atonal harmony vs./in JI

>
>****This is really interesting, Chris, since I remember that when you
>posted your piece, which I really like by the way, some were saying
>that such music and Feldman *had* to be in 12-tET.
>
>There may be more *doubters* now... ??
>
>jp
>

Well, I think the main point is that originally, I was experimenting with
realizing Feldman/et al harmonies in, say, 5-limit or 7-limit JI.
compared to those results, I feel one may as well just use 12tet.

What the revelation was, is that these kinds of harmonies really require
the higher overtones (13+) to make them worth JI-izing.

cb

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., Christopher Bailey <cb202@c...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_2332.html#2332

> >
> >****This is really interesting, Chris, since I remember that when
you
> >posted your piece, which I really like by the way, some were saying
> >that such music and Feldman *had* to be in 12-tET.
> >
> >There may be more *doubters* now... ??
> >
> >jp
> >
>
> Well, I think the main point is that originally, I was
experimenting with
> realizing Feldman/et al harmonies in, say, 5-limit or 7-limit JI.
> compared to those results, I feel one may as well just use 12tet.
>
> What the revelation was, is that these kinds of harmonies really
require
> the higher overtones (13+) to make them worth JI-izing.
>
> cb

***Hi Chris!

Are you seriously saying that if you were to tune Feldman so that the
5-limit and 7-limit sonorities, when they occur, were Just, it really
wouldn't sound any different??

jp

What I am saying is that a lot of the really juicy harmonies that I
admire, *aren't* 5- and 7-limit. So I wouldn't try to realize the more
complex elements of the chord as 5-limit (or 7-limit) tones.

for example (again), C-E-Db. I wouldn't realize the Db as a 16/15, but
as a 17/16.

Or, C-Db-F#. Would probably use 16:17:22, not 1/1:16/15:45/32. Or even
1/1:16/15:7/5.

Unless the JI "buzz" is happening, I don't see the point of it. If you
just want something that sounds randomly "out of tune", then just use an
ET, or random intonation. . . . .

>
>***Hi Chris!
>
>Are you seriously saying that if you were to tune Feldman so that the
>5-limit and 7-limit sonorities, when they occur, were Just, it really
>wouldn't sound any different??
>
>jp
>
>--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., Christopher Bailey <cb202@c...> wrote:
>
>/makemicromusic/topicId_2332.html#2332

> >
> >****This is really interesting, Chris, since I remember that when
you
> >posted your piece, which I really like by the way, some were saying
> >that such music and Feldman *had* to be in 12-tET.
> >
> >There may be more *doubters* now... ??

> Well, I think the main point is that originally, I was
experimenting with
> realizing Feldman/et al harmonies in, say, 5-limit or 7-limit JI.
> compared to those results, I feel one may as well just use 12tet.
>
> What the revelation was, is that these kinds of harmonies really
require
> the higher overtones (13+) to make them worth JI-izing.
>
> cb

***From: Christopher Bailey******************

212-663-2515
http://music.columbia.edu/~chris

**********************************************

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., Christopher Bailey <cb202@c...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_2332.html#2349

> What I am saying is that a lot of the really juicy harmonies that I
> admire, *aren't* 5- and 7-limit. So I wouldn't try to realize
the more complex elements of the chord as 5-limit (or 7-limit) tones.
>

***True, but then again, many significant aspects of your piece, at
least the one you posted, *are...*

Take the very opening. Sounds like a 12-tET major third to me.

Surely that would sound a *lot* different in 5-limit just...

jp

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:

> > Well, I think the main point is that originally, I was
> experimenting with
> > realizing Feldman/et al harmonies in, say, 5-limit or 7-limit JI.
> > compared to those results, I feel one may as well just use 12tet.
> >
> > What the revelation was, is that these kinds of harmonies really
> require
> > the higher overtones (13+) to make them worth JI-izing.
> >
> > cb
>
> ***Hi Chris!
>
> Are you seriously saying that if you were to tune Feldman so that
the
> 5-limit and 7-limit sonorities, when they occur, were Just, it
really
> wouldn't sound any different??

i think he's talking about using a *prime* limit of 5 or 7 for all
the chords -- quite different from what i think you're thinking,
joseph. for example, the C Db E chord, he was thinking would be
1/1:16/15:5/4 (which has a prime limit of 5 but an odd limit of 75)
in just intontation, but then i suggested 1/1-17/16-5/4 or 16:17:20
(prime limit 17, odd limit 17) instead, and that led to his
breakthrough, at least in part . . .

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., Christopher Bailey <cb202@c...> wrote:

> Or, C-Db-F#. Would probably use 16:17:22,
intervallic odd limit = 17, otonal odd limit = 17

> not 1/1:16/15:45/32.
intervallic odd limit = 675, otonal odd limit = 675

> Or even
> 1/1:16/15:7/5.
intervallic odd limit = 21, otonal odd limit = 21

that suggests your ears are agreeing with the kinds of measures i use
for these things . . .

> Unless the JI "buzz" is happening, I don't see the point of it.

probably then the otonal limit is more relevant for you.

and yes, i agree with kraig that we can refine these things
beyond 'limits' -- but as a first cut, they get you in the ballpark --
and the previous correspondents brought them up.

please follow up to main tuning list, not here . . .