Re: [MMM] tuning-WHIPping

At 06:32 AM 9/16/2007, you wrote:
>It's true that we're too un-harsh with each other. On the other hand,
>saying "it was crap" and that's it, isn't very interesting to read either.

First off, I'd never say that to an artist's face, and secondly,
I wasn't doing criticism there, just trying to make a point about
the list. But for the record, I tend to find algorithmic
compositions uninspiring. And if you have to do one, the I Ching
is about the most trendy choice available. I mean, at least pick
something exotic, like a space-filling curve, or maybe your own
DNA or something. Finally, the brass players in these recordings
produced what I can only describe as belching sounds. Not good
brass playing, any way you slice it. There, I said my peace.

Back to the topic at large, I recall that I recently posted the
comments of a friend of mine who is not a microtonalist but who
was a composer for many years in the '80s. The worst of his
comments was "yawn" as I recall, and it started quite a
controversy here, first with people accusing me of saying it, and
later with them blaming me for even posting it.

-Carl

ih defense of the piece in question it was more than Algorithmic to my ears. far more complex sounding than the stucture implied. While one can use the I ching, he did so in his own unique way. The playing was for me superb and to expand the horn into this spectrum of pitches is quite a feat. Some of the higher pitches were sounds i have never really heard on a horn. I will agree that algorithmic compositions often some off static. I think we have reached a level where our minds are used to them and hence can grasp the whole. I dare say i found this more with Mats piece and feel if all the variations would have been put into a single piece. i might have enjoyed it better . Placing the different tunings against each other, interacting, would / could be quite compelling. my 2 cents

Carl Lumma wrote:
>
> At 06:32 AM 9/16/2007, you wrote:
> >It's true that we're too un-harsh with each other. On the other hand,
> >saying "it was crap" and that's it, isn't very interesting to read > either.
>
> First off, I'd never say that to an artist's face, and secondly,
> I wasn't doing criticism there, just trying to make a point about
> the list. But for the record, I tend to find algorithmic
> compositions uninspiring. And if you have to do one, the I Ching
> is about the most trendy choice available. I mean, at least pick
> something exotic, like a space-filling curve, or maybe your own
> DNA or something. Finally, the brass players in these recordings
> produced what I can only describe as belching sounds. Not good
> brass playing, any way you slice it. There, I said my peace.
>
> Back to the topic at large, I recall that I recently posted the
> comments of a friend of mine who is not a microtonalist but who
> was a composer for many years in the '80s. The worst of his
> comments was "yawn" as I recall, and it started quite a
> controversy here, first with people accusing me of saying it, and
> later with them blaming me for even posting it.
>
> -Carl
>
> -- 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

At 01:18 PM 9/16/2007, you wrote:
>ih defense of the piece in question it was more than Algorithmic to my
>ears. far more complex sounding than the stucture implied. While one can
>use the I ching, he did so in his own unique way.

Maybe I'm hallucinating, but I feel like I've heard several I Ching
-based pieces that sound just like that.

>The playing was for me
>superb and to expand the horn into this spectrum of pitches is quite a
>feat.

Maybe I was having a bad day. I should try listening again.

-Carl

harmonics up to 27? on the French horn?

Carl Lumma wrote:
>
> At 01:18 PM 9/16/2007, you wrote:
> >ih defense of the piece in question it was more than Algorithmic to my
> >ears. far more complex sounding than the stucture implied. While one can
> >use the I ching, he did so in his own unique way.
>
> Maybe I'm hallucinating, but I feel like I've heard several I Ching
> -based pieces that sound just like that.
>
> >The playing was for me
> >superb and to expand the horn into this spectrum of pitches is quite a
> >feat.
>
> Maybe I was having a bad day. I should try listening again.
>
> -Carl
>
> -- 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

Wondering what this was about, I googled and found the piece
at issue here. I don't know how on earth anyone could not be
amazed by that kind of pitch control on natural horn, whatever
taste one might have in terms of the composition. Personally,
I found it quite attractive. Bravo, Mr. Burdick!

Yours,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...> wrote:
>
> harmonics up to 27? on the French horn?
>
> Carl Lumma wrote:
> >
> > At 01:18 PM 9/16/2007, you wrote:
> > >ih defense of the piece in question it was more than Algorithmic to my
> > >ears. far more complex sounding than the stucture implied. While one can
> > >use the I ching, he did so in his own unique way.
> >
> > Maybe I'm hallucinating, but I feel like I've heard several I Ching
> > -based pieces that sound just like that.
> >
> > >The playing was for me
> > >superb and to expand the horn into this spectrum of pitches is quite a
> > >feat.
> >
> > Maybe I was having a bad day. I should try listening again.
> >
> > -Carl
> >
> >
>
> --
> 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
>

Re: opus 102

Richard Burdick's Opus 102 Planetary Ripples for 16 similar instruments"

I am adding a PDF file to the web page with the score.(80 pages)

http://www.i-ching-music.com/FREE102.html

This work is now almost exactly 10 years old. I wrote it in exploration of the harmonic
series that I face every day as a professional horn player. I see this as ripples in the water,
but in more of an outer-space solar-system pool of water. I like to develop compositions
by way of expanding or contracting phrases. (although sort of a stupid technique, I like
it).In this case, the fundamental is followed by the ripples of all the other overtones of it.
As is sort of hits the side of the pond, it bounces back at half time and at double time.
This is not really a mathematical piece, but a cool weird musical piece ( As I, the composer
hears it). I don't really know what an algarhythm is.

I really appreciate honesty, and it is true the low notes on the horn sound farty, bear in
mind that the fundamental of this compositions in the A below what a cello can play. The
sound wave is physically longer than the horn tube, which is a A horn and is about ten feet
long. I don't think it is physically possible to start the note with a square attack; it needs
to sort of start before the beat and fuzz in. It really should have been done on a tuba.
Similarly I start to sound a little thin as I play high A's (horn in F high E's!)

A 432 - I am working as much as I can at the base tone of A = 432, I wish this group
would discuss that!

The I Ching.- I am a composer who likes to explore artificial scales. I think I am in good
company with this group of people who like to explore tunings. It's very similar. Since I
started creating scales from the patterns in the I Ching 25 years ago, I have been through
four revisions of the set of 64 scales. Revision 3 is a set of scales based on the harmonic
series one scale per tone up where there are 64 tones in the octave. I will have this work
ready for publication in the next year or so. I do not use the I ching as chance in any way,
nor did John Cage really do it.

The I Ching trendy,(!,?) wow that's a new one!

Opus 102 is not an I Ching scale composition, but most of my work is.

Can public comments be posted elsewhere? I like to create back pages to my composition
or recording description pages. Can comments that are placed in public forums be copied
legally and made public in other places?

No problems,

Richard Burdick

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Andrew Hunt" <aahunt@...> wrote:
>
> Wondering what this was about, I googled and found the piece
> at issue here. I don't know how on earth anyone could not be
> amazed by that kind of pitch control on natural horn, whatever
> taste one might have in terms of the composition. Personally,
> I found it quite attractive. Bravo, Mr. Burdick!
>
> Yours,
> Aaron Hunt
> H-Pi Instruments
>

>I really appreciate honesty, and it is true the low notes on the horn
>sound farty,

I confess I didn't notice these were all horns when I made that
comment. So they're pedal tones, which explains a great deal.

I therefore also didn't notice they were natural horns.

So basically, I'm a dumbass, nothing to see here, move along.

Though on the naive level, I guess I don't like how it sounds.

>The I Ching trendy,(!,?) wow that's a new one!

I seem to see it everywhere in program notes, etc.

>Opus 102 is not an I Ching scale composition, but most of my work is.
>
>Can public comments be posted elsewhere? I like to create back pages
>to my composition or recording description pages. Can comments that
>are placed in public forums be copied legally and made public in other
>places?

That's a grey line. From an etiquette point of view, linking to
the comments should be OK, but reproducing them elsewhere is maybe
not.

-Carl