Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic New work in progress

This is the first half of "Waterloo Rag", an original of mine. (2.1 Mb MP3 file, 128 kbps @ 44.1 kHz, 2 min 15 sec.)

WARNING: I'm having trouble getting the recording levels right using the software I got, and they sound really loud on playback, at least to me, so you might want to turn your sound down first, then play. It's also clips a bit, but that might be my soundcard, not the recording itself.

I've only gotten as far as the very beginning of the Trio section. It's really more of a stride piece than ragtime. I'm planning on 12- and 16-bar blues/boogie-woogie progressions in the parallel F major key if/when I get it written, and then I have to add right-hand improvisation. When I publish the finished version, please do delete that which I have here for download.

The tuning is an 72-edo approximation of 11-limit JI, but this would be just as easily played in 31-tone extended meantone. It's tonal in the conventional sense, but I use enharmonic progressions and only chromatic, with 7-limit "blues" chords here and there. You might also recognize the first four notes of Maqam as-Saba (the notes F Gd Ab Bbb) at one point, if you're familiar with Arabic and Turkish music.

Waterloo, by the way, is the original name of Austin, Texas.

Enjoy, and hopefully I'll have the whole thing finished and recorded before too long. ~D.

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

The link... it no work for me. -Carl

At 10:34 PM 7/20/2008, you wrote:
>This is the first half of "Waterloo Rag", an original of mine. (2.1 Mb
>MP3 file, 128 kbps @ 44.1 kHz, 2 min 15 sec.)
>
>http://tinyurl.com/5wh3ju
>
>WARNING: I'm having trouble getting the recording levels right using the
>software I got, and they sound really loud on playback, at least to me,
>so you might want to turn your sound down first, then play. It's also
>clips a bit, but that might be my soundcard, not the recording itself.
>
>I've only gotten as far as the very beginning of the Trio section. It's
>really more of a stride piece than ragtime. I'm planning on 12- and
>16-bar blues/boogie-woogie progressions in the parallel F major key
>if/when I get it written, and then I have to add right-hand
>improvisation. When I publish the finished version, please do delete
>that which I have here for download.
>
>The tuning is an 72-edo approximation of 11-limit JI, but this would be
>just as easily played in 31-tone extended meantone. It's tonal in the
>conventional sense, but I use enharmonic progressions and only
>chromatic, with 7-limit "blues" chords here and there. You might also
>recognize the first four notes of Maqam as-Saba (the notes F Gd Ab Bbb)
>at one point, if you're familiar with Arabic and Turkish music.
>
>Waterloo, by the way, is the original name of Austin, Texas.
>
>Enjoy, and hopefully I'll have the whole thing finished and recorded
>before too long. ~D.
>

🔗Danny Wier <dawiertx@...>

Carl Lumma wrote:
> The link... it no work for me. -Carl
> I was afraid that would happen. Here's the list of my files; it's the last one on the list called "Waterloo Rag".

http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/dawier/

This should work. I hope. ~D.

> At 10:34 PM 7/20/2008, you wrote:
> >> This is the first half of "Waterloo Rag", an original of mine. (2.1 Mb >> MP3 file, 128 kbps @ 44.1 kHz, 2 min 15 sec.)
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/5wh3ju
>>
>> WARNING: I'm having trouble getting the recording levels right using the >> software I got, and they sound really loud on playback, at least to me, >> so you might want to turn your sound down first, then play. It's also >> clips a bit, but that might be my soundcard, not the recording itself.
>>
>> I've only gotten as far as the very beginning of the Trio section. It's >> really more of a stride piece than ragtime. I'm planning on 12- and >> 16-bar blues/boogie-woogie progressions in the parallel F major key >> if/when I get it written, and then I have to add right-hand >> improvisation. When I publish the finished version, please do delete >> that which I have here for download.
>>
>> The tuning is an 72-edo approximation of 11-limit JI, but this would be >> just as easily played in 31-tone extended meantone. It's tonal in the >> conventional sense, but I use enharmonic progressions and only >> chromatic, with 7-limit "blues" chords here and there. You might also >> recognize the first four notes of Maqam as-Saba (the notes F Gd Ab Bbb) >> at one point, if you're familiar with Arabic and Turkish music.
>>
>> Waterloo, by the way, is the original name of Austin, Texas.
>>
>> Enjoy, and hopefully I'll have the whole thing finished and recorded >> before too long. ~D.
>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

Wow, that blew my socks off! I'll be sure to remind Mike
to listen when he gets back from his retreat. Don't let
the comments go to your head, and don't stop working on it!
I'll save my questions until it's done. Unless you want
help with your levels problem.

-Carl

>>I was afraid that would happen. Here's the list of my files; it's the
>>last one on the list called "Waterloo Rag".
>>
>> http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/dawier/
>>
>>This should work. I hope. ~D.

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

Danny,

That was s-weeeet!!!

I'm in wholehearted agreement that this rocks. I'm a sucker for this
style anyway ((hyper-)Art Tatum, (hyper-)Oscar Peterson, etc.) It's a
perfect model of what can be done to extend familiar styles in
interesting ways with new tunings. This stands out as one of the best
things I've heard on the list to date....bravo!

I can't wait to hear what this becomes when finished, but I also want
to say that if you cut off the middle 'trio' section, it still works
as a finished whole, short and sweet. But I trust your instincts after
hearing that---more! more!

Any chance of a human performance, or at least applying a 'swinging'
humanize function (e.g. a gaussian function offset of time and attack
on each note) to liven it up? As it stands, it still works, but in a
kind of robot-aesthetical way. But that's fine with me still--I'm a
sucker for 'robot stride' and other neo-Nancarrow things that are
possible with MIDI technology--it's a whole avenue of my own musical
explorations.

What software did you use to create the piece/MIDI performance?

Best,
Aaron.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:
>
> Wow, that blew my socks off! I'll be sure to remind Mike
> to listen when he gets back from his retreat. Don't let
> the comments go to your head, and don't stop working on it!
> I'll save my questions until it's done. Unless you want
> help with your levels problem.
>
> -Carl
>
> >>I was afraid that would happen. Here's the list of my files; it's the
> >>last one on the list called "Waterloo Rag".
> >>
> >> http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/dawier/
> >>
> >>This should work. I hope. ~D.
>

🔗Rick McGowan <rick@...>

🔗Jon Szanto <jszanto@...>

Danny,

O, you r teh funneh! We can haz sirius piece nao?

(damn, I wish I could post a lolcat on this list!!)

For reals, that is great! I'll look forward to the entire piece, but
this really has a fine swagger, and is the kind of re-interpretation
of older styles that I really enjoy. While the expanded tuning is
quite obvious, it's use is completely subservient to the material, and
it doesn't come off as "oh, this must be a piece of Microtonal Music".

And I totally endorse the concept of fun in the music that gets made.
Far too often we end up in our complex, furrowed-brow modes, and this
one makes me want to order another beer or three!

Congrats, and please let us know as it comes along. I'm going to put
it through my 'real' audio system later tonight and crank it up, but I
really like the piano sound - if you feel like mentioning how it is
produced, I'd love to know (and apologies if you've mentioned that
before and I missed it...)

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Prent Rodgers <prentrodgers@...>

Best two minutes of music I've heard in a year. Keep it up. The
transition to the 3/4 is great! Wonderful chord changes. This is
masterful microtonal madness...

Prent Rodgers

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Danny Wier <dawiertx@...> wrote:
>
> This is the first half of "Waterloo Rag", an original of mine. (2.1 Mb
> MP3 file, 128 kbps @ 44.1 kHz, 2 min 15 sec.)
> http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/dawier/ look for Waterloo Rag (incomplete)
>

> Enjoy, and hopefully I'll have the whole thing finished and recorded
> before too long. ~D.
>

🔗aum <aum@...>

🔗Danny Wier <dawiertx@...>

I'll have to answer Dan, Carl (and Mike after he hears it), Aaron, Rick, Jon, Prent, Milan and anyone else I missed in one fell swoop - thanks for the compliments; I'll try my hardest to get the complete thing before too long.

As for a human performance - I WISH. First I'd need a 72-ET keyboard, or at least a 31-ET keyboard, which is way beyond my means right now, then I'd have to learn to play the thing.

I sequenced this in Noteworthy Composer 2 beta, which I actually paid for (still cheaper than Sibelius anyway), and I haven't learned how to use Rosegarden yet. I wrote the swung notes as quarter-eighth triplets, so it's a strict, mechanial 2:1 ratio, which I do not recommend for anything slower than 100 in cut time.

Anyway, this part took me about a week to compose, so pray I don't get long-term writer's block again. I'm taking a day off from composing today so I don't get burnout (I wrote something instead; it's on composing in 72-ET and it's in HTML format in my Yahoo! Briefcase: http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/dawier). ~D.

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

Danny wrote:
>I sequenced this in Noteworthy Composer 2 beta, which I actually paid
>for (still cheaper than Sibelius anyway), and I haven't learned how to
>use Rosegarden yet. I wrote the swung notes as quarter-eighth triplets,
>so it's a strict, mechanial 2:1 ratio, which I do not recommend for
>anything slower than 100 in cut time.

But what did you do about the pitches?

-Carl

🔗hstraub64 <straub@...>

🔗Danny Wier <dawiertx@...>

Carl Lumma wrote:
> Danny wrote:
> >> I sequenced this in Noteworthy Composer 2 beta, which I actually paid >> for (still cheaper than Sibelius anyway), and I haven't learned how to >> use Rosegarden yet. I wrote the swung notes as quarter-eighth triplets, >> so it's a strict, mechanial 2:1 ratio, which I do not recommend for >> anything slower than 100 in cut time.
>> >
> But what did you do about the pitches?

Yeah, the one important thing I forgot.

I put the piano on six or seven staffs set to the same number of MIDI channels, and at the beginning of each staff, I put a pitch bend, so each staff is permanently set to some number of moria (72-ET pitches) above or below 12-ET tuning. You can use any arrangement you want, but I used this (in cents): 0, -50, +17, -33, +33, -17, +50. The last of these is optional, since there's already a -50 staff.

Since there are 14-15 instrumental channels in MIDI, and you skip ch. 10 since it's a percussion channel (my Roland uses both 10 and 16), that lets me use only two instruments for a single MIDI file. That limits me to either solo piano, or guitar and bass, or piano and bass, or qanun and oud, etc.

~D.

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

Tx. -C.

Danny wrote:
>> But what did you do about the pitches?
>
>Yeah, the one important thing I forgot.
>
>I put the piano on six or seven staffs set to the same number of MIDI
>channels, and at the beginning of each staff, I put a pitch bend, so
>each staff is permanently set to some number of moria (72-ET pitches)
>above or below 12-ET tuning. You can use any arrangement you want, but I
>used this (in cents): 0, -50, +17, -33, +33, -17, +50. The last of these
>is optional, since there's already a -50 staff.
>
>Since there are 14-15 instrumental channels in MIDI, and you skip ch. 10
>since it's a percussion channel (my Roland uses both 10 and 16), that
>lets me use only two instruments for a single MIDI file. That limits me
>to either solo piano, or guitar and bass, or piano and bass, or qanun
>and oud, etc.
>
>~D.

🔗Danny Wier <dawiertx@...>

hstraub64 wrote:
> Might be a little slower . but yeah, sounds really great!
> Thanks, first of all; add your name to the list.

I have the tempo set at 120 bpm in 2/2 time, but it was originally 100-108 or something when I started. Since it's a MIDI sequence, the swung notes are going to sound mechanical, and a faster tempo would cover that up a bit. And stride is supposed to be played pretty fast, since a stride is a jazz rag, and a rag is vaguely a syncopated march. An example: Eubie Blake's "The Baltimore Todolo" (this guy on piano is good; who cares if it's 12-ET!): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ebl4bh7bfs . He's playing in about 100-120, but he does get loose with the tempo and rhythm, which you definitely want to do.

Though his performance of Scott Joplin's "Maple Leaf Rag" is a little _too_ fast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrPtS1aRdME (he takes over on piano from the first player, who plays it about right, IMO). I think he's just showing off here.

Programming rubato in a MIDI file can be a fun if not tedious process. Usually the latter. I'm not even sure exactly how to do it and not sound unauthentic. ~D.

🔗Jon Szanto <jszanto@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

>Though his performance of Scott Joplin's "Maple Leaf Rag" is a little
>_too_ fast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrPtS1aRdME (he takes over on
>piano from the first player, who plays it about right, IMO). I think
>he's just showing off here.

Joplin fought in vain against people playing his music too fast.

-Carl

🔗Jon Szanto <jszanto@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:
> Joplin fought in vain against people playing his music too fast.

I always play my music too fast. I'll never learn.

But I never play it too loud.

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Pete McRae <professorsidewinder@...>

Oh, now Jon...that's just wrong! [Glasgow accent]
Crank it!

--- Jon Szanto <jszanto@...> wrote:

> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma
> <carl@...> wrote:
> > Joplin fought in vain against people playing his
> music too fast.
>
> I always play my music too fast. I'll never learn.
>
> But I never play it too loud.
>
> Cheers,
> Jon
>
>

🔗Jon Szanto <jszanto@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Pete McRae
<professorsidewinder@...> wrote:
>
> Oh, now Jon...that's just wrong! [Glasgow accent]
> Crank it!

Aha, I suppose I wasn't clear: it isn't possible to play it *too* loud.

(well, actually, it is, but it makes for good copy...)

Cheers,
Jon