Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic keyboards for JLS

Carl Lumma wrote:
> Yo-
> > Have you seen:
> > http://www.synthtopia.com/content/2007/02/10/video-hands-on-with-the-c-thru-music-axis-midi-controller/
> > $850 pounds sterling plus VAT and shipping. On sale now.

Looks pretty good! This link's a bit better, with pictures (only one click away):

http://www.synthtopia.com/content/2007/02/05/namm-bizarre-new-harmonic-table-midi-controller/

So it's a hexagonal array. Exactly what some people have been asking for.

One thing I note is they've designed it to "stretch more than four octaves with one hand". It relates to an idea I had in the summer, when I dug out my Ztar for a few days. The thing is, a lot of keyboards try to copy the Halberstadt, using the same span but adding more notes. I think it's better to target smaller octaves.

I know you (Carl) did a survey of microtonal keyboards a while back. Firstly you wanted to finger a whole octave with one hand. Secondly you didn't like hexagonal keys because they reduce the freedom you have to place your fingers. My experience with the Ztar is that freedom isn't so important if it's really easy to finger the chords. And for that to be the case the octaves have to be much smaller than they are on a piano.

I'm going to conjecture now that for small keys the optimum layout is almost square. The Ztar mapping I used had an octave on 5 "frets" across 6 "strings". This gives 30 notes, and so is the nearest you can get to having 31 notes in a square.

You can add as many duplicates to this as you like. The point is that I'm setting a maximum vertical span that relates to some guess on the expected horizontal span.

A Bosanquet layout usually copies the 7 white keys in a row, and adds other keys above or below them. That would be most efficient for 7x7=49 keys. As it was originally designed for 53, that's fairly logical. But apply it to 31 and the octaves are too wide. Apply it to 19 and they're way too wide.

So the solution is that Bosanquet used long, piano-like keys, rather than hexagonal ones. The advantage is that you get the same freedom in finger placement as on a piano. And the problem is that it gets harder to play weird chords that cover a large vertical distance.

So to hexagons! The ideal 31 note layout would be based on a pentatonic, not a diatonic. So it approaches that 6x5 square, with one extra note.

For a 19 note keyboard, you can still start with a pentatonic, and approach 4x5 with a note missing.

For a 12 note keyboard, even pentatonics are too big. The ideal layout is 4x3. And that looks like roughly what they're doing with this keyboard. (Going by the picture, it's a triangular lattice, so a harmonic rather than melodic layout.)

> Aaron Hunt knows more about the MIDI implementation than I do,
> but with some limitations I think it could be remapped.

It's all set up for the 12 note scale. There has to be a way to differentiate what would normally be duplicate keys. Maybe they could be cajoled into a firmware upgrade if enough people want one.

> http://monome.org
> > Made to order, with OSC (not MIDI). $500 for 8x8, available now.

Not as exciting but nice to know it's there.

Graham

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

>http://www.synthtopia.com/content/2007/02/10/video-hands-on-with-the-c
>-thru-music-axis-midi-controller/
>>
>> $850 pounds sterling plus VAT and shipping. On sale now.
>
>Looks pretty good! This link's a bit better, with pictures
>(only one click away):
>
>http://www.synthtopia.com/content/2007/02/05/namm-bizarre-new-harmonic
>-table-midi-controller/

Uh, my like has an in-depth video. Best by far on the
net of this device that I know of.

>So it's a hexagonal array. Exactly what some people have
>been asking for.
>
>One thing I note is they've designed it to "stretch more
>than four octaves with one hand". It relates to an idea I
>had in the summer, when I dug out my Ztar for a few days.
>The thing is, a lot of keyboards try to copy the
>Halberstadt, using the same span but adding more notes. I
>think it's better to target smaller octaves.

They target smaller octaves in this case simply through
a mapping.

>I know you (Carl) did a survey of microtonal keyboards a
>while back. Firstly you wanted to finger a whole octave
>with one hand. Secondly you didn't like hexagonal keys
>because they reduce the freedom you have to place your
>fingers. My experience with the Ztar is that freedom isn't
>so important if it's really easy to finger the chords. And
>for that to be the case the octaves have to be much smaller
>than they are on a piano.

Yeah, the truth is you can't tell about keyboards until you
try them, and in fact, use them for years. Probably there
are valid methods for playing all of them well.

>A Bosanquet layout usually copies the 7 white keys in a row,
>and adds other keys above or below them. That would be most
>efficient for 7x7=49 keys. As it was originally designed
>for 53, that's fairly logical. But apply it to 31 and the
>octaves are too wide. Apply it to 19 and they're way too wide.

They are??

>So the solution is that Bosanquet used long, piano-like
>keys, rather than hexagonal ones. The advantage is that you
>get the same freedom in finger placement as on a piano. And
>the problem is that it gets harder to play weird chords that
>cover a large vertical distance.

That's true.

>> Aaron Hunt knows more about the MIDI implementation than I do,
>> but with some limitations I think it could be remapped.
>
>It's all set up for the 12 note scale. There has to be a
>way to differentiate what would normally be duplicate keys.

It's not clear if the duplication is hard-wired or not.
IIRC, Aaron wasn't sure, but he said most of them are independent,
but some may be wired together.

>> Made to order, with OSC (not MIDI). $500 for 8x8, available now.
>
>Not as exciting but nice to know it's there.

It's exciting if you want a lambdoma keyboard.

-Carl

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

Thanks for posting the video, Carl; it's nice to finally
see one of these things in action (and you have to dig that
Police tune at the end).

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:
>> >> Aaron Hunt knows more about the MIDI implementation than I do,
> >> but with some limitations I think it could be remapped.
> >
> >It's all set up for the 12 note scale. There has to be a
> >way to differentiate what would normally be duplicate keys.
>
> It's not clear if the duplication is hard-wired or not.
> IIRC, Aaron wasn't sure, but he said most of them are independent,
> but some may be wired together.

Tech specs are here:
<http://www.c-thru-music.com/cgi/?page=spec-64>

or you can see the manual here (very nicely done):
<http://www.c-thru-music.com/pdf/AXiS-64_User_Manual.pdf>

As a microtonal instrument one of these keyboards could be used
with a TBX1 to retune however you want. Anyone interested in that
I would urge you to contact C-Thru and ask them (as Graham
suggested) if a firmware change could allow all the keys to give
unique MIDI messages. I'm guessing they will say 'no' either
because the hardware won't allow it, or because changing it
would ruin their vision of the harmonic layout, but it would be
worth a try. Anyone interested in pursuing this, let me know.
Working together for something along these lines could result in
something worthwhile for everyone involved.

Yours,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

That's my favorite Police tune! -C.

At 10:02 PM 9/21/2007, you wrote:
>Thanks for posting the video, Carl; it's nice to finally
>see one of these things in action (and you have to dig that
>Police tune at the end).
>
>--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:
>>> >> Aaron Hunt knows more about the MIDI implementation than I do,
>> >> but with some limitations I think it could be remapped.
>> >
>> >It's all set up for the 12 note scale. There has to be a
>> >way to differentiate what would normally be duplicate keys.
>>
>> It's not clear if the duplication is hard-wired or not.
>> IIRC, Aaron wasn't sure, but he said most of them are independent,
>> but some may be wired together.
>
>
>Tech specs are here:
><http://www.c-thru-music.com/cgi/?page=spec-64>
>
>or you can see the manual here (very nicely done):
><http://www.c-thru-music.com/pdf/AXiS-64_User_Manual.pdf>
>
>As a microtonal instrument one of these keyboards could be used
>with a TBX1 to retune however you want. Anyone interested in that
>I would urge you to contact C-Thru and ask them (as Graham
>suggested) if a firmware change could allow all the keys to give
>unique MIDI messages. I'm guessing they will say 'no' either
>because the hardware won't allow it, or because changing it
>would ruin their vision of the harmonic layout, but it would be
>worth a try. Anyone interested in pursuing this, let me know.
>Working together for something along these lines could result in
>something worthwhile for everyone involved.
>
>Yours,
>Aaron Hunt
>H-Pi Instruments

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

Aaron Andrew Hunt wrote:

> Tech specs are here:
> <http://www.c-thru-music.com/cgi/?page=spec-64>
> > or you can see the manual here (very nicely done):
> <http://www.c-thru-music.com/pdf/AXiS-64_User_Manual.pdf>

Nice! 192 notes total. And it *is* velocity sensitive, contrary to one of the online comments.

> As a microtonal instrument one of these keyboards could be used
> with a TBX1 to retune however you want. Anyone interested in that
> I would urge you to contact C-Thru and ask them (as Graham > suggested) if a firmware change could allow all the keys to give
> unique MIDI messages. I'm guessing they will say 'no' either > because the hardware won't allow it, or because changing it
> would ruin their vision of the harmonic layout, but it would be > worth a try. Anyone interested in pursuing this, let me know.
> Working together for something along these lines could result in > something worthwhile for everyone involved.

I'm not interested in the sense that I'd buy one. It looks too big to carry round. How would retuning the 12 note output give any advantage over any other 12 note keyboard? Other than the general advantages they claim, of course.

A firmware change must be possible because there's a USB socket for it. Frankly, how difficult would it be for them? Change a lookup table probably. It needn't ruin the harmonic layout.

They're supposed to be made to order, and the thread started with 19 note keyboards, so why not order one with key tops for 19 notes to the octave? That'd be a pretty neat microtonal device. Ideal for 5-limit JI, 7-limit planar with 225:224 tempered out, meantone, magic, whatever. Completely generalized because the harmony's the same (but different bad chords with different tunings).

I'm sure they'll say "no" anyway but if enough people are prepared to pay for a 19-note device I expect they'd change their minds. Who's up for it? (Not me as I said. But maybe I could be convinced if those Thummers never make it out.)

Graham

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

Carl Lumma wrote:

> Uh, my like has an in-depth video. Best by far on the
> net of this device that I know of.

15MB!!! What about people with slow connections? But yes, I got it, and it's a good demonstration of the instrument.

> They target smaller octaves in this case simply through
> a mapping.

Once you've set the size and shape of the keys, what else is there to change?

> try them, and in fact, use them for years. Probably there
> are valid methods for playing all of them well.

Maybe, but I used the Ztar for years and now I'm sharing my wisdom. The 5-fret octave mapping was easy to get use to and easy to re-learn after a few years hiatus. It wasn't by any means the first one I thought of.

>>A Bosanquet layout usually copies the 7 white keys in a row, >>and adds other keys above or below them. That would be most >>efficient for 7x7=49 keys. As it was originally designed >>for 53, that's fairly logical. But apply it to 31 and the >>octaves are too wide. Apply it to 19 and they're way too wide.
> > They are??

According to my conjecture, yes. Note that the Ztar keys are wide the other way, so I may be a tad extreme. But that's also an option to think about. All I'm saying is that people tend to overlook radically small octaves and I think they work very well.

>>>Made to order, with OSC (not MIDI). $500 for 8x8, available now.
>>
>>Not as exciting but nice to know it's there.
> > It's exciting if you want a lambdoma keyboard.

Oh, maybe. It doesn't look as nice and isn't specifically designed as a musical instrument. But it's much cheaper (check that exchange rate!) and guaranteed flexible.

What's with the lights? Can you set them to come on in whatever pattern you want, to help with a layout? That would be exciting.

The FAQ say it does support MIDI in software (OS X and XP).

Graham

🔗threesixesinarow <CACCOLA@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:

> >http://www.synthtopia.com/content/2007/02/05/namm-bizarre-new-
harmonic-table-midi-controller/

> >A Bosanquet layout usually copies the 7 white keys in a row,
> >and adds other keys above or below them. That would be most
> >efficient for 7x7=49 keys. As it was originally designed
> >for 53, that's fairly logical. But apply it to 31 and the
> >octaves are too wide. Apply it to 19 and they're way too wide.
>

Bosanquet was 12 columns, casting out multiples of 12 as needed -
it was Wilson who did with 7 and 5.

>
> >So the solution is that Bosanquet used long, piano-like
> >keys, rather than hexagonal ones. The advantage is that you
> >get the same freedom in finger placement as on a piano. And
> >the problem is that it gets harder to play weird chords that
> >cover a large vertical distance.

His keys were also relieved so you could slide your finger
underneath and it also looks like you can stick your finger
between them.

http://tinyurl.com/yptty9 (Allan, Reed Organs in England)

Clark

🔗threesixesinarow <CACCOLA@...>

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

threesixesinarow wrote:

> Bosanquet was 12 columns, casting out multiples of 12 as needed - > it was Wilson who did with 7 and 5.

But the white keys stick out further, so there's really a row of 7 white keys with 5 black keys behind them, like a halberstadt.

What about Fokker?

>>>So the solution is that Bosanquet used long, piano-like >>>keys, rather than hexagonal ones. The advantage is that you >>>get the same freedom in finger placement as on a piano. And >>>the problem is that it gets harder to play weird chords that >>>cover a large vertical distance.
> > His keys were also relieved so you could slide your finger > underneath and it also looks like you can stick your finger > between them. > > http://tinyurl.com/yptty9 (Allan, Reed Organs in England) Did they finish rebuilding it?

Graham

🔗threesixesinarow <CACCOLA@...>

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

Fokker's was like the Bosanquet upside down. He developed his during the war to " hide" that he was a nuclear Physicist from the nazis. Because of the war Fokker did wot have access to Bonsanquet's work in England

Graham Breed wrote:
>
> threesixesinarow wrote:
>
> > Bosanquet was 12 columns, casting out multiples of 12 as needed -
> > it was Wilson who did with 7 and 5.
>
> But the white keys stick out further, so there's really a
> row of 7 white keys with 5 black keys behind them, like a
> halberstadt.
>
> What about Fokker?
>
> >>>So the solution is that Bosanquet used long, piano-like
> >>>keys, rather than hexagonal ones. The advantage is that you
> >>>get the same freedom in finger placement as on a piano. And
> >>>the problem is that it gets harder to play weird chords that
> >>>cover a large vertical distance.
> >
> > His keys were also relieved so you could slide your finger
> > underneath and it also looks like you can stick your finger
> > between them.
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/yptty9 <http://tinyurl.com/yptty9> (Allan, Reed > Organs in England)
>
> Did they finish rebuilding it?
>
> Graham
>
> -- 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

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

>Once you've set the size and shape of the keys, what else is
>there to change?

As you can see, octaves on this keyboard are 4ths.

>> try them, and in fact, use them for years. Probably there
>> are valid methods for playing all of them well.
>
>Maybe, but I used the Ztar for years and now I'm sharing my
>wisdom. The 5-fret octave mapping was easy to get use to
>and easy to re-learn after a few years hiatus. It wasn't by
>any means the first one I thought of.

What mapping is that?

>>>A Bosanquet layout usually copies the 7 white keys in a row,
>>>and adds other keys above or below them. That would be most
>>>efficient for 7x7=49 keys. As it was originally designed
>>>for 53, that's fairly logical. But apply it to 31 and the
>>>octaves are too wide. Apply it to 19 and they're way too wide.
>>
>> They are??
>
>According to my conjecture, yes.

On a typical Wilson-like keyboard, the width of the octave
does not change from 31 to 53.

>>>>Made to order, with OSC (not MIDI). $500 for 8x8, available now.
>>>
>>>Not as exciting but nice to know it's there.
>>
>> It's exciting if you want a lambdoma keyboard.
>
>Oh, maybe. It doesn't look as nice and isn't specifically
>designed as a musical instrument. But it's much cheaper
>(check that exchange rate!) and guaranteed flexible.
>
>What's with the lights? Can you set them to come on in
>whatever pattern you want, to help with a layout? That
>would be exciting.

Yes, I believe the behaviors you see (if you watch the videos,
they show a wide range of behaviors, including Tenori-On -like
behavior) are simply programmed in Max.

>The FAQ say it does support MIDI in software (OS X and XP).

I think that means they have a Max module that spits out
MIDI, that they'll share with you if you want it.

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

This is correct. But i want to stress that Wilson proposes more than one layout for even the same tuning.
With an ET or EDO, one can interpret the scale as having more than one generator, each can result in a different layout. This is convenient and accents the actual material one is using. With a constant structure ( or PB) you can also look at the tuning in terms of being different variable linear series, hence generating different layouts. Like i have mentioned i have used multiple layouts over the years with even the same tuning. I will admit that his keyboard work is, at least for me the hardiest to grasp, as far as putting into words.

Carl Lumma wrote:
>
>
> >
> >According to my conjecture, yes.
>
> On a typical Wilson-like keyboard, the width of the octave
> does not change from 31 to 53.
>
>
>
> -- 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

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

It was for this reason that Wilson was also advocating 31 ET at the time. Besides Holland there was Webster College in St. Louis which was promoting 31. His purpose was to strengthen existing movements as opposed to introduce newer opposing ones. Before this he had attempted to do the same thing with Partch. ( he did the diagrams for Genesis as well as helping with the construction of the quadraladis reversum. and the flute used in delusion was a gift to harry from him.

Even with the development of the Eikosany, he took pains to show its relationship with the diamond. Somewhere in Genesis HP did a chart of all the harmonic triads in the diamond. Wilson has mentioned to me that he believes this chart might have had a subconscious influence on him, and that HP can quite close to discovering the eikosany himself, if only he would have seen it in terms of products. It was probably his work with Chalmers looking for small pitch systems that had multiple meanings that lead to seeing this set in this way. SO i would say that Wilson has always seen his work as being interrelated to that of others. not to say the implications of those have confined him there. There is a desire to build upon the historical models, not obscure or replace them.

Carl Lumma wrote:
>
> >http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/instrum.html > <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ehuygensf/instrum.html>
> >
> >Not hexagonal, but getting on that way. Although by 1970
> >Wilson would have had priority.
>
> Wilson and Fokker were corresponding in 1970, and maybe
> earlier.
>
> -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

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

well so did general motors who CEO was a major supporter of Hitler on his way up!

Carl Lumma wrote:
>
> At 09:35 AM 9/22/2007, you wrote:
> >At 08:27 AM 9/22/2007, you wrote:
> >>Fokker's was like the Bosanquet upside down. He developed his during > the
> >>war to "hide" that he was a nuclear Physicist from the nazis.
> >
> >Sorry, you said *from* the Nazis. Yes, the Wikipedia entry
> >agrees. Whew.
> >
> >I didn't know he was such an accomplished physicist.
> >
> >Heh, his cousin was Anthony Fokker, a.k.a. "The Flying Dutchman"!
> >
> >-Carl
>
> But Anthony did sell planes to the Germans in WWI. Especially,
> the Red Baron flew a Fokker.
>
> Ok, enough of the history. -C.
>
> -- 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

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

i am commenting on metatuning about such related matters

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

Carl Lumma wrote:
>>Once you've set the size and shape of the keys, what else is >>there to change?
> > As you can see, octaves on this keyboard are 4ths.

I don't know what that means. Octaves are octaves and fourths are fourths. And any resonable mapping is going to make the 12 note scale compact because of all the duplication.

The think is that they made a point of saying that the octaves are small. That chimes with my experience of the Ztar, where small octaves make it a lot easier to play chords with one hand. Maybe guitarists and accordion players would recognize this as well.

>>>try them, and in fact, use them for years. Probably there
>>>are valid methods for playing all of them well.
>>
>>Maybe, but I used the Ztar for years and now I'm sharing my >>wisdom. The 5-fret octave mapping was easy to get use to >>and easy to re-learn after a few years hiatus. It wasn't by >>any means the first one I thought of.
> > What mapping is that?

In 31-equal,

|| 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 ...
|| 5 11 17 23 29 5 11 17 23 29 5 11 17 23 29 ...
|| 4 10 16 22 28 4 10 16 22 28 4 10 16 22 28 ...
|| 3 9 15 21 27 3 9 15 21 27 3 9 15 21 27 ...
|| 2 8 14 20 26 2 8 14 20 26 2 8 14 20 26 ...
|| 1 7 13 19 25 1 7 13 19 25 1 7 13 19 25 ...

In decimal notation,

|| 1^ 3^ 5^ 7^ 9^ 1^ 3^ 5^ 7^ 9^ 1^ 3^ 5^ 7^ 9^ ...
|| 1 3 5 7 9 1 3 5 7 9 1 3 5 7 9 ...
|| 1v 3v 5v 7v 9v 1v 3v 5v 7v 9v 1v 3v 5v 7v 9v ...
|| 0^ 2^ 4^ 6^ 8^ 0^ 2^ 4^ 6^ 8^ 0^ 2^ 4^ 6^ 8^ ...
|| 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 ...
|| 0v 2v 4v 6v 8v 0v 2v 4v 6v 8v 0v 2v 4v 6v 8v ...

>>>>A Bosanquet layout usually copies the 7 white keys in a row, >>>>and adds other keys above or below them. That would be most >>>>efficient for 7x7=49 keys. As it was originally designed >>>>for 53, that's fairly logical. But apply it to 31 and the >>>>octaves are too wide. Apply it to 19 and they're way too wide.
>>>
>>>They are??
>>
>>According to my conjecture, yes.
> > On a typical Wilson-like keyboard, the width of the octave
> does not change from 31 to 53.

Yes. But, eugh, the number of notes does. If you keep the octaves small the complexity's going to splurge out in another direction. So if you want to use all intervals there's a trade-off between the span and the number of notes. With 53 notes a 7 key octave makes sense but with 19 notes it could be much smaller.

You *could* still use small octaves for big scales if all you want is simple scales with transpositions, and no duplication of notes.

>>>>>Made to order, with OSC (not MIDI). $500 for 8x8, available now.
>>>>
>>>>Not as exciting but nice to know it's there.
>>>
>>>It's exciting if you want a lambdoma keyboard.
>>
>>Oh, maybe. It doesn't look as nice and isn't specifically >>designed as a musical instrument. But it's much cheaper >>(check that exchange rate!) and guaranteed flexible.
>>
>>What's with the lights? Can you set them to come on in >>whatever pattern you want, to help with a layout? That >>would be exciting.
> > Yes, I believe the behaviors you see (if you watch the videos,
> they show a wide range of behaviors, including Tenori-On -like
> behavior) are simply programmed in Max.

*They* have videos? The lights are controlled by the computer, anyway. Which is pretty damn good for a hyper-generalized, square-array keyboard. Did anybody want one of them?

>>The FAQ say it does support MIDI in software (OS X and XP).
> > I think that means they have a Max module that spits out
> MIDI, that they'll share with you if you want it.

Dunno, they use Max for some things, but you can use MIDI with other things. They say all the software's free which it can't be if it requires Max. But they say the runtime's free, so perhaps they're using inconsistent meanings of "free". Also they don't say the OSC isn't with Max as well. But I'm sure it'll be possible to hack something.

Graham

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

You are right about simple scales. This is why a different layout of a tuning can be useful. In the case of 31, your template can assure that the material you are going to use most is close by horizontally and still have close octaves. Close octaves are good also when you have tuned bars and pipes. where each note takes up more space. but here you can't go too deep cause it is hard to reach far back.

Graham Breed wrote:
>
>
> Yes. But, eugh, the number of notes does. If you keep the
> octaves small the complexity's going to splurge out in
> another direction. So if you want to use all intervals
> there's a trade-off between the span and the number of
> notes. With 53 notes a 7 key octave makes sense but with 19
> notes it could be much smaller.
>
> You *could* still use small octaves for big scales if all
> you want is simple scales with transpositions, and no
> duplication of notes.
>
>
> Graham
>
> -- 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

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

Graham wrote...

[Axis]

>>>Once you've set the size and shape of the keys, what else is
>>>there to change?
>>
>> As you can see, octaves on this keyboard are 4ths.
>
>I don't know what that means. Octaves are octaves and
>fourths are fourths.

As in, separated by only 2 keys.

>The think is that they made a point of saying that the
>octaves are small. That chimes with my experience of the
>Ztar, where small octaves make it a lot easier to play
>chords with one hand. Maybe guitarists and accordion
>players would recognize this as well.

If you watched the video, you can play triads with one
finger.

>>>Maybe, but I used the Ztar for years and now I'm sharing my
>>>wisdom. The 5-fret octave mapping was easy to get use to
>>>and easy to re-learn after a few years hiatus. It wasn't by
>>>any means the first one I thought of.
>>
>> What mapping is that?
>
>In 31-equal,
>
>|| 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 ...
>|| 5 11 17 23 29 5 11 17 23 29 5 11 17 23 29 ...
>|| 4 10 16 22 28 4 10 16 22 28 4 10 16 22 28 ...
>|| 3 9 15 21 27 3 9 15 21 27 3 9 15 21 27 ...
>|| 2 8 14 20 26 2 8 14 20 26 2 8 14 20 26 ...
>|| 1 7 13 19 25 1 7 13 19 25 1 7 13 19 25 ...

That dose look good.

[Monome]

>>>>>>Made to order, with OSC (not MIDI). $500 for 8x8, available now.
//
>>>What's with the lights? Can you set them to come on in
>>>whatever pattern you want, to help with a layout? That
>>>would be exciting.
>>
>> Yes, I believe the behaviors you see (if you watch the videos,
>> they show a wide range of behaviors, including Tenori-On -like
>> behavior) are simply programmed in Max.
>
>*They* have videos? The lights are controlled by the
>computer, anyway. Which is pretty damn good for a
>hyper-generalized, square-array keyboard. Did anybody want
>one of them?

I'm thinking about it. The price is right.

>>>The FAQ say it does support MIDI in software (OS X and XP).
>>
>> I think that means they have a Max module that spits out
>> MIDI, that they'll share with you if you want it.
>
>Dunno, they use Max for some things, but you can use MIDI
>with other things.

There's no MIDI on the device as far as I know.

-Carl

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

Carl Lumma wrote:
> Graham wrote...
> > [Axis]

>>>As you can see, octaves on this keyboard are 4ths.
>>
>>I don't know what that means. Octaves are octaves and >>fourths are fourths.
> > As in, separated by only 2 keys.

Okay. 3 steps, which fits my almost-square 3x4. If you extended it to 19 notes, the octave would be 4 steps.

>>The think is that they made a point of saying that the >>octaves are small. That chimes with my experience of the >>Ztar, where small octaves make it a lot easier to play >>chords with one hand. Maybe guitarists and accordion >>players would recognize this as well.
> > If you watched the video, you can play triads with one
> finger.

That's obvious from the layout, which is specifically designed around those chords. It's fine if you only want to play triads in root position. If so, you can quite happily set a halberstadt up with one chord per key.

> [Monome]

>>>>The FAQ say it does support MIDI in software (OS X and XP).
>>>
>>>I think that means they have a Max module that spits out
>>>MIDI, that they'll share with you if you want it.
>>
>>Dunno, they use Max for some things, but you can use MIDI >>with other things.
> > There's no MIDI on the device as far as I know.

http://wiki.monome.org/view/MonomeSerial

I downloaded the OS X source code but only looked at the filenames. It's some kind of C. The connection is USB.

Graham

🔗threesixesinarow <CACCOLA@...>

>> http://tinyurl.com/yptty9 (Allan, Reed Organs in England)

> Hey, do you think any of these photos may be in the public
> domain? I think I've seen at least one of them in Partch's
> book, or somewhere like that.

Science & Society has copyright notices on the ones credited
to them, but then they put them on old patents too.

http://tinyurl.com/ypt8yu (Bosanquet keyboard)
http://tinyurl.com/2gt573 (Brown harmonium)
http://tinyurl.com/yqwnln (Wheatstone telegraph)

There are plenty of old diagrams though.

http://name.umdl.umich.edu/1980183.0001.001 p.54-63
(Thompson, Poole, Bosanquet, Brown)
http://tinyurl.com/ysvmzq (White #3)

>> United States Patent 5741990 April 21, 1998

> I've given up reading patents. They're intentionally vague,
> and the particulars often change by the time the product is
> finished.

They can be pretty funny in context, but the same is true just
referring to pictures or even less. Look at what gets written
about all the famous ones for pianos.

Clark

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

At 07:13 AM 9/23/2007, you wrote:
>Carl Lumma wrote:
>> Graham wrote...
>>
>> [Axis]
>
>>>>As you can see, octaves on this keyboard are 4ths.
>>>
>>>I don't know what that means. Octaves are octaves and
>>>fourths are fourths.
>>
>> As in, separated by only 2 keys.
>
>Okay. 3 steps, which fits my almost-square 3x4. If you
>extended it to 19 notes, the octave would be 4 steps.

With the mapping they're using, the octave would be a lot
farther away than that.

>> [Monome]
>
>>>>>The FAQ say it does support MIDI in software (OS X and XP).
>>>>
>>>>I think that means they have a Max module that spits out
>>>>MIDI, that they'll share with you if you want it.
>>>
>>>Dunno, they use Max for some things, but you can use MIDI
>>>with other things.
>>
>> There's no MIDI on the device as far as I know.
>
>http://wiki.monome.org/view/MonomeSerial
>
>I downloaded the OS X source code but only looked at the
>filenames. It's some kind of C. The connection is USB.

I thought OSC had to be over ethernet, but I guess you can
host it on top of other protocols.

-Carl

🔗Herman Miller <hmiller@...>

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Herman Miller <hmiller@...>

Graham Breed wrote:
> Herman Miller wrote:
>> Carl Lumma wrote:
> >>> With the mapping they're using, the octave would be a lot
>>> farther away than that.
>>
>> Not a lot farther, but a bit. Up four major thirds, down a minor third. >> Alternatively up five minor thirds, down a major third.
> > Right, I was counting "up a major third, down a minor third" > as a single step to the right. It looks that way on my > diagram, anyway :P
> > You know, a thought's struck me. Would this need a firmware > upgrade to fit 19 notes? I think maybe the duplicates would > be the same either way (81:80 equivalence). But in my > confused state I'm not sure.

It's not a meantone-based keyboard layout; the 12-ET version could be used as either an augmented or diminished keyboard. If you tuned it to 19-ET it would be either magic or hanson (minor thirds along one axis, major thirds on the other), and the octaves wouldn't be in the same places.