Lo, How a Rose E'er Blooming

I've put up a version of a new piece, based on a 13th century German carol, and a well known hymn with the subject title. It's in 72 EDO, but chosen to approximate some just intervals. More information on my weblog: http://tinyurl.com/ybx9ffz

Prent Rodgers

At 04:27 PM 2/18/2010, you wrote:
>I've put up a version of a new piece, based on a 13th century German
>carol, and a well known hymn with the subject title. It's in 72 EDO,
>but chosen to approximate some just intervals. More information on my
>weblog: http://tinyurl.com/ybx9ffz
>
>Prent Rodgers

Hi Prent!

One of my favorite pieces of music (the original, that is).
You say 13th century here and 15th century on your blog.
Praetorius was 16-17th century. The tune may be older of
course... is it?

-Carl

Prent,

Very nice sounding -- thanks for pointing us to it. I enjoyed it! Is
this piece going on your CD this month? :-)

Jay

On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 00:27 +0000, prentrodgers wrote:
>
> I've put up a version of a new piece, based on a 13th century German
> carol, and a well known hymn with the subject title. It's in 72 EDO,
> but chosen to approximate some just intervals. More information on my
> weblog: http://tinyurl.com/ybx9ffz
>
> Prent Rodgers
>
>
>
>
>

Prent, this music is very pleasant. I like it a lot. Congratulations!

Oz.

✩ ✩ ✩
www.ozanyarman.com

On Feb 19, 2010, at 2:27 AM, prentrodgers wrote:

> I've put up a version of a new piece, based on a 13th century German
> carol, and a well known hymn with the subject title. It's in 72 EDO,
> but chosen to approximate some just intervals. More information on
> my weblog: http://tinyurl.com/ybx9ffz
>
> Prent Rodgers
>

PR,

Nice, as always. I seem to sense incremental growth in almost every piece of yours, either through the sophistication of the tuning moves, or the better sounding 'mixes', etc.

With your latest iteration of mallet ensembles, you know what I'd love to hear? I don't know enough about the Csound processing of the scores, but it would be killer if there could be one final pass before the score gets transformed into actual sound where a 'humanize' algorithm could be applied.

The thing that I hear is that in all this rhythmic motion, all the simultaneous attacks that fall together Really Do Fall Together - in a way that no 'natural' ensemble could do. I'm willing to bet if you could have just a few notes ghosting a hair before or after the beat (or unison stroke/attack), it would go a long way into the final breath of virtual performance. As it is, the rubato you have in this piece is really very well done. If we could only lose just a fraction of the totally quantized feel, it would be smashing.

But, you know, just IMHO. :)

Cheers,
Jon

Jon,
Thanks for listening. I do have a dial I can turn to add a random amount of delay to the start times by a few milliseconds. I'd already applied it to the marimba, but not the other mallet instruments. See if you like this version any better. I set it to "3". You get funny results with numbers like 10 or 11. This sounds more realistic to me. I'm always striving for that "fake but accurate" sound.

http://tinyurl.com/yknb6qu

Thanks also to Carl for pointing out that the original is a 15th century carol, not 13th. I suspect the date is for the melody, not the harmonization. My copy says: "Kirchengesang, Cologne, 1599".

Thanks Jay and Oz for listening.

Prent Rodgers
--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "jonszanto" <jszanto@...> wrote:
>
> PR,
>
>
>
> The thing that I hear is that in all this rhythmic motion, all the simultaneous attacks that fall together Really Do Fall Together - in a way that no 'natural' ensemble could do. I'm willing to bet if you could have just a few notes ghosting a hair before or after the beat (or unison stroke/attack), it would go a long way into the final breath of virtual performance. As it is, the rubato you have in this piece is really very well done. If we could only lose just a fraction of the totally quantized feel, it would be smashing.
>
> But, you know, just IMHO. :)
>
> Cheers,
> Jon
>

At 09:16 AM 2/19/2010, you wrote:
>Jon,
>Thanks for listening. I do have a dial I can turn to add a random
>amount of delay to the start times by a few milliseconds. I'd already
>applied it to the marimba, but not the other mallet instruments. See
>if you like this version any better. I set it to "3". You get funny
>results with numbers like 10 or 11. This sounds more realistic to me.
>I'm always striving for that "fake but accurate" sound.
>
>http://tinyurl.com/yknb6qu
>
>Thanks also to Carl for pointing out that the original is a 15th
>century carol, not 13th. I suspect the date is for the melody, not the
>harmonization. My copy says: "Kirchengesang, Cologne, 1599".

That would be 16th (almost 17th!) Century. :)

-Carl

I like it - sounds very much like a Christmas display.

So then this tuning scheme is a 72 EDO version of C major JI?

On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:16 PM, prentrodgers <prentrodgers@...>wrote:

>
>
> Jon,
> Thanks for listening. I do have a dial I can turn to add a random amount of
> delay to the start times by a few milliseconds. I'd already applied it to
> the marimba, but not the other mallet instruments. See if you like this
> version any better. I set it to "3". You get funny results with numbers like
> 10 or 11. This sounds more realistic to me. I'm always striving for that
> "fake but accurate" sound.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yknb6qu
>

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

Good point. But my copy says 15th century German carol and gives a date at the end of the 16th century. No idea why.
Prent

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:
>
> >harmonization. My copy says: "Kirchengesang, Cologne, 1599".
>
> That would be 16th (almost 17th!) Century. :)
>
> -Carl
>

Prent,

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "prentrodgers" <prentrodgers@...> wrote:
>See if you like this version any better. I set it to "3". You get funny results with numbers like 10 or 11. This sounds more realistic to me. I'm always striving for that "fake but accurate" sound.

Me like. In a way, it becomes almost another kind of 'predictability', with a tiny ripple on the 'simultaneous' attacks, but - again, for me - it really just gives it a less blocky, more natural feel to it. *Especially* with some of the fairly hard l/r panning, and in this case it adds more depth and 'fake' reality.

Let me/us know when it's available for download/purchase, I like this one.

Cheers,
Jon

Chris,
Thanks for listening. The notes are based on very low integer just ratios, based on trying to make consonant chords, without regard to melody. There are no held notes from one chord to another.

The tuning is 72 equal divisions of the octave using these notes:

C 1/1
D 10/9
D 9/8
E 5/4
F 4/3
F 25/18
G 3/2
A 5/3
A 27/16
B 16/9
B 9/5
B 15/8

Two D's depending on what part they play, two F's, two A's, three B's. It could be done with real just, but I'm spending time learning 72 EDO and that's what came out.

Prent Rodgers

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
>
> I like it - sounds very much like a Christmas display.
>
> So then this tuning scheme is a 72 EDO version of C major JI?
>
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:16 PM, prentrodgers <prentrodgers@...>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Jon,
> > Thanks for listening. I do have a dial I can turn to add a random amount of
> > delay to the start times by a few milliseconds. I'd already applied it to
> > the marimba, but not the other mallet instruments. See if you like this
> > version any better. I set it to "3". You get funny results with numbers like
> > 10 or 11. This sounds more realistic to me. I'm always striving for that
> > "fake but accurate" sound.
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/yknb6qu
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>