Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic 22 vs 17 vs 19EDO sound example

/makemicromusic/files/djtrancendance/sadness%20of%20anger%2022%20vs%2019%20vs%2017EDO.mp3

Same melody/harmony is all three scales...which one sounds best to you all?

-------------------------
Aaron>"I'll say that I agree that 17 is great, but it depends on what you're looking for. It's not strong in the 5/4 dept., but as you know it's good for neutral 3rds and 2nds (and thus neutral 6ths and 7ths),
which are interesting animals."

Right, you can't match up 12TET-like harmony due to things like the missing 5/4. My general argument is that 17TET is great so far as satisfying the two conflicting goals as "familiar/stable sounding like 12TET" and "something that sounds brand-spanking new and will get the attention of people who want something radically different".
The latter much because you can't write 12EDO-type music in 17EDO (thus musicians will have no choice but to make music that appeals at least somewhat to 'crazy tuning radicals'). :-D

But, admittedly, 19 and 22 EDO also have tons of fresh new options. So, in a major way, I'm betting 17EDOs distinct "soft" sound/tone will give it an advantage.

Though, in the end of the day, my goal is to get some tuning (17EDO or not....) that we can all bring up to, say, Fender, and ask them to make a
guitar based on, get samples of it being played up on youtube....and promote it until we have at least a handful of well known musicians actually trying it.

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

🔗Jake Freivald <jdfreivald@...>

Thanks for putting together the sample.

On 2/10/11, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
> /makemicromusic/files/djtrancendance/sadness%20of%20anger%2022%20vs%2019%20vs%2017EDO.mp3
>
> Same melody/harmony is all three scales...which one sounds best to you all?
>
> -------------------------
> Aaron>"I'll say that I agree that 17 is great, but it depends on what you're
> looking for. It's not strong in the 5/4 dept., but as you know it's good for
> neutral 3rds and 2nds (and thus neutral 6ths and 7ths),
> which are interesting animals."
>
>      Right, you can't match up 12TET-like harmony due to things like the
> missing 5/4. My general argument is that 17TET is great so far as
> satisfying the two conflicting goals as "familiar/stable sounding like
> 12TET" and "something that sounds brand-spanking new and will get the
> attention of people who want something radically different".
> The latter much because you can't write 12EDO-type music in 17EDO (thus
> musicians will have no choice but to make music that appeals at least
> somewhat to 'crazy tuning radicals'). :-D
>
>    But, admittedly, 19 and 22 EDO also have tons of fresh new options. So,
> in a major way, I'm betting 17EDOs distinct "soft" sound/tone will give it
> an advantage.
>
>
>    Though, in the end of the day, my goal is to get some tuning (17EDO or
> not....) that we can all bring up to, say, Fender, and ask them to make a
> guitar based on, get samples of it being played up on youtube....and
> promote it until we have at least a handful of well known musicians actually
> trying it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

🔗Jake Freivald <jdfreivald@...>

Sorry, hit "send" accidentally.

Thanks for putting together the sample.

The subject line and the song title are different: I'm guessing that
the MP3 contains 22 first, then 19, then 17.

I prefer the 19.

22 sounds very good, but more frenetic or anxious, and yes, my ears
still claim that it's a bit out of tune -- but it's a nice out of tune
that sounds a little like church bells or something.

The 17 sounds *way* out of tune to me, but a lot of that stems from
the 3rd bass note. (The same note is used in the bass as an upbeat
just before the 1-count.) If I try to block that out, the rest is
better, although still out of tune.

Regards,
Jake

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

I'd agree 19 too, but I might challenge your bass note or two in the 17
example.

There is another point I'd like to make.

While I understand what is going on here - the truth of the matter is that
you can't throw any arbitrary music into any arbitrary tuning. If you could
and it would all sound great we would have a lot less to talk about here.
And *if* (I don't know) this example was actually a 12 edo-ish progression /
melody then its pretty natural 19 will sound best.

So I think a better way to go would be to write *comparable* song in each
tuning that uses the strengths of each. After all the goal is to write good
*new* music.

Chris

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> /makemicromusic/files/djtrancendance/sadness%20of%20anger%2022%20vs%2019%20vs%2017EDO.mp3
>
> Same melody/harmony is all three scales...which one sounds best to you all?
>
>

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

🔗cityoftheasleep <igliashon@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> Same melody/harmony is all three scales...which one sounds best to you all?
>

What was the order? 22-17-19? I liked the middle one best, though they all sounded pretty horrendous to me.

> -------------------------
> Right, you can't match up 12TET-like harmony due to things like the missing 5/4.

Oh, but that is NOT the case. 17 sounds more like 12 than 19 does. In 12, we are used to a very pythagorean major 3rd--one that does not feel like a 5/4 at all, but is restless and active. In 17, we have an exaggeration of this, a sharper 3rd that is further from 5/4 but also a bit more "periodic", since it's closer to 14/11 (whereas 12's is closer to 19/15 or 24/19--I really do get a "buzz" from 17-EDO that I don't from 12, and I don't know what else but periodicity could be responsible). Anyway, 17 preserves the "restlessness" of 12-EDO, and just exaggerates it a bit more. 19 changes the mood entirely.

> My general argument is that 17TET is great so far as satisfying the two conflicting goals > as "familiar/stable sounding like 12TET" and "something that sounds brand-spanking
> new and will get the attention of people who want something radically different".
> The latter much because you can't write 12EDO-type music in 17EDO (thus musicians
> will have no choice but to make music that appeals at least somewhat to 'crazy tuning
> radicals'). :-D

LOL, we'll see what you think of the two 17-EDO tracks on my next EP, which should be ready for download in a week or two. They sound pretty tame, if you ask me.

> But, admittedly, 19 and 22 EDO also have tons of fresh new options. So, in a major
> way, I'm betting 17EDOs distinct "soft" sound/tone will give it an advantage.

I really don't think 22's in the running. Yes, it has better harmonies than either 19 or 17, but on the guitar, the learning curve is about twice as steep.

> Though, in the end of the day, my goal is to get some tuning (17EDO or not....) that we > can all bring up to, say, Fender, and ask them to make a
> guitar based on, get samples of it being played up on youtube....and promote it until we > have at least a handful of well known musicians actually trying it.

I think 19-EDO would probably end up winning the day, for one reason and one reason only: it is easier to sing in 19-EDO than it is in 17-EDO. Although musicians from the Middle East might beg to differ, since neutral 3rds and 2nds are in their melodic vocabulary. Heck, why not both? Guitarists like choices. 17 and 19 are both logical extensions of 12-EDO, with relatively gentle learning curves. I think 17-EDO would be killer for metal. Then again, maybe 24-EDO is more realistic--it's backwards-compatible with 12-EDO instruments, and it offers at least two excellent MOS alternatives to the diatonic scale: the 5L+4s "Island" scale that Mike B. is in love with, and the 3L+4s "Mohajira-ish" scale. Maybe it's a good "gateway drug"?

But sadly, I think there will have to be a demand before there is a supply. Until someone gets some mainstream visibility with an alternatively-fretted instrument, a big company like Fender is quite unlikely to start churning out xenguitars. In the meantime, at least Freenote Music sells 19-EDO guitar necks, and has a deal with G&L where you can get one of their necks on a G&L guitar for a respectable price as a custom order.

-Igs

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...>

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:50 PM, cityoftheasleep
<igliashon@...> wrote:
>
> Oh, but that is NOT the case. 17 sounds more like 12 than 19 does. In 12, we are used to a very pythagorean major 3rd--one that does not feel like a 5/4 at all, but is restless and active. In 17, we have an exaggeration of this, a sharper 3rd that is further from 5/4 but also a bit more "periodic", since it's closer to 14/11 (whereas 12's is closer to 19/15 or 24/19--I really do get a "buzz" from 17-EDO that I don't from 12, and I don't know what else but periodicity could be responsible). Anyway, 17 preserves the "restlessness" of 12-EDO, and just exaggerates it a bit more. 19 changes the mood entirely.

You don't think that 12-equal's major third sounds like 5/4? Do you
think that 15-equal's perfect fifth sounds like 3/2? In both cases
these intervals sound like the more "restless" versions of their just
counterparts, but they're still recognizable to me and probably
produce the right fundamental in each case if you were to test for it.
I believe 12-equal's major third produces a pretty strong and solid 1.

> LOL, we'll see what you think of the two 17-EDO tracks on my next EP, which should be ready for download in a week or two. They sound pretty tame, if you ask me.

Hell yeah!

> > Though, in the end of the day, my goal is to get some tuning (17EDO or not....) that we > can all bring up to, say, Fender, and ask them to make a
> > guitar based on, get samples of it being played up on youtube....and promote it until we > have at least a handful of well known musicians actually trying it.
>
> I think 19-EDO would probably end up winning the day, for one reason and one reason only: it is easier to sing in 19-EDO than it is in 17-EDO. Although musicians from the Middle East might beg to differ, since neutral 3rds and 2nds are in their melodic vocabulary. Heck, why not both? Guitarists like choices. 17 and 19 are both logical extensions of 12-EDO, with relatively gentle learning curves. I think 17-EDO would be killer for metal. Then again, maybe 24-EDO is more realistic--it's backwards-compatible with 12-EDO instruments, and it offers at least two excellent MOS alternatives to the diatonic scale: the 5L+4s "Island" scale that Mike B. is in love with, and the 3L+4s "Mohajira-ish" scale. Maybe it's a good "gateway drug"?

It's also a good gateway drug because lots of musicians can't play
much else. Sax players can learn to mess around in 24-tet without much
trouble. For them to mess around in 15-equal would probably be more of
a pain. And it's hard for a sax player to just buy a bunch of saxes
retuned to various equal temperaments, as saxophones are expensive.

24 also has some other interesting MOS's as well - the 8&16
"demolished" scale, for starters, is really cool. Perfect higher-limit
extension to the octatonic scale, at least in the sense that it's used
in expanded diatonic harmony. Would probably require a bit of getting
used to in terms of actually conceptualizing the whole scale.

-Mike

🔗cameron <misterbobro@...>

I think it's 22, 19, 17. The one in the middle sounds bad to me, like conventional 12-tET played out of tune. The last one sounds like it is hitting the wrong notes in the tuning. The first one sounds pretty consistent on its own terms, but the scalar material sounds "unnatural" for the tuning.

I think the original was concieved in 12-tET, and the importance of this example lies in illustrating what a bad idea it is to retune a 12-tET concept rather than work appropriately with the materials at hand.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> /makemicromusic/files/djtrancendance/sadness%20of%20anger%2022%20vs%2019%20vs%2017EDO.mp3
>
> Same melody/harmony is all three scales...which one sounds best to you all?
>
> -------------------------
> Aaron>"I'll say that I agree that 17 is great, but it depends on what you're looking for. It's not strong in the 5/4 dept., but as you know it's good for neutral 3rds and 2nds (and thus neutral 6ths and 7ths),
> which are interesting animals."
>
>      Right, you can't match up 12TET-like harmony due to things like the missing 5/4. My general argument is that 17TET is great so far as satisfying the two conflicting goals as "familiar/stable sounding like 12TET" and "something that sounds brand-spanking new and will get the attention of people who want something radically different".
> The latter much because you can't write 12EDO-type music in 17EDO (thus musicians will have no choice but to make music that appeals at least somewhat to 'crazy tuning radicals'). :-D
>
>    But, admittedly, 19 and 22 EDO also have tons of fresh new options. So, in a major way, I'm betting 17EDOs distinct "soft" sound/tone will give it an advantage.
>
>
>    Though, in the end of the day, my goal is to get some tuning (17EDO or not....) that we can all bring up to, say, Fender, and ask them to make a
> guitar based on, get samples of it being played up on youtube....and promote it until we have at least a handful of well known musicians actually trying it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

>"I think the original was concieved in 12-tET, and the importance of this
example lies in illustrating what a bad idea it is to retune a 12-tET
concept rather than work appropriately with the materials at hand. "
Actually, the original was in 19TET. But it was in a 12TET-like mode of it...

--- On Fri, 2/11/11, cameron <misterbobro@...> wrote:

From: cameron <misterbobro@...>
Subject: [MMM] Re: 22 vs 17 vs 19EDO sound example
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, February 11, 2011, 12:46 AM

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

> /makemicromusic/files/djtrancendance/sadness%20of%20anger%2022%20vs%2019%20vs%2017EDO.mp3

> Same melody/harmony is all three scales...which one sounds best to you all?

> -------------------------

> Aaron>"I'll say that I agree that 17 is great, but it depends on what you're looking for. It's not strong in the 5/4 dept., but as you know it's good for neutral 3rds and 2nds (and thus neutral 6ths and 7ths),

> which are interesting animals."

> Right, you can't match up 12TET-like harmony due to things like the missing 5/4. My general argument is that 17TET is great so far as satisfying the two conflicting goals as "familiar/stable sounding like 12TET" and "something that sounds brand-spanking new and will get the attention of people who want something radically different".

> The latter much because you can't write 12EDO-type music in 17EDO (thus musicians will have no choice but to make music that appeals at least somewhat to 'crazy tuning radicals'). :-D

> But, admittedly, 19 and 22 EDO also have tons of fresh new options. So, in a major way, I'm betting 17EDOs distinct "soft" sound/tone will give it an advantage.

> Though, in the end of the day, my goal is to get some tuning (17EDO or not....) that we can all bring up to, say, Fender, and ask them to make a

> guitar based on, get samples of it being played up on youtube....and promote it until we have at least a handful of well known musicians actually trying it.

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

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

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

Doh, I meant,

Note, if I'm reading the results correctly, 22TET failed miserably and
19TET edged out
17TET (though not by much). Also, perhaps it was my
mistake to use a scale that was basically a diatonic scale with an extra
tone (or two, depending on the scale used)...

--- On Fri, 2/11/11, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

From: Michael <djtrancendance@...>
Subject: Re: [MMM] Re: 22 vs 17 vs 19EDO sound example
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, February 11, 2011, 9:03 AM

Note, if I'm reading the results correctly, 22TET failed miserably and 19TET edged out 19TET (though not by much). Also, perhaps it was my mistake to use a scale that was basically a diatonic scale with an extra tone (or two, depending on the scale used)...

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