Michael's Challenge #2

Here's my endeavor. It's a 3-part improvisation focusing more on the melodically-expressive aspects of this tuning, since Chris V. has already masterfully demonstrated some of the best harmonic possibilities in this scale.

/makemicromusic/files/Igliashon%20Jones/Lurid%20Occlusion.mp3

I think the most challenging aspect of this scale was really its shape: it's built out of a few neutralish 2nds, a major 3rd, a small major 2nd, and a cluster of semitones of various sizes. That's 4(!) general categories of interval that all fall within the interval class of "2nd", making for a very uneven scale, which nevertheless revealed itself to me to be full of depth and mystery. I found it capable of great contrast--depending on where one is in the scale, the mood varies greatly.

For those interested, I mapped it to a keyboard using the nearest 12-equal semitones, making a scale of C Db Eb Fx G# A# B. I'd be happy to post a 12-equal version as well, in case anyone wants to compare.

-Igs

Sounds very good, and therefore, ruinous for any so-called
maximum/dissonance consonance theories pursued with recklessness. For
understandable reasons! No one among the newbies wants to seriously
consider the context and setting of the music, which involves much more
than just locking of chords to harmonic proportions. There is no
standard "in-tune" in the entire history of music-making.

Oz.

--

✩ ✩ ✩
www.ozanyarman.com

cityoftheasleep wrote:
> Here's my endeavor. It's a 3-part improvisation focusing more on the melodically-expressive aspects of this tuning, since Chris V. has already masterfully demonstrated some of the best harmonic possibilities in this scale.
>
> /makemicromusic/files/Igliashon%20Jones/Lurid%20Occlusion.mp3
>
> I think the most challenging aspect of this scale was really its shape: it's built out of a few neutralish 2nds, a major 3rd, a small major 2nd, and a cluster of semitones of various sizes. That's 4(!) general categories of interval that all fall within the interval class of "2nd", making for a very uneven scale, which nevertheless revealed itself to me to be full of depth and mystery. I found it capable of great contrast--depending on where one is in the scale, the mood varies greatly.
>
> For those interested, I mapped it to a keyboard using the nearest 12-equal semitones, making a scale of C Db Eb Fx G# A# B. I'd be happy to post a 12-equal version as well, in case anyone wants to compare.
>
> -Igs
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

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

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Ozan Yarman <ozanyarman@...> wrote:
>
> Sounds very good, and therefore, ruinous for any so-called
> maximum/dissonance consonance theories pursued with recklessness.

Um, no. Just because no one has said anything less positive does not mean we all agree it sounds good.

Just me being the exception is enough.

Oz.

--

✩ ✩ ✩
www.ozanyarman.com

genewardsmith wrote:
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Ozan Yarman<ozanyarman@...> wrote:
>> Sounds very good, and therefore, ruinous for any so-called
>> maximum/dissonance consonance theories pursued with recklessness.
>
> Um, no. Just because no one has said anything less positive does not mean we all agree it sounds good.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

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

I didn't get a chance to listen until now - I like the mood especially at
the beginning.
This is quite cool.

Chris

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 5:23 PM, cityoftheasleep <igliashon@...>wrote:

>
>
> Here's my endeavor. It's a 3-part improvisation focusing more on the
> melodically-expressive aspects of this tuning, since Chris V. has already
> masterfully demonstrated some of the best harmonic possibilities in this
> scale.
>
>
> /makemicromusic/files/Igliashon%20Jones/Lurid%20Occlusion.mp3
>
> I think the most challenging aspect of this scale was really its shape:
> it's built out of a few neutralish 2nds, a major 3rd, a small major 2nd, and
> a cluster of semitones of various sizes. That's 4(!) general categories of
> interval that all fall within the interval class of "2nd", making for a very
> uneven scale, which nevertheless revealed itself to me to be full of depth
> and mystery. I found it capable of great contrast--depending on where one is
> in the scale, the mood varies greatly.
>
> For those interested, I mapped it to a keyboard using the nearest 12-equal
> semitones, making a scale of C Db Eb Fx G# A# B. I'd be happy to post a
> 12-equal version as well, in case anyone wants to compare.
>
> -Igs
>
>
>

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

Chris>"I didn't get a chance to listen until now - I like the mood especially at
the beginning. This is quite cool."

Agreed...the beginning is the strong point. Also...the whole piece is quite
listenable...if (still) rather narrow in mood range to my ear (again, seems to
be a fundamental limitation of the scale).
And Igs, it seems you're the go-to guy for getting punch out of awkward scales.
And yes (Igs) my "bad" scale does still manage to have a "major third", if you
count around 21/17 as a major third. :-D

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

Hey all,

It's been a LONG time since I've chimed in, I've been lurking more and barely checking in.

But I just wanted to say that I played Ig's challenge piece over the Bose Wave Radio in my kitchen, coming out of my laptop. My daughter was playing with here dolls, talking to them, and listening. When it was finished she said "Well, that was cool!" She's 4 and a half!

What this means is that you've succeeded, Igs, congrats. Excellent choice of timbres; nothing too harsh....I enjoyed it myself. Nice to hear microtones in a "progressive club/IDM" context.

Can someone state ths scale again for me? I'm jumping into the middle of this thread w/o much context.

BTW, I should mention two pieces of exciting news: UnTwelve is now officially a non-for-profit, and our competition had 4 times the (legal) entries than it did last year, and 10 times the registrants!

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "cityoftheasleep" <igliashon@...> wrote:
>
> Here's my endeavor. It's a 3-part improvisation focusing more on the melodically-expressive aspects of this tuning, since Chris V. has already masterfully demonstrated some of the best harmonic possibilities in this scale.
>
> /makemicromusic/files/Igliashon%20Jones/Lurid%20Occlusion.mp3
>
> I think the most challenging aspect of this scale was really its shape: it's built out of a few neutralish 2nds, a major 3rd, a small major 2nd, and a cluster of semitones of various sizes. That's 4(!) general categories of interval that all fall within the interval class of "2nd", making for a very uneven scale, which nevertheless revealed itself to me to be full of depth and mystery. I found it capable of great contrast--depending on where one is in the scale, the mood varies greatly.
>
> For those interested, I mapped it to a keyboard using the nearest 12-equal semitones, making a scale of C Db Eb Fx G# A# B. I'd be happy to post a 12-equal version as well, in case anyone wants to compare.
>
> -Igs
>

Aaron>"But I just wanted to say that I played Ig's challenge piece over the
Bose Wave Radio in my kitchen, coming out of my laptop. My daughter was playing
with here dolls, talking to them, and listening. When it was finished she said
"Well, that was cool!" She's 4 and a half!"

Now that has really got me wondering WHY it's working. :-D

Not to say it's a bad thing but, granted it DOES work...it really seems to throw
Just Intonation, virtual pitch, and a whole bunch of other theories down the
drain so far as being anything near complete explanations.

It even seems to hint that, perhaps, too much dissonance can create a different
kind of consonance....and, even if I still think it sounds "ghastly"...such a
consonance may indeed be well received by the general public anyhow (and not
just hardcore microtonalists)!

-----------------------
Can someone state this scale again for me? I'm jumping into the middle of this
thread w/o much context.
Here you go... :-)

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

Note the insanely low number of low-limit dyads possible...
-----------------------------------------------

BTW Aaron, congrats on your choice of "sound test", you really can't get much
less pre-biased than a 4 1/2 year old!

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

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> Not to say it's a bad thing but, granted it DOES work...it really seems to throw
> Just Intonation, virtual pitch, and a whole bunch of other theories down the
> drain so far as being anything near complete explanations.

I'm not sure about that. I hear some pretty obvious 5-limit harmony
and modal stuff in this. Also, since when are you using "virtual
pitch" theories to devise scales?

-Mike

MikeB>"I'm not sure about that. I hear some pretty obvious 5-limit harmony and
modal stuff in this. Also, since when are you using "virtual pitch" theories to
devise scales?"

Funny, because unless you count the vague 16/13-ish interval as a major third
(IE allow 20-cent or so errors rounding to the nearest 5-limit interval)...there
is nothing technically 5-limit in here.

So (Mike B)...let me ask you this....looking at the below scale (even
assuming different roots used)...where are the 5-limit intervals you supposedly
hear?
If there is a 5-limit sound somewhere in there...it seems obviously not to be
directly implied by the dyads or any attempt at JI-derived pitch properties from
them...but perhaps some other unknown variable....

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

>"Also, since when are you using "virtual pitch" theories to devise scales?"
I'm not...but if you look at the dyads...I'm pretty sure you'll find nothing
which represents any low to mid segment of the harmonic series anything that
would point toward any sort of root. I would think it would be like trying to
derive a virtual pitch from a 13:16:19 triad....

_

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

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> MikeB>"I'm not sure about that. I hear some pretty obvious 5-limit harmony and
>
> modal stuff in this. Also, since when are you using "virtual pitch" theories to
> devise scales?"
>
> Funny, because unless you count the vague 16/13-ish interval as a major third
> (IE allow 20-cent or so errors rounding to the nearest 5-limit interval)...there
> is nothing technically 5-limit in here.

I'm not sure what the intervals are. When I listened to it, my brain
heard all kinds of pleasant modal stuff going on. I heard lydian
dominant, I heard phrygian, I heard lots of nice things that I'm not
supposed to say on here because it's taboo, so I said "5-limit" stuff
instead. I'm going by my ears.

> >"Also, since when are you using "virtual pitch" theories to devise scales?"
> I'm not...but if you look at the dyads...I'm pretty sure you'll find nothing
> which represents any low to mid segment of the harmonic series anything that
> would point toward any sort of root. I would think it would be like trying to
> derive a virtual pitch from a 13:16:19 triad....

13:16:19 sounds like a really flat major triad to me if I play it with
sines. Maybe in another context it would sound different, perhaps if
played after a more sharp-leaning major triad.

-Mike

I think it is important to note that Annika at 4.5 yrs is less likely to have a 12 tet bias. In fact I'd say that is about as genuine "I like micro" opinion as you'll ever get.

Besides Michael has a track record of coming up with likable tunings that are hard to explain with theory - well the tuning theory that I can grasp I'm referring to in part the popularity of my pieces in Michael's tunings.

Chris
*

I'm not sure who you're replying to here but I assume it's me.

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:07 PM, <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
>
> I think it is important to note that Annika at 4.5 yrs is less likely to have a 12 tet bias. In fact I'd say that is about as genuine "I like micro" opinion as you'll ever get.

I don't think that the perception of "phrygian" sonorities has
anything to do with a 12-tet bias. I think that one can appreciate the
sound of phrygian at 4.5 years old too.

> Besides Michael has a track record of coming up with likable tunings that are hard to explain with theory - well the tuning theory that I can grasp I'm referring to in part the popularity of my pieces in Michael's tunings.

He tried to come up with an "unusable" one here, I thought.

-Mike

MikeB>"I'm not sure what the intervals are. When I listened to it, my brain
heard all kinds of pleasant modal stuff going on. I heard lydian
dominant, I heard phrygian, I heard lots of nice things that I'm not supposed to
say on here because it's taboo"

Now here's the killer question (now that we both seem to agree the math isn't
5-limit, but the sound instead bears a feel like 5-limit)...why/how are you
hearing those "modes"?
After Aaron's post it really got me thinking...maybe the brain can, in fact,
assemble just about anything it wants out of intervals that are "too
dissonant"...almost in the same way I can interpret a cloud as a million
different beautiful shapes.

Now if I knew why I could maybe even, say, proceed to make many new "bad
scales" and get increasingly well-received results...my guess is the way to get
this sort of "alternative consonance" is not so simply as the "maximize dyadic
dissonance" method I'm currently using...

>"13:16:19 sounds like a really flat major triad to me if I play it with sines.
>Maybe in another context it would sound different, perhaps if played after a
>more sharp-leaning major triad."
I'm just saying, mathematically, that's about as "precise" as the scale gets IE
not very precise...and that most likely it's not simple-integer-ratio math that
explains what's going on, but something much more abstract...

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

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> MikeB>"I'm not sure what the intervals are. When I listened to it, my brain
>
> heard all kinds of pleasant modal stuff going on. I heard lydian
> dominant, I heard phrygian, I heard lots of nice things that I'm not supposed to
> say on here because it's taboo"
>
> Now here's the killer question (now that we both seem to agree the math isn't
> 5-limit, but the sound instead bears a feel like 5-limit)...why/how are you
> hearing those "modes"?

I guess this is non-standard jazz terminology here. If I hear a minor
chord with a b2 over the root being played, whether or not it's being
held harmonically or played as a melodic interval, I say that's a
"phrygian" sound. I suppose I should be saying, more properly, that
I'm hearing extended 5-limit harmony.

All seven of the diatonic modes can be represented as inversions of
the following linked 5-limit JI chord, compressed into an octave:

16:20:24:30:36:45:54

Or, more precisely, a "magic chord" tempered version of the above
where 81/80 vanishes. So when I say I'm hearing modal stuff, I'm
really saying that I hear extended 5-limit relationships.

-Mike

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:

> I'm not sure what the intervals are. When I listened to it, my brain
> heard all kinds of pleasant modal stuff going on. I heard lydian
> dominant, I heard phrygian, I heard lots of nice things that I'm not
> supposed to say on here because it's taboo, so I said "5-limit" stuff
> instead. I'm going by my ears.

I went by my ears also, and heard stuff that sounded off. But lots of things people like sounds off to me.

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:30 PM, genewardsmith
<genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what the intervals are. When I listened to it, my brain
> > heard all kinds of pleasant modal stuff going on. I heard lydian
> > dominant, I heard phrygian, I heard lots of nice things that I'm not
> > supposed to say on here because it's taboo, so I said "5-limit" stuff
> > instead. I'm going by my ears.
>
> I went by my ears also, and heard stuff that sounded off. But lots of things people like sounds off to me.

Oh, it definitely sounded "off" to me. But I still heard intelligible
5-limit harmony, same as with blackwood or whitewood, even though
those sound off. Although I didn't mind it being off, I thought that
added a really cool xenharmonic flavor to it.

-Mike

Chris>"Besides Michael has a track record of coming up with likable tunings
that are hard to explain with theory - well the tuning theory that I can grasp
I'm referring to in part the popularity of my pieces in Michael's tunings."

That's the weird thing. In my tunings I either typically go for (extreme
consonance and/or range of tonal color) or (extreme dissonance and/or lack of
range of tonal color).
And yet it seems EVEN (IE in this case) when I try to purposefully make
something extremely dissonant or "color-less"...I apparently run into a
different type of consonance.
The PHI-tunings were even stranger because they tried to achieve consonance
through repeating patterns while ignoring the "gold standard" of JI...and those
turned out extremely popular in your own (Chris's) recordings.

It seems (from my tunings) some of the larger questions are
A) Can dyadic dissonance produce a sort of "predictable ambiguity" type of
consonance or even the illusion of diatonic-like modes? (from my last two
tunings)
B) Can recurrent sequences and patterns (IE in my PHI and Silver scales) produce
a sense of stability despite containing huge levels of beating?
C) Does using inharmonic timbres hold at least part of the key to getting A or B
working (Igs seems to very strategically use timbre when applying my "bad"
tunings)...

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

And a fourth question
D) Is the human mind in fact locked to an internal diatonic schema that causes
even bizarre ratios like 16/13 to become rounded to the nearest diatonic mode
far as mood is concerned when used in composition (Mike B's old theory)?

________________________________
From: Michael <djtrancendance@...>
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, January 6, 2011 2:42:14 PM
Subject: Re: [MMM] Annika liked it; some news (was Re: Michael's Challenge #2)

Chris>"Besides Michael has a track record of coming up with likable tunings
that are hard to explain with theory - well the tuning theory that I can grasp
I'm referring to in part the popularity of my pieces in Michael's tunings."

That's the weird thing. In my tunings I either typically go for (extreme
consonance and/or range of tonal color) or (extreme dissonance and/or lack of
range of tonal color).
And yet it seems EVEN (IE in this case) when I try to purposefully make
something extremely dissonant or "color-less"...I apparently run into a
different type of consonance.
The PHI-tunings were even stranger because they tried to achieve consonance
through repeating patterns while ignoring the "gold standard" of JI...and those
turned out extremely popular in your own (Chris's) recordings.

It seems (from my tunings) some of the larger questions are
A) Can dyadic dissonance produce a sort of "predictable ambiguity" type of
consonance or even the illusion of diatonic-like modes? (from my last two
tunings)
B) Can recurrent sequences and patterns (IE in my PHI and Silver scales) produce

a sense of stability despite containing huge levels of beating?
C) Does using inharmonic timbres hold at least part of the key to getting A or B

working (Igs seems to very strategically use timbre when applying my "bad"
tunings)...

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

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

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> And a fourth question
> D) Is the human mind in fact locked to an internal diatonic schema that causes
> even bizarre ratios like 16/13 to become rounded to the nearest diatonic mode
> far as mood is concerned when used in composition (Mike B's old theory)?

That theory was actually something I got from Paul. I don't think it
holds anymore, since the 12-tet altered scale:

C Db Eb Fb Gb Ab Bb C

works over a C7 chord (without the fifth), and jazz guys have been
doing this for 100 years now. This is despite the fact that the 5:4 is
now a diminished fourth, not a major third. People also use the
octatonic scale over dom7 chords too.

I have since thrown that theory entirely away, and Paul also noted the
validity of the above example, although I'm not sure what his new
paradigm is.

But in all seriousness, shall we take this to tuning? Jon Szanto is
probably on his way to my place with a hunting knife now for posting
this kind of stuff here.

-Mike

I was just throwing out an observation.

And Michael has before failed to fail as it were. My hardest problems with
his tunings was trying to use inversions due to the irregularity of the
spacing of the notes. In fact surprisingly with this tuning I didn't feel
the need as there was significant harmonic variety.

Chris

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...>wrote:

>
>
> I'm not sure who you're replying to here but I assume it's me.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:07 PM, <chrisvaisvil@gmail.com<chrisvaisvil%40gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> > I think it is important to note that Annika at 4.5 yrs is less likely to
> have a 12 tet bias. In fact I'd say that is about as genuine "I like micro"
> opinion as you'll ever get.
>
> I don't think that the perception of "phrygian" sonorities has
> anything to do with a 12-tet bias. I think that one can appreciate the
> sound of phrygian at 4.5 years old too.
>
>
> > Besides Michael has a track record of coming up with likable tunings that
> are hard to explain with theory - well the tuning theory that I can grasp
> I'm referring to in part the popularity of my pieces in Michael's tunings.
>
> He tried to come up with an "unusable" one here, I thought.
>
> -Mike
>
>

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

Chris>"My hardest problems with his tunings was trying to use inversions due to
the irregularity of the spacing of the notes."

Irregular spacing is necessary to approximate all dyads in the scale from all
roots so precisely (or imprecisely...in the case of my "bad" scale) using a
relatively small number of notes.
Try to fit any of my scales into an evenly spaced TET...and you're talking at
least 53TET or so and most often much higher...

I'm eager to see what you think of the Dimension^2 12-tone scale in
composition (if you are willing to try it)...since it contains a higher variety
of possible dyads than anything I've made yet: including most of the 3,5,7,and
about half of the possible 11 limit dyads (IE my favorites in 11-limit), plus
the 22/15 from 15-limit: the only thing it's admittedly weak on...is 9-limit.

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

Hi Aaron, glad your little girl dug my tune! Though I have to warn you: this tuning is not FDA-approved for consumption by children, so I hope you won't hold Michael or me responsible for any adverse effects that may show up down the line (such as a complete disregard for normal harmonic conventions in later years).

In all seriousness, though: I've never had the opportunity to try out my music on developing minds, and I've always wondered how it would fare. It's great encouragement that at least one listener found it enjoyable!

-Igs

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "akjmicro" <aaron@...> wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> It's been a LONG time since I've chimed in, I've been lurking more and barely checking in.
>
> But I just wanted to say that I played Ig's challenge piece over the Bose Wave Radio in my kitchen, coming out of my laptop. My daughter was playing with here dolls, talking to them, and listening. When it was finished she said "Well, that was cool!" She's 4 and a half!
>
> What this means is that you've succeeded, Igs, congrats. Excellent choice of timbres; nothing too harsh....I enjoyed it myself. Nice to hear microtones in a "progressive club/IDM" context.
>
> Can someone state ths scale again for me? I'm jumping into the middle of this thread w/o much context.
>
> BTW, I should mention two pieces of exciting news: UnTwelve is now officially a non-for-profit, and our competition had 4 times the (legal) entries than it did last year, and 10 times the registrants!
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "cityoftheasleep" <igliashon@> wrote:
> >
> > Here's my endeavor. It's a 3-part improvisation focusing more on the melodically-expressive aspects of this tuning, since Chris V. has already masterfully demonstrated some of the best harmonic possibilities in this scale.
> >
> > /makemicromusic/files/Igliashon%20Jones/Lurid%20Occlusion.mp3
> >
> > I think the most challenging aspect of this scale was really its shape: it's built out of a few neutralish 2nds, a major 3rd, a small major 2nd, and a cluster of semitones of various sizes. That's 4(!) general categories of interval that all fall within the interval class of "2nd", making for a very uneven scale, which nevertheless revealed itself to me to be full of depth and mystery. I found it capable of great contrast--depending on where one is in the scale, the mood varies greatly.
> >
> > For those interested, I mapped it to a keyboard using the nearest 12-equal semitones, making a scale of C Db Eb Fx G# A# B. I'd be happy to post a 12-equal version as well, in case anyone wants to compare.
> >
> > -Igs
> >
>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:

> Oh, it definitely sounded "off" to me. But I still heard intelligible
> 5-limit harmony, same as with blackwood or whitewood, even though
> those sound off. Although I didn't mind it being off, I thought that
> added a really cool xenharmonic flavor to it.

Ah. To me, it starts to sound less intelligible when it goes off, and I like intelligible.

Slightly exaggareted. IMHO you can find such things maybe since bebop, that means after WW II.

Or try Debussy, Janacek, Skriabin or Stravinski, after 1911.

Daniel Forro

On 7 Jan 2011, at 6:12 AM, Mike Battaglia wrote:

> since the 12-tet altered scale:
>
> C Db Eb Fb Gb Ab Bb C
>
> works over a C7 chord (without the fifth), and jazz guys have been
> doing this for 100 years now.

On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Daniel Forró <dan.for@...> wrote:
>
> Slightly exaggareted. IMHO you can find such things maybe since
> bebop, that means after WW II.
>
> Or try Debussy, Janacek, Skriabin or Stravinski, after 1911.

OK, and 2011 - 1911 = 100...?

-Mike

100, but these gentlemen weren't jazz guys :-)

Daniel Forro

On 8 Jan 2011, at 1:21 AM, Mike Battaglia wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Daniel Forró <dan.for@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> Slightly exaggareted. IMHO you can find such things maybe since
>> bebop, that means after WW II.
>>
>> Or try Debussy, Janacek, Skriabin or Stravinski, after 1911.
>
> OK, and 2011 - 1911 = 100...?
>
> -Mike