It's not just the scale, it's the context that counts.

Well, there you have it. The topic says it all, about why bad is not
necessarily "bad".

Oz.

--

✩ ✩ ✩
www.ozanyarman.com

Michael wrote:
> Carl>"Except the Pentra example doesn't have the bass."
> Fair point...I forgot to re-add the bass channel in the Pentra scale
> example...will do so soon and replace the old version.
>
>> "Can you provide the scales for Quadra and the Alltheworst examples in Scala
>> format?"
>
> Sure. I'll work on converting Quadra, but here is the "Alltheworst" scale in
> Scl format.
>
>
> ! E:\bad.scl
> !
> badscale
> 7
> !
> 1067/1000
> 117/100
> 59/40
> 823/500
> 347/200
> 909/500
> 2/1
>
> I'll re-post both the Scala files to the file section soon as work. For the
> record, although when I first made "Pentra" I thought it was a
> stronger/more-stable scale, upon looking back several independent times I'm
> pretty sure "Quadra" is the stronger scale.
>
>
> So I think comparing Quadra and The Bad Scale is a good analysis of "stable
> vs. unstable high-limit scales"...because both contain tons of similarly
> high-limit and un-12TET-like ratios...but
>
> A) Quadra focuses on using my more favorite sets of the higher IE 9 and
> 11-limit ratios and imperfect-fifths...
> A2) "badscale" focuses on my least favorite of the higher-limit dyads. Even on
> the rare occasions it hits a 7-limit dyad IE the 2 or 7/6's in the entire scale
> from any root, it makes the fifths around it bad enough to kill any sense of
> consonance (hopefully).
> B1) Quadra focuses or arranging the higher-limit ratios in an order so they
> align with the few lower-limit ratios in the scale to produce passable chords..
> B2)."Badscale" focussed on making sure any possible triads contain one to no
> decently low-limit dyads in possible triads to ensure chaos. :-D
>
>
> My "other" question is....how does my "badscale" compare in listening tests
> to, say, a scale based on the "golden mediant" method of achieving maximum
> dissonance?
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

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

Ozan>"Well, there you have it. The topic says it all, about why bad is not
necessarily "bad"."

My compositional argument still is...the more "bad" a scale is, the less
ways there are to make it sound good...but due to "diminishing marginal
returns"...there are always going to be at least a few usable options (chords or
otherwise) for the composer in any scale, no matter how "bad" that scale is.
Sure, you can use smart priming, tempo, sustain, phrasing...techniques to get
unstable sounding chords to sound more stable...but I'm pretty sure the process
would still be rather limited far as the range of emotions you could get from
the scale.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A great challenge, IMVHO, would be for someone to take my "bad" scale and make
a piece with as many unique chords in it as possible while making it sound
"stable"...which doesn't necessarily mean consonant but does mean
"non-chaotic/intelligent/well-planned"...kind of in the same way someone like
Stravinsky or Debussy does...

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

Is that a challenge? Who is up for it?

Oz.

--

✩ ✩ ✩
www.ozanyarman.com

Michael wrote:
> Ozan>"Well, there you have it. The topic says it all, about why bad is not
> necessarily "bad"."
>
> My compositional argument still is...the more "bad" a scale is, the less
> ways there are to make it sound good...but due to "diminishing marginal
> returns"...there are always going to be at least a few usable options (chords or
> otherwise) for the composer in any scale, no matter how "bad" that scale is.
> Sure, you can use smart priming, tempo, sustain, phrasing...techniques to get
> unstable sounding chords to sound more stable...but I'm pretty sure the process
> would still be rather limited far as the range of emotions you could get from
> the scale.
>
> A great challenge, IMVHO, would be for someone to take my "bad" scale and make
> a piece with as many unique chords in it as possible while making it sound
> "stable"...which doesn't necessarily mean consonant but does mean
> "non-chaotic/intelligent/well-planned"...kind of in the same way someone like
> Stravinsky or Debussy does...
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

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

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
> A great challenge, IMVHO, would be for someone to take my "bad" scale and make
> a piece with as many unique chords in it as possible while making it sound
> "stable"...which doesn't necessarily mean consonant but does mean
> "non-chaotic/intelligent/well-planned"...kind of in the same way someone like
> Stravinsky or Debussy does...

Challenge accepted! Now make with the scale.

-Igs

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Ozan Yarman <ozanyarman@...> wrote:
>
> Is that a challenge? Who is up for it?

I am.

-Igs

Me> A great challenge, IMVHO, would be for someone to take my "bad" scale and
make

> a piece with as many unique chords in it as possible while making it sound
> "stable"...which doesn't necessarily mean consonant but does mean
> "non-chaotic/intelligent/well-planned"...kind of in the same way someone like
> Stravinsky or Debussy does...

Igs>"Challenge accepted! Now make with the scale."

I had already posted the scale, but here it is again...

! E:\bad.scl
!
badscale
7
!
1067/1000
117/100
59/40
823/500
347/200
909/500
2/1

Now go ahead and try to compose something that does not sound really
ambiguous and spaced out.... :-D

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

Actually, I think with working at it a bit this I can find music that is
very melodic.

This is the raw improvisation - warts and all

http://micro.soonlabel.com/bad/bad-michaels.mp3

scala file I used in here http://micro.soonlabel.com/bad/

Chris

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

>
>
> Me> A great challenge, IMVHO, would be for someone to take my "bad" scale
> and
> make
>
> > a piece with as many unique chords in it as possible while making it
> sound
> > "stable"...which doesn't necessarily mean consonant but does mean
> > "non-chaotic/intelligent/well-planned"...kind of in the same way someone
> like
> > Stravinsky or Debussy does...
>
> Igs>"Challenge accepted! Now make with the scale."
>
> I had already posted the scale, but here it is again...
>
>
> ! E:\bad.scl
> !
> badscale
> 7
> !
> 1067/1000
> 117/100
> 59/40
> 823/500
> 347/200
> 909/500
> 2/1
>
> Now go ahead and try to compose something that does not sound really
> ambiguous and spaced out.... :-D
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

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

Chris posted....
http://micro.soonlabel.com/bad/bad-michaels.mp3

At 52-55 seconds, even I'll admit, it sounds startlingly melodic and well
planned. 1:24-1:27 has a similar effect as does around 1:45-1:48...and all of
said-above parts seem to have exactly the same strong/good mood that you managed
to "hack" out of my "bad scale". :-)

Meanwhile the rest, sounds to me like a blur...kind of like ocean waves
washing, not conveying any particular emotion but rather "predictable
ambiguity". There is also virtually no moody harmony or decipherable chords of
any sorts but the nasty ratios make it understandably (and purposefully) hard to
do that. :-D

I tried making my own piece with my "bad scale", but couldn't even manage to
make the second and seventh note work at all in stable-sounding melody. And
again, the mood sounded very much like the one in the parts that came across to
me as melodic in your song...really seem to go along with my theory that bad
scales have very limited moods: this one seems to just have an ambiguous mood
and the melodic mood we both ran into.

I will post my short piece using my "bad scale" soon. :-D

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

Mike,

I just finished a longer piece with the same tuning and honestly I like it. I'll post tomorrow since its time to wind down. A hint. Making pianoteq map to only white keys made a huge playability difference. 3rds mostly work. I'll post the score tomorrow as well. Thanks for the long response. I read it but replying in detail from my bed with the berry is madness. :)

Chris
*

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael <djtrancendance@...>
Sender: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 17:33:23
To: <MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [MMM] RESPONSE to Chris's piece with Michael's "bad scale" :-)

Chris posted....
http://micro.soonlabel.com/bad/bad-michaels.mp3

At 52-55 seconds, even I'll admit, it sounds startlingly melodic and well
planned. 1:24-1:27 has a similar effect as does around 1:45-1:48...and all of
said-above parts seem to have exactly the same strong/good mood that you managed
to "hack" out of my "bad scale". :-)

Meanwhile the rest, sounds to me like a blur...kind of like ocean waves
washing, not conveying any particular emotion but rather "predictable
ambiguity". There is also virtually no moody harmony or decipherable chords of
any sorts but the nasty ratios make it understandably (and purposefully) hard to
do that. :-D

I tried making my own piece with my "bad scale", but couldn't even manage to
make the second and seventh note work at all in stable-sounding melody. And
again, the mood sounded very much like the one in the parts that came across to
me as melodic in your song...really seem to go along with my theory that bad
scales have very limited moods: this one seems to just have an ambiguous mood
and the melodic mood we both ran into.

I will post my short piece using my "bad scale" soon. :-D

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

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

Sounds fabulously "in-tune" to me.

Oz.

--

✩ ✩ ✩
www.ozanyarman.com

Chris Vaisvil wrote:
> Actually, I think with working at it a bit this I can find music that is
> very melodic.
>
> This is the raw improvisation - warts and all
>
> http://micro.soonlabel.com/bad/bad-michaels.mp3
>
> scala file I used in here http://micro.soonlabel.com/bad/
>
>
> Chris
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Michael<djtrancendance@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Me> A great challenge, IMVHO, would be for someone to take my "bad" scale
>> and
>> make
>>
>>> a piece with as many unique chords in it as possible while making it
>> sound
>>> "stable"...which doesn't necessarily mean consonant but does mean
>>> "non-chaotic/intelligent/well-planned"...kind of in the same way someone
>> like
>>> Stravinsky or Debussy does...
>> Igs>"Challenge accepted! Now make with the scale."
>>
>> I had already posted the scale, but here it is again...
>>
>>
>> ! E:\bad.scl
>> !
>> badscale
>> 7
>> !
>> 1067/1000
>> 117/100
>> 59/40
>> 823/500
>> 347/200
>> 909/500
>> 2/1
>>
>> Now go ahead and try to compose something that does not sound really
>> ambiguous and spaced out.... :-D
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>

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