Uncle Harry....again

Kraig wrote:

"may i point out that Partch used a 43 tone spectrum. He still
havefaired better
than those who used less."

Uncle Harry? Please. [jls rolls his eyes] What Harry did, or didn't do,
hasn't directly affected our Western branch of the ancient Sumerian
tradition one iota. He wrote some totally awesome works ("Castor &
Pollux" is a classic, IMO) so his place in the 20th century's Top Ten
Musical Iconoclasts is assured -- let's just not forget he wrote a lot
of horrible stuff as well.

His primary and most vital contribution was to compel a much-needed
dialogue among Western composers/musicians about the historical
importance of tuning in our system of music, but that fact didn't have a
thing to do with the number of tones he composed with.

Besides, Julian Carrillo used divisions up to 96. If more is better,
then he's kicked Harry to the curb. In fact, my vote goes to Gene Ward
Smith for Microtonal God. Congrats Gene, and be kind to us mortals.

"i really don'tthink we can tell where any of it might go."

On the contrary, it's not at all difficult to project how
"microtonality" will continue to develop inside the Western branch of
the ancient Sumerian tradition. Look behind you, through the past 4000
years to the present. See any patterns?

At 10:40 AM 10/26/2007, you wrote:
>let's just not forget he wrote a lot
>of horrible stuff as well.

Such as?

>His primary and most vital contribution was to compel a much-needed
>dialogue among Western composers/musicians about the historical
>importance of tuning in our system of music,

I see his overall artistic statement as much broader and
more significant than tuning alone. And Partch's tuning was
pushing forward, not calling the past.

>Besides, Julian Carrillo used divisions up to 96. If more is better,
>then he's kicked Harry to the curb. In fact, my vote goes to Gene Ward
>Smith for Microtonal God. Congrats Gene, and be kind to us mortals.

I never quite know what to make of these kinds of remarks from
you. Just how serious/sarcastic are you?

>"i really don'tthink we can tell where any of it might go."
>
>On the contrary, it's not at all difficult to project how
>"microtonality" will continue to develop inside the Western branch of
>the ancient Sumerian tradition. Look behind you, through the past 4000
>years to the present. See any patterns?

Why don't you enlighten us?

-Carl

my point being that it is not a good thing to decide things apriori. what matters is not how many tones one uses but how good themusic is.
practically has little to do with the history of music.there is nothing more impractical than an orchestra which is why theyalways needto be subsidized. On the other end of a few tones we havemany great traditions of music around the world. In the west. it sofarhas not been as fruitful

-----Original Message-----
From: J.Smith [mailto:jsmith9624@...]
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 01:40 PM
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [MMM] Uncle Harry....again

Kraig wrote:

"may i point out that Partch used a 43 tone spectrum. He still
havefaired better
than those who used less."

Uncle Harry? Please. [jls rolls his eyes] What Harry did, or didn't do,
hasn't directly affected our Western branch of the ancient Sumerian
tradition one iota. He wrote some totally awesome works ("Castor &
Pollux" is a classic, IMO) so his place in the 20th century's Top Ten
Musical Iconoclasts is assured -- let's just not forget he wrote a lot
of horrible stuff as well.

His primary and most vital contribution was to compel a much-needed
dialogue among Western composers/musicians about the historical
importance of tuning in our system of music, but that fact didn't have a
thing to do with the number of tones he composed with.

Besides, Julian Carrillo used divisions up to 96. If more is better,
then he's kicked Harry to the curb. In fact, my vote goes to Gene Ward
Smith for Microtonal God. Congrats Gene, and be kind to us mortals.

"i really don'tthink we can tell where any of it might go."

On the contrary, it's not at all difficult to project how
"microtonality" will continue to develop inside the Western branch of
the ancient Sumerian tradition. Look behind you, through the past 4000
years to the present. See any patterns?

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

I also find it conceited to associate itself with the sumerians. likemost things from this area of the world, it is not understood.

-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Lumma [mailto:carl@...]
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 11:33 PM
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MMM] Uncle Harry....again

At 10:40 AM 10/26/2007, you wrote:
>let's just not forget he wrote a lot
>of horrible stuff as well.

Such as?

>His primary and most vital contribution was to compel a much-needed
>dialogue among Western composers/musicians about the historical
>importance of tuning in our system of music,

I see his overall artistic statement as much broader and
more significant than tuning alone. And Partch's tuning was
pushing forward, not calling the past.

>Besides, Julian Carrillo used divisions up to 96. If more is better,
>then he's kicked Harry to the curb. In fact, my vote goes to Gene Ward
>Smith for Microtonal God. Congrats Gene, and be kind to us mortals.

I never quite know what to make of these kinds of remarks from
you. Just how serious/sarcastic are you?

>"i really don'tthink we can tell where any of it might go."
>
>On the contrary, it's not at all difficult to project how
>"microtonality" will continue to develop inside the Western branch of
>the ancient Sumerian tradition. Look behind you, through the past 4000
>years to the present. See any patterns?

Why don't you enlighten us?

-Carl

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