "harmonious" >> music can be mapped.
>>
>> Charles Lucy lucy@...
>> >
> I say, Charles, Q.E.D. Perhaps we should move this to the
> tuning list.
> Just what the list needs. A ridiculous and unnecessary JI vs. temperament flame war.

Why can't every just be as cool as I and accept both? ;)

-A.

> Just what the list needs. A ridiculous and unnecessary JI vs.
> temperament flame war.
>
> Why can't every just be as cool as I and accept both? ;)

Because, everyone knows apples really are better than oranges...

-Chris Bryan

AKJ,

{you wrote...}
>Just what the list needs. A ridiculous and unnecessary JI vs. temperament flame war.

You know what they say: wars are good for the economy.

>Why can't every just be as cool as I and accept both? ;)

Because you're no fun? :)

Aw, in reality, it is all so daft. All I've *ever* wanted on these lists is for people to live and let live. Let each musician/performer/composer pick what they would like to work with, how they would like to work with it, and deal with them responsibly if they have questions in *another* area. There is something about me, on some genetic level, that just isn't interested in exploring ETs, but I stand appreciative, if not humbled, at some of the works that get down in those tunings (not the least a number of your works). I just don't like to be chastised for not using them, and I don't like people to chastise others for their choice of tunings. It all seems so very silly and unproductive.

Probably why I'm not around so much anymore, among many other Real World issues. More people should look at your example, Aaron, because you *have* been very open in your approaches to tuning.

Cheers,
Jon

I was trying to be funny!

Aaron K. Johnson wrote:
>
> Carl Lumma wrote:
> >> At this stage, Carl, and many other naive or lazy thinkers jump (or
> >> should that I say "stumble") to the conclusion that these points must
> >>
> >> also be the intervals at which the musical "harmonics" occur.
> >>
> >> Hence many people still fallaciously believe that Just Intonation
> >> must be the only possible reference grid from which "harmonious"
> >> music can be mapped.
> >>
> >> Charles Lucy lucy@... <mailto:lucy%40lucytune.com>
> >>
> >
> > I say, Charles, Q.E.D. Perhaps we should move this to the
> > tuning list.
> >
>
> Just what the list needs. A ridiculous and unnecessary JI vs.
> temperament flame war.
>
> Why can't every just be as cool as I and accept both? ;)
>
> -A.
>
> -- 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

Jon Szanto wrote:
> AKJ,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >> Just what the list needs. A ridiculous and unnecessary JI vs. temperament flame war.
>> >
> You know what they say: wars are good for the economy.
>
> >> Why can't every just be as cool as I and accept both? ;)
>> >
> Because you're no fun? :)
>
> Aw, in reality, it is all so daft. All I've *ever* wanted on these lists is for people to live and let live. Let each musician/performer/composer pick what they would like to work with, how they would like to work with it, and deal with them responsibly if they have questions in *another* area. There is something about me, on some genetic level, that just isn't interested in exploring ETs, but I stand appreciative, if not humbled, at some of the works that get down in those tunings (not the least a number of your works). I just don't like to be chastised for not using them, and I don't like people to chastise others for their choice of tunings. It all seems so very silly and unproductive.
>
> Probably why I'm not around so much anymore, among many other Real World issues. More people should look at your example, Aaron, because you *have* been very open in your approaches to tuning.
> Thanks, Jon, but really, many other examples abound on the list---Margo, Gene, Chris Bailey, Dan Stearns, Jon Smith, Aaron Hunt, and doesn't Jacob like JI besides being the 17-king (or do I have early senility)? The list is endless...I actually think it's the minority of folks that choose one over the other when I think about it...

Nonetheless, I agree people should have the right to only do one or the other without harassment.

Best,
Aaron.

I must have missed where you entered, Kraig--I thought this was Carl vs. Charles...

-A.

Kraig Grady wrote:
> I was trying to be funny!
>
> Aaron K. Johnson wrote:
> >> Carl Lumma wrote:
>> >>>> At this stage, Carl, and many other naive or lazy thinkers jump (or
>>>> should that I say "stumble") to the conclusion that these points must
>>>>
>>>> also be the intervals at which the musical "harmonics" occur.
>>>>
>>>> Hence many people still fallaciously believe that Just Intonation
>>>> must be the only possible reference grid from which "harmonious"
>>>> music can be mapped.
>>>>
>>>> Charles Lucy lucy@... <mailto:lucy%40lucytune.com>
>>>>
>>>> >>> I say, Charles, Q.E.D. Perhaps we should move this to the
>>> tuning list.
>>>
>>> >> Just what the list needs. A ridiculous and unnecessary JI vs.
>> temperament flame war.
>>
>> Why can't every just be as cool as I and accept both? ;)
>>
>> -A.
>>
>> >> >
>

Aaron,

{you wrote...}
>Thanks, Jon, but really, many other examples abound on the list

Yes, there are others, not endless perhaps. And the list includes a lot of more recent people (recent in light of my being here 10 years), of which you stand out in my mind - probably for a few reasons, but it doesn't matter. Point well taken.

>Nonetheless, I agree people should have the right to only do one or the other without harassment.

The more important part of the message, to be sure.

Cheers,
Jon