JI/ET

There were just a couple of posts regarding the old JI vs EQ temp thing, had a comment or two. First, it's a total non issue to me...people should write/play whatever they want. The real issue to me, as always, is the music. It's pretty simple...eq temps were developed to play chordally based music; so, generally, if one wants to play classical, jazz, American folk, blues, country, reggae, flamenco, rock, R&B, etc, you're going to be dealing with a temperament. Of course, these styles developed using 12 tone tuning, but I've composed tunes in these styles using other temperaments, and will continue to do so (and so have numerous others). When I hear folks say they would never use any sort of temperaments, it seems to me they are also saying they are not going to be playing in styles that DO use temperaments...not a problem, but to me, that's the issue, the music, not the tunings.

And, art is all about creativity and self expression...if you figure out a way to play truck drivin' music using JI, I'd love to hear it, and would probably think it's a hoot. Haven't heard it yet...And, I like pure tunings for modally based music that doesn't change keys. On my new CD, there are two fretless pieces tuned to the Harmonic Series, and both pieces do not modulate...so, pure tunings are perfect for that sort of music. Wouldn't want to try Charlie Parker style stuff in JI, but it sure works great in 19 (and other temps as well).

And, I do get tired of the frequent sniping and bickering that goes on here...there's absolutely no need for it, and it occasionally makes me a bit wary of posting, cause I'm wondering who's gonna try to take a potshot if they're in a funky mood. I think there's an etiquette that people need for participating in group interactions...sure, everybody has a bad day, especially as we get a bit older...but, needling people for no good reason, which is what happens here a lot, is uncalled for and unnecessary, and only serves to create bad feeling between people. Hate to say it, but I've rarely recommended the lists to my numerous friends/students who are interested in tunings...I would be a bit embarrassed for them to get caught up in the nonsense. That being said, the tuning lists have somehow managed to last with the same cast of characters for some time, we seem to be able to put up with each other for the most part, and I'm glad, cause there are some interesting ideas that appear here. On to the next round...Hstick

myspace.com/microstick guitar9.com

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

Actually, chordal music works fine in JI. And blues in particular is
usually JI even though we have to stretch strings on the guitar or bracket
the note on a piano to get it in tune. ETs were invented for free
transposition which is required for a lot of modern chordal music where
there is a lot of local key changing.

> It's pretty simple...eq temps were developed
> to play chordally based music; so, generally, if one wants to play
> classical, jazz, American folk, blues, country, reggae, flamenco, rock,
> R&B, etc, you're going to be dealing with a temperament.

--
http://DoctorOakroot.com - Rough-edged songs on homemade GIT-tars.

Good points...

For me, using an EDOs has something to do with the nature of the music
I'm writing, (echoing Neil)--for the most part, I like transposable
harmony, and modulation being a part of the picture as well with no limitations. So, in that traditional 'classical' sense, I use EDOs. When
I'm looking to do something more-drone like, neo-ethnic, spacious, or
perhaps abstract then JI fits the bill. Also, for 'abstract',
non-harmonic EDOs work well too (as all the work in 11- and 13- around
here of late indicates)

I also think it's extremely valid and useful to bridge both worlds, and
write for really high EDOs that approximate JI ever-closer (72, 99, 171,
441, etc.) with the convenience of a finite set and modulation. This is Gene's approach, and I don't see why there are those who would attack
him for it, or why choose not to do this should be attacked. Yes, it's
generally more applicable in MIDI or electronic music.

Then there's saying 'forget octaves', which I've not been particularly
interested in myself, b/c I really strongly relate to the pitch class
idea as an 'identity', but why not?

In summary---YEAH JI!!!! YEAH TEMPERAMENT!!!! YIPPPEEE!!!

What else can be said?

-A.

microstick@... wrote:
> There were just a couple of posts regarding the old JI vs EQ temp thing, had a comment or two. First, it's a total non issue to me...people should write/play whatever they want. The real issue to me, as always, is the music. It's pretty simple...eq temps were developed to play chordally based music; so, generally, if one wants to play classical, jazz, American folk, blues, country, reggae, flamenco, rock, R&B, etc, you're going to be dealing with a temperament. Of course, these styles developed using 12 tone tuning, but I've composed tunes in these styles using other temperaments, and will continue to do so (and so have numerous others). When I hear folks say they would never use any sort of temperaments, it seems to me they are also saying they are not going to be playing in styles that DO use temperaments...not a problem, but to me, that's the issue, the music, not the tunings.
>
> And, art is all about creativity and self expression...if you figure out a way to play truck drivin' music using JI, I'd love to hear it, and would probably think it's a hoot. Haven't heard it yet...And, I like pure tunings for modally based music that doesn't change keys. On my new CD, there are two fretless pieces tuned to the Harmonic Series, and both pieces do not modulate...so, pure tunings are perfect for that sort of music. Wouldn't want to try Charlie Parker style stuff in JI, but it sure works great in 19 (and other temps as well).
>
> And, I do get tired of the frequent sniping and bickering that goes on here...there's absolutely no need for it, and it occasionally makes me a bit wary of posting, cause I'm wondering who's gonna try to take a potshot if they're in a funky mood. I think there's an etiquette that people need for participating in group interactions...sure, everybody has a bad day, especially as we get a bit older...but, needling people for no good reason, which is what happens here a lot, is uncalled for and unnecessary, and only serves to create bad feeling between people. Hate to say it, but I've rarely recommended the lists to my numerous friends/students who are interested in tunings...I would be a bit embarrassed for them to get caught up in the nonsense. That being said, the tuning lists have somehow managed to last with the same cast of characters for some time, we seem to be able to put up with each other for the most part, and I'm glad, cause there are some interesting ideas that appear here. On to the next round...Hstick
>
> myspace.com/microstick guitar9.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

Doctor Oakroot wrote:

>Actually, chordal music works fine in JI. And blues in particular is
>usually JI even though we have to stretch strings on the guitar or bracket
>the note on a piano to get it in tune. ETs were invented for free
>transposition which is required for a lot of modern chordal music where
>there is a lot of local key changing.
>
> >
>> It's pretty simple...eq temps were developed
>>to play chordally based music; so, generally, if one wants to play
>>classical, jazz, American folk, blues, country, reggae, flamenco, rock,
>>R&B, etc, you're going to be dealing with a temperament.
>>

I think what Neil is implying is ET's make modulation easier. Is that what you were trying to say Neil?

--
* David Beardsley
* microtonal guitar
* http://biink.com/db
* http://biink.com/poole

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, <microstick@...> wrote:
>
>so, generally, if one wants to play classical, jazz, American folk,
>blues, country, reggae, flamenco, rock, R&B, etc, you're going to be
>dealing with a temperament.

This isn't meant as a potshot, Mr. Haverstick, but I think you are
entirely mistaken here, and this boggles me. Haven't you played with
Jon Catler? Isn't he like, the most prominent exception in the world
to this above generalization? He rocks the bejillickers out of his JI
guitars, and plays some mean jazz to boot. And don't forget Dante
Rosati, who plays amazing JI classical guitar music. Oh, and Pete
McRae has some fine bluesy JI stuff as well, based I think on some
sort of eikosany or something. And let's not forget Harry Partch's
unique JI guitar music as well (no idea what you'd call his style
though). Come to think of it, most of the microtonal guitar music I'm
familiar with is JI, with yourself (and, humbly, myself as well) being
the few exceptions. Which, given the difficulty at fretting up a JI
guitar, frankly boggles my mind.

I'm probably one of the more vocal people here about my disdain for JI
theory. But I must stress that it is only the theory behind JI that
bores me; I've heard so much amazing JI music that I could not for a
second dismiss the concept. Come to think of it, of all the
microtonal music that I really like and find myself returning to time
and time again, most of it is JI stuff. But on the other hand,
theories connected with EDOs (MOS scales serving as alternatives to
diatonic tonalities and such) fascinate me, even if I find a lot of
the music written in alternate EDOs to be less than exciting.
However, the gap is definitely narrowing.

Hmmmm... equal temperaments and equal divisions of the octave
certainly make transposition not only easier, but literal
transposition in all keys possible. Because I don't consider a literal
transposition a true modulation, I'd say that equal divisions make
modulation more difficult, or at least weaken its effects. Inequality
of interval sizes is a necessity of modulation at its strongest, which
can even transcend the idea of scale steps: for example, it is
possible to audibly modulate from C major to C major if, for example,
one CMj is based on the tetrachord 1/1, 9/8, 5/4, 4/3, and the other
CMj on 1/1, 8/7, 9/7, 4/3.

Now someone will point out that the example above could be done in x-
EDO, where x is some huge number, to which I say that the giant EDOs
which contain a mass of intervals indistinguishable from "JI"
intervals, when driven full throttle, are something that is both and
neither JI/ET. And like everything else that of a both/neither nature,
they actually should be understood as a new thing. Which is a good
thing, seems to me.

The way I work with extended rational intonation would not only
require astronomical EDOs, but the easy and hopefully elegant logic
of the approach as far as notating/programming and visualizing would
be completely obscured, so the "debate" thankfully doesn't concern me.

-Cameron Bobro