Re: [MMM] Manuel/Paul: last call for the Scala 22 I need...

Jon,

Type this:
equal 22
load/map two22
send

The four files with Paul's mappings are
erl22.kbm, erl22d.kbm, two22.kbm and two22b.kbm.
Do you think I need to rename them?
Generally, there are no scale files with EDO's
since it's easy to create them with the "equaltemp"
command.
I'm adding support for Paul's decatonic system to
the on-screen keyboard. Having played with that a little,
it makes it easier for me to understand it, and improvise
a bit, compared to using it on a regular keyboard.
Of course not being able to play with the fingers
quickly becomes frustrating.

Manuel

Manuel,

{you wrote...}
>Type this:
>equal 22
>load/map two22
>send

Ah, commands a software crafter could love (I haven't publicly thanked you retaining a command line interface, so here it is!). I will work with that and see what I get later tonight.

>The four files with Paul's mappings are erl22.kbm, erl22d.kbm, two22.kbm >and two22b.kbm. Do you think I need to rename them?

Wellll, that's up to you. They aren't the most intuitive names, but if one were to make every filename be a complete descriptor directory listings would be hideous. The main part of the problem is, for a new user, scrolling through hundreds of tunings and wondering "which one is the one I'd like?".

What would be very nice, albeit a lot of work, would be a scale/map file browswer, sort of like multi-column file lists. Since you already have the ability to embed comments in the file structure, it could scroll through the contents and show the file name in one column and the comment (description) in the other. Yes, it would take time to put good comments in there, but if the GTK toolkit could support this it would probably allow a quick 'find' function to look for a scale that said "Erlich 2 octave 22 with skipped e's".

But life is short, yes? :)

>Generally, there are no scale files with EDO's since it's easy to create >them with the "equaltemp" command.

Right, I'm slowly getting around to all the commands. Quite honestly I'm using it as a tuning database at the moment, and am leaving the other aspects of the program for later.

And again I say: thank you for a free program that does so much! Slap us if we complain too much!!

>I'm adding support for Paul's decatonic system to the on-screen keyboard. >Having played with that a little, it makes it easier for me to understand >it, and improvise a bit, compared to using it on a regular keyboard. Of >course not being able to play with the fingers quickly becomes frustrating.

So much in life does.

Cheers,
Jon (and thanks for the info...)

Yo Manuel!

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., manuel.op.de.coul@e... wrote:
> Type this:
> equal 22
> load/map two22
> send
>
> The four files with Paul's mappings are
> erl22.kbm, erl22d.kbm, two22.kbm and two22b.kbm.

Ta da! It worked, and I've got the DX11, TX802, and TX81z tuned up in
22tet.

What happens if I don't like the tuning? :)

Cheers,
Jon

>Ta da! It worked, and I've got the DX11, TX802, and TX81z tuned up in
>22tet.

Super.

>What happens if I don't like the tuning? :)

Blame Paul :)

Manuel

Jon wrote:
>What would be very nice, albeit a lot of work, would be a scale/map file
>browswer, sort of like multi-column file lists. Since you already have
the
>ability to embed comments in the file structure, it could scroll through
>the contents and show the file name in one column and the comment
>(description) in the other.

It would make the file browser even slower, but it's actually a
good idea for the DIR command. Only very little work. Thanks!

Manuel

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "Jonathan M. Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_2168.html#2183

> What would be very nice, albeit a lot of work, would be a scale/map
file
> browswer, sort of like multi-column file lists. Since you already
have the
> ability to embed comments in the file structure, it could scroll
through
> the contents and show the file name in one column and the comment
> (description) in the other. Yes, it would take time to put good
comments in
> there, but if the GTK toolkit could support this it would probably
allow a
> quick 'find' function to look for a scale that said "Erlich 2
octave 22
> with skipped e's".
>
> But life is short, yes? :)
>

***I suppose a simple Webpage describing the various files would be
possible, too. But there are an *incredible* number of files...
well over 1000 I believe, so that project *would* take some time, it
is true...

JP

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_2168.html#2189

> Yo Manuel!
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., manuel.op.de.coul@e... wrote:
> > Type this:
> > equal 22
> > load/map two22
> > send
> >
> > The four files with Paul's mappings are
> > erl22.kbm, erl22d.kbm, two22.kbm and two22b.kbm.
>
> Ta da! It worked, and I've got the DX11, TX802, and TX81z tuned up
in
> 22tet.
>
> What happens if I don't like the tuning? :)
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

***When *I* played around with this, it always "bothered" me that
there was a "dead" key and a note left out of the mapping... :)

JP

Joe,

{you wrote...}
>***When *I* played around with this, it always "bothered" me that there >was a "dead" key and a note left out of the mapping... :)

Heh. Not me! I love the oddity of that weird extra 'e', and in fact was turning it into part of the melodies. Kind of like 'found sound' tuning! Besides, it's a feature, not a bug...

Cheers,
Jon

The problem with mapping 22 over two octaves is that the same interval
becomes different sizes. I like that the fifth is a minor 9 ( an octave
would have been great)
the third a fifth
a second a third etc.

jpehrson2 wrote:

> --- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
>
> /makemicromusic/topicId_2168.html#2189
>
> > Yo Manuel!
> >
> > --- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., manuel.op.de.coul@e... wrote:
> > > Type this:
> > > equal 22
> > > load/map two22
> > > send
> > >
> > > The four files with Paul's mappings are
> > > erl22.kbm, erl22d.kbm, two22.kbm and two22b.kbm.
> >
> > Ta da! It worked, and I've got the DX11, TX802, and TX81z tuned up
> in
> > 22tet.
> >
> > What happens if I don't like the tuning? :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Jon
>
> ***When *I* played around with this, it always "bothered" me that
> there was a "dead" key and a note left out of the mapping... :)
>
> JP
>
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

KG,

{you wrote...}
>The problem with mapping 22 over two octaves is that the same interval >becomes different sizes. I like that the fifth is a minor 9 ( an octave >would have been great) the third a fifth a second a third etc.

Right. One thing I'm finding, as I take a completely unfamiliar scale and do a "laying on of the hands" to it, is that if there is a physical or contextual symmetry to it, my hands/ears combination starts finding things of interest to play. If I map in a linear fashion, where there is no symmetry to a keyboard, it seems to take longer to unfold places of interest.

In many ways, this is probably a very juvenile approach. But what I'm liking, in a complete 'discovery' mode, is looking at that same physical object (kbd) and now it is sounding veeery different than the last tuning - what happens when I play *this*?

If this were important, in terms of getting 'work done' or becoming an expert in a particular tuning, then I would be smart to use some analytical methods as well. For now, it is an aural playground.

And I'm getting more and more a certain feeling: I like the sand in my playground to not be an equally-tuned sand, but some set of tuned intervals sand...

Cheers,
Jon

"Jonathan M. Szanto" wrote:

>
>
> Right. One thing I'm finding, as I take a completely unfamiliar scale and
> do a "laying on of the hands" to it, is that if there is a physical or
> contextual symmetry to it, my hands/ears combination starts finding things
> of interest to play. If I map in a linear fashion, where there is no
> symmetry to a keyboard, it seems to take longer to unfold places of interest.

The mind and body work well together when given the chance!

>
>
> In many ways, this is probably a very juvenile approach.

I think it is the Corporeal approach!

> But what I'm
> liking, in a complete 'discovery' mode, is looking at that same physical
> object (kbd) and now it is sounding veeery different than the last tuning -
> what happens when I play *this*?

often patterns in one tuning will work in another especially if one is a subset
of the others. this explains how partch could use something that looked like
traditional music in notation and it work in his 41+2 tuning

>
> And I'm getting more and more a certain feeling: I like the sand in my
> playground to not be an equally-tuned sand, but some set of tuned intervals
> sand...

right off the bat you have these 22 tone scales
http://www.anaphoria.com/trans22.PDF
the 7 limit one on pages 1 and 2, listed as no.3 on page 3
with pages 5-8 with some of the useable scales including the enharmonic you were
using (here's some places you can modulate to).
i also have an electric bass here tuned to this scale left over from Jose
Garcia's Microtonal band of the 80's, Cypher.

Evangelina has been added to the end as a fourth which contains Canrights 12
tone scale.

There is also the one i used for years and plan to get back too known as
Pascal
or the 1-3-7-9-11-15 Eikosany but haven't seen you jump up and down wanting 30
hexanies so i recommend what i have seen you used!

Good job all in all with your list!

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:

> The problem with mapping 22 over two octaves is that the same
interval
> becomes different sizes.

not if you physically remove the e's from the keyboard (as steve
rezsutek did)

even if you don't go to such lengths, this is not really a problem,
rather it's a great boon, if you follow the logic in my paper.

there's no way i could improvise chord/melody stuff if the different
octaves didn't look the same -- and i suspect even jacky would be
able to do certain things more easily with this kind of setup. with a
straight mapping, jacky and others are more likely to approach the
keyboard in a different way and make different kinds of music with
it -- not necessarily better or worse, but undoubtedly different.

Paul,

{you wrote...}
>not if you physically remove the e's from the keyboard (as steve rezsutek did)

I know you aren't kidding, as you wouldn't have said it, but you're kidding, right? Someone had to *physically* remove the keys to mentally get around the problem??

Fascinating.

Me, I just took it in stride, but everyone is different.

>even if you don't go to such lengths, this is not really a problem, rather >it's a great boon, if you follow the logic in my paper.

We don't need no stinkin' papers! Your two sentence explanation a while back was all I needed; the ear can/will do the rest.

>there's no way i could improvise chord/melody stuff if the different >octaves didn't look the same -- and i suspect even jacky would be able to >do certain things more easily with this kind of setup. with a straight >mapping, jacky and others are more likely to approach the keyboard in a >different way and make different kinds of music with it -- not necessarily >better or worse, but undoubtedly different.

Yep. No two Partch instruments are 'attacked' the same way, so it behooves the composer in a certain tuning to become familiar enough with the tuning's panoply of possibilities, maybe on a theoretical level, to leap over the oddness of physical presentation.

Which doesn't have to be a hurdle at all, if your conceptual game is in order...

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "Jonathan M. Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> Paul,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >not if you physically remove the e's from the keyboard (as steve
rezsutek did)
>
> I know you aren't kidding, as you wouldn't have said it, but you're
> kidding, right? Someone had to *physically* remove the keys to
mentally get
> around the problem??

and moved the other keys to 'fill the hole', resulting in the hand
being able to grab a slightly larger interval. see the very bottom of
http://x31eq.com/instrum.htm

> Yep. No two Partch instruments are 'attacked' the same way, so it
behooves
> the composer in a certain tuning to become familiar enough with the
> tuning's panoply of possibilities, maybe on a theoretical level, to
leap
> over the oddness of physical presentation.

but i wasn't presenting this as a composer -- you and jacky were
*improvising* with this setup, right?

Paul,

{you wrote...}
>and moved the other keys to 'fill the hole', resulting in the hand being >able to grab a slightly larger interval. see the very bottom of >http://x31eq.com/instrum.htm

Yow! That is *very* different, indeed. I had NO idea that was what you were referring to, as you merely said "removed the e's". That full kbd of black and whites reminded me of my early days of practicing scales and arpeggios on mallet instruments: when you've been in the practice room for a few hours, and the eyes are glazing over, as you move up an down the 'kbd' the wooden bars tend to a melt into one, large plank.

Scary.

>but i wasn't presenting this as a composer -- you and jacky were >*improvising* with this setup, right?

Um, can of worms. Are improvising and composing mutually exclusive? I think not...

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "Jonathan M. Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

> >but i wasn't presenting this as a composer -- you and jacky were
> >*improvising* with this setup, right?
>
> Um, can of worms. Are improvising and composing mutually exclusive?
I think
> not...

exactly. which is why issues of keyboard layout *are* important . . .
the point i was trying to make to you. it sounded like you were
arguing the opposite, in saying that the composer ought to be able to
overcome these 'lowly performer' considerations.

P,

{you wrote...}
>exactly. which is why issues of keyboard layout *are* important . . . the >point i was trying to make to you. it sounded like you were arguing the >opposite, in saying that the composer ought to be able to overcome these >'lowly performer' considerations.

No, not what I meant. I meant that one person's conceptual hurdle is another person's field of delight. But I also think that a composer can "overcome" performance considerations, otherwise the technical level of composing for instruments would never have stretched what is possible.

And never, never, would I consider the performer "lowly". If nothing else, I have self-esteem! :)

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "paulerlich" <paul@s...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_2168.html#2261

>
> and moved the other keys to 'fill the hole', resulting in the hand
> being able to grab a slightly larger interval. see the very bottom
of
> http://x31eq.com/instrum.htm
>

***This gives me a "headache..." I guess you've got to be mainly
a "keyboard" player to get such a headache from it... :)

jp

>***This gives me a "headache..." I guess you've got to be mainly a >"keyboard" player to get such a headache from it... :)

Nope: who on Earth would put red text on a green background? Sheesh...

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "Jonathan M. Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

> And I'm getting more and more a certain feeling: I like the sand in my
> playground to not be an equally-tuned sand, but some set of tuned intervals
> sand...

All this theory is one big playground; there's lots of tuned sand to be tried.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "Jonathan M. Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

> And I'm getting more and more a certain feeling: I like the sand in
my
> playground to not be an equally-tuned sand, but some set of tuned
intervals
> sand...

hi jon -- two suggestions on this last point:

(1) there are about a million *subsets* of 22-equal with unequal
intervals;

(2) you should try my 22-tone *well-temperament* (manuel hopefully
can point you to that), which is unequal of course, and has indian
tendencies on the white keys and 7-limit tendencies on the black keys
(and again, one acoustical octave is mapped to two keyboard octaves).

Paul,

{you wrote...}
>hi jon -- two suggestions on this last point:

Excellent, let's look...

>(1) there are about a million *subsets* of 22-equal with unequal intervals;

OK, I'm going to provide unintended hilarity for the majority of people on the list(s) by virtue of my kindergarten-like question: Am I correct in assuming that what you mean is, for example, taking 15 notes out of the 22-equal set and using *only* those? Because if that isn't what you mean, I can't for the life of me figure out what you mean by "22-equal with unequal intervals". It's either 22 completely equal intervals, or it's not, right? Wouldn't, by this logic, mean that if I only played on the black keys of a piano, my subset of 12tet is now considered "unequal"?

Sorry, this must make me look *really, really* stupid!

>(2) you should try my 22-tone *well-temperament* (manuel hopefully can >point you to that), which is unequal of course, and has indian tendencies >on the white keys and 7-limit tendencies on the black keys (and again, one >acoustical octave is mapped to two keyboard octaves).

OK, after I've had more time with the 'plain' version. I haven't completely chucked it out the window after a few hours play... :)

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "Jonathan M. Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> Paul,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >hi jon -- two suggestions on this last point:
>
> Excellent, let's look...
>
> >(1) there are about a million *subsets* of 22-equal with unequal
intervals;
>
> OK, I'm going to provide unintended hilarity for the majority of
people on
> the list(s) by virtue of my kindergarten-like question: Am I
correct in
> assuming that what you mean is, for example, taking 15 notes out of
the
> 22-equal set and using *only* those?

right, or the 12-tone subsets i told you about.

> Because if that isn't what you mean, I
> can't for the life of me figure out what you mean by "22-equal with
unequal
> intervals".

note the word 'subset', with asterisks, above.

> It's either 22 completely equal intervals, or it's not, right?
> Wouldn't, by this logic, mean that if I only played on the black
keys of a
> piano, my subset of 12tet is now considered "unequal"?

you bet! perhaps even more so if the white keys aren't even there
(which is closer to what i'm suggesting, as you'd only be mapping a
*subset* of 22-equal to your keyboard, not *all* 22 notes.

Paul,

{you wrote...}
> > Am I correct in
> > assuming that what you mean is, for example, taking 15 notes out of
> > the 22-equal set and using *only* those?
>
>right, or the 12-tone subsets i told you about.

That's it? Really?

> > Because if that isn't what you mean, I
> > can't for the life of me figure out what you mean by "22-equal with
>unequal
> > intervals".
>
>note the word 'subset', with asterisks, above.

So all we're saying is that you tune 22 intervals within an octave. Everything you pull out of there is a subset, still considered 22.

Crap, I was expecting a revelation! When I sat/sit down to the kbd with those 22 pitches tuned up, it seems to me just plain PATENTLY OBVIOUS that I don't need to use them all, but therein is contained any special qualities of any subset. I can use 4 pitches, or 20. But it is all still 22.

And I guess the point is that if the number of equal steps is low, you can find things easily by ear and physical playing, but if the steps are many, you would have to pick carefully. So if I set up a 1200tET tuning, I could pick a real nice set of pitches to make a scale.

All of this, at some level, I have understood for a long time, and maybe it is so obvious to me that I thought we were talking about two different things...

> > It's either 22 completely equal intervals, or it's not, right?
> > Wouldn't, by this logic, mean that if I only played on the black
>keys of a
> > piano, my subset of 12tet is now considered "unequal"?
>
>you bet!

So you are saying it is equal temperament, but by choosing to skip some of the notes I now have an unequal temperament, or simply that the scale has unequal steps?

I have to say, the language is a problem. Glad I'm not a beginner...

Cheers,
Jon (who appreciates help in all forms)