Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.

I just finished listening to most of the untwelve competition entries..
And all I can think is what a bunch of crap.
It’s all musically extremely uninteresting (at least to me and I’m sure to the general public as well) combined with the low production qualities and varying degrees of out of tune-ness.
It made me wonder (shake my head in disbelief even) how such a large group of largely intelligent people on these lists can be so extremely unproductive after such a long time.

Microtuning is supposed to do several things I think.
- Provide better sound quality due to synchronicity (timbres will not interfere as much / phase when 2 notes are in tune)
- Give interesting new musical possibilities / chords / melodies with a deeper or new “feel” or sound to them.
- And most importantly, tuning should give insight into the function of chords and progressions that normal music theory can’t. Which should make making musically interesting music easyer, not harder.

I’m not hearing any of the above benefits back in the untwelve competition.
I really think just about any music list or forum with the same amount of people holding a composition / music production competition for normal 12tet music would produce many more better sounding more musically enjoyable music.

So in my opinion, tuning research as far as it stands now on these lists, is not giving any overall advantage for making actual music, rather it’s a big disadvantage.
The disadvantage probably comes from many things, such as difficulty / extra work in tuning instruments, all the extra work in working out the tuning / ratios etc for all the notes which also severely complicates composition in most cases, the out of tune sound that most often results, etc.

So if tuning research isn’t generally at the point on these lists that it helps in music making, does it at least hold this promise for the future and are people here actively and productively researching tuning to achieve that goal?
Well, somewhat actively yes, but productively? I’d have to say no.
What I see is a whole lot of people sticking their head in the sand for what really needs to be done.
Some of the great errors in tuning practice are so incredibly apparent, but nobody seems to be doing any serious work in these directions.
The biggest example being common practice music tuning.
How can everybody on these lists just sit here work on all kinds of things, yet the most basic problem of how to tune common practice music best isn’t solved!
How can one expect to do difficult / complex things in tuning and get musical results when one doesn’t even understand the basics.
It just seems so obvious to me. Solve how to tune common practice music in Just Intonation, and you will lay the foundation for how music works and can experiment with more alternative tunings from there.
But somehow tuning common practice music to JI is very unpopular here. Why? Too difficult? Is the majority here a quitter?
I don’t think you can get around this one, I think it’s essential common practice music in JI it is to be truly solved before microtonal music will become practical for people to make better music (not worse music as is the case now).
I just wish more people would take it on.

I’m writing this very unpopular email in the hope it’s of help to some of you and to tuning research in general.
(not to troll Carl, I’m not writing this for attention or wish to get caught up in long discussion or flames)
I’m sure there’ll be many in disagreement with what I write, some with long toes will feel insulted (which is not my intention).
I hope if you feel the need to reply negatively, that you will write truly insulting emails etc. to me personally and not bother the whole list.

-Marcel

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

🔗jsmith9624@...

Well.

I must say, Marcel, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. However,
in a world of varied individuals -- with equally varied thoughts, means,
& goals -- many may not share your far-sighted vision of just exactly
what needs to be done *first* in microtonality, whether in theory or
practice.

It seems to me that should you feel so strongly (not to say obsessively)
about the importance of "solving" the "problem" of JI as it applies to
common practice in music, before anything else of note can proceed, then
your genius in this matter is all that's required to work it all out &
then apply to your own compositions -- thus conveniently lighting a path
for those of us still bemused and benighted.

I would point out, that theory nearly *always* lags behind practice.
There's a great deal to work out in practice -- a good many issues, I
think -- and common practice rules of engagement may not apply every
time. You'll have to find forgiveness in your heart for those who *like*
sand in their hair...

I agree that "production quality" varied quite a bit in the Un12
competition entries...musical quality as well. But it only goes to show
what you must expect from individuals from assorted backgrounds, with
assorted tools at hand (not everyone has wads of disposable currency to
throw at the latest high-end music production gear). Yet these good
folks still managed to create *something* both microtonal & musical.
That much (or perhaps all) of it isn't to your taste is irrelevant. They
stepped forward & created new music.

You sir, did not.

Regards,
jlsmith

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, <m.develde@...> wrote:
>
> ï»¿I just finished listening to most of the untwelve competition
entries..
> And all I can think is what a bunch of crap.
> Itâs all musically extremely uninteresting (at least to me and
Iâm sure to the general public as well) combined with the low
production qualities and varying degrees of out of tune-ness.
> It made me wonder (shake my head in disbelief even) how such a large
group of largely intelligent people on these lists can be so extremely
unproductive after such a long time.
>
> Microtuning is supposed to do several things I think.
> - Provide better sound quality due to synchronicity (timbres will not
interfere as much / phase when 2 notes are in tune)
> - Give interesting new musical possibilities / chords / melodies with
a deeper or new âfeelâ or sound to them.
> - And most importantly, tuning should give insight into the function
of chords and progressions that normal music theory canât. Which
should make making musically interesting music easyer, not harder.
>
> Iâm not hearing any of the above benefits back in the untwelve
competition.
> I really think just about any music list or forum with the same amount
of people holding a composition / music production competition for
normal 12tet music would produce many more better sounding more
musically enjoyable music.
>
> So in my opinion, tuning research as far as it stands now on these
lists, is not giving any overall advantage for making actual music,
rather itâs a big disadvantage.
> The disadvantage probably comes from many things, such as difficulty /
extra work in tuning instruments, all the extra work in working out the
tuning / ratios etc for all the notes which also severely complicates
composition in most cases, the out of tune sound that most often
results, etc.
>
> So if tuning research isnât generally at the point on these
lists that it helps in music making, does it at least hold this promise
for the future and are people here actively and productively researching
tuning to achieve that goal?
> Well, somewhat actively yes, but productively? Iâd have to say
no.
> What I see is a whole lot of people sticking their head in the sand
for what really needs to be done.
> Some of the great errors in tuning practice are so incredibly
apparent, but nobody seems to be doing any serious work in these
directions.
> The biggest example being common practice music tuning.
> How can everybody on these lists just sit here work on all kinds of
things, yet the most basic problem of how to tune common practice music
best isnât solved!
> How can one expect to do difficult / complex things in tuning and get
musical results when one doesnât even understand the basics.
> It just seems so obvious to me. Solve how to tune common practice
music in Just Intonation, and you will lay the foundation for how music
works and can experiment with more alternative tunings from there.
> But somehow tuning common practice music to JI is very unpopular here.
Why? Too difficult? Is the majority here a quitter?
> I donât think you can get around this one, I think itâs
essential common practice music in JI it is to be truly solved before
microtonal music will become practical for people to make better music
(not worse music as is the case now).
> I just wish more people would take it on.
>
> Iâm writing this very unpopular email in the hope itâs
of help to some of you and to tuning research in general.
> (not to troll Carl, Iâm not writing this for attention or wish
to get caught up in long discussion or flames)
> Iâm sure thereâll be many in disagreement with what I
write, some with long toes will feel insulted (which is not my
intention).
> I hope if you feel the need to reply negatively, that you will write
truly insulting emails etc. to me personally and not bother the whole
list.
>
> -Marcel
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

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

🔗jonszanto <jszanto@...>

🔗Daniel Forró <dan.for@...>

🔗Ozan Yarman <ozanyarman@...>

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗Dante Rosati <danterosati@...>

Chris I can't believe you're rising to the troll bait. You know who and what
he is, how could you possibly care what he thinks?

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>wrote:

>
>
> Marcel,
>
> I am deeply hurt. What was so terrible about my entry?
>
> I used the very best piano sound available and poured my heart into
> the composition.
>
> Please, please tell me what was so awful about it?
>
> Chris
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:20 PM, <m.develde@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I just finished listening to most of the untwelve competition entries..
> > And all I can think is what a bunch of crap.
> > It’s all musically extremely uninteresting (at least to me and I’m sure
> to the general public as well) combined with the low production qualities
> and varying degrees of out of tune-ness.
> > It made me wonder (shake my head in disbelief even) how such a large
> group of largely intelligent people on these lists can be so extremely
> unproductive after such a long time.
> >
>
>
>

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

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗jsmith9624@...

Chris,

Don't take Marcel's comments personally, brother. His criticism of the
Un12 entries was general & unspecific. Anything just short of his ideal
would never make the cut. I advise developing a sense of detachment
about one's art -- at least, after you release it into a world where
critics will delight to take jabs at it with sharpened sticks -- and a
thick skin. And continue to follow your Muse's directives, whatever they
might be.

We all would like our music to be admired by everyone who hears it, but
that ain't gonna happen... so, no worries. Finding fault is easy, but
highlighting virtue requires thought & consideration. You have those
qualities in abundance (& talent as well)...but Marcel could do with
supplements.

Best,
jls

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>
wrote:
>
> Marcel,
>
> I am deeply hurt. What was so terrible about my entry?
>
> I used the very best piano sound available and poured my heart into
> the composition.
>
> Please, please tell me what was so awful about it?
>
> Chris
>
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:20 PM, m.develde@... wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > ï»¿I just finished listening to most of the untwelve competition
entries..
> > And all I can think is what a bunch of crap.
> > Itâs all musically extremely uninteresting (at least to me
and Iâm sure to the general public as well) combined with the low
production qualities and varying degrees of out of tune-ness.
> > It made me wonder (shake my head in disbelief even) how such a large
group of largely intelligent people on these lists can be so extremely
unproductive after such a long time.
> >
>

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

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

I don't know about you Dante, but I'm very curious as to why my music is
being rejected out of hand by Marcel.
In fact I'd like a detailed explanation for every entry in the competition.
I'd like Marcel to back up his words with some substance.

Chris

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Dante Rosati <danterosati@...>wrote:

>
>
> Chris I can't believe you're rising to the troll bait. You know who and
> what
> he is, how could you possibly care what he thinks?
>
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...
> >wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> > Marcel,
> >
> > I am deeply hurt. What was so terrible about my entry?
> >
> > I used the very best piano sound available and poured my heart into
> > the composition.
> >
> > Please, please tell me what was so awful about it?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:20 PM, <m.develde@...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I just finished listening to most of the untwelve competition
> entries..
> > > And all I can think is what a bunch of crap.
> > > It’s all musically extremely uninteresting (at least to me and I’m sure
> > to the general public as well) combined with the low production qualities
> > and varying degrees of out of tune-ness.
> > > It made me wonder (shake my head in disbelief even) how such a large
> > group of largely intelligent people on these lists can be so extremely
> > unproductive after such a long time.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

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

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

I appreciate your comments however, I forgot the /sarcasm/ emoticon in my
previous post to Marcel about my Un12 entry.

I'll listen to Marcel's ideas on JI and some are indeed worthy and
interesting. His opinion on what is good music and especially his
"well-tuned" versions of centuries old music I question. I happen to think
20th and 21st century classical music is quite worthy of praise and in my
opinion from what I understand of Marcel's work I don't think Marcel's JI
can truly be applied to music that isn't tonal and conventional. So I don't
think Marcel's technique can be applied to new music (and I don't mean
neo-classical) and have yet to be proven wrong by an example if his. In fact
I gave him a piece of mine to re-tune in his JI and have yet to hear a
result. It was a simple piece too.

Certainly I agree with your idea of detachment. - the rest is off list.

Chris

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:57 AM, jsmith9624@... <
jsmith9624@...> wrote:

>
>
> Chris,
>
> Don't take Marcel's comments personally, brother. His criticism of the
> Un12 entries was general & unspecific. Anything just short of his ideal
> would never make the cut. I advise developing a sense of detachment
> about one's art -- at least, after you release it into a world where
> critics will delight to take jabs at it with sharpened sticks -- and a
> thick skin. And continue to follow your Muse's directives, whatever they
> might be.
>
> We all would like our music to be admired by everyone who hears it, but
> that ain't gonna happen... so, no worries. Finding fault is easy, but
> highlighting virtue requires thought & consideration. You have those
> qualities in abundance (& talent as well)...but Marcel could do with
> supplements.
>
> Best,
> jls
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Marcel,
> >
> > I am deeply hurt. What was so terrible about my entry?
> >
> > I used the very best piano sound available and poured my heart into
> > the composition.
> >
> > Please, please tell me what was so awful about it?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:20 PM, m.develde@... wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I just finished listening to most of the untwelve competition
>
> entries..
> > > And all I can think is what a bunch of crap.
> > > It’s all musically extremely uninteresting (at least to me
> and I’m sure to the general public as well) combined with the low
>
> production qualities and varying degrees of out of tune-ness.
> > > It made me wonder (shake my head in disbelief even) how such a large
> group of largely intelligent people on these lists can be so extremely
> unproductive after such a long time.
> > >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

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

🔗Jake Freivald <jdfreivald@...>

Through some amazing technological advances, scientists are starting to be able to read the echoes of ancient sounds, mathematically mapping current-day echoes back to the original sounds. When they applied this to an old caveman dwelling, they heard this most amazing transcript of a group of people who were speaking.

=====
My fellow cavemen,

After listening to most of the undrum competition entries, all I can think is what a bunch of crap.

It's all musically extremely uninteresting combined with the poor qualities of the materials used and varying degrees of out of rhythm-ness.

It made me wonder (shake my head in disbelief even) how such a large group of largely intelligent cavemen can be so extremely unproductive after such a long time.

Using non-drum instruments is supposed to do several things I think.
- Provide better sound when such heavy emphasis on banging is not wanted
- Give interesting new musical possibilities with a deeper or new "feel" or sound to them.
- And most importantly, using non-drum instruments should give insight into the function of sound and rhythm that normal drumming theory can't. Which should make making musically interesting music easyer, not harder.

I'm not hearing any of the above benefits back in the undrum competition.

I really think just about any forum with the same amount of people holding a music competition for normal drum music would produce many more better sounding more enjoyable music.

So in my opinion, non-drum research as far as it stands now in these meetings, is not giving any overall advantage for making actual music, rather it's a big disadvantage.

The disadvantage probably comes from many things, such as difficulty / extra work in stretching strings across drum bodies or making tubes to blow through, all the extra work in trying to make pitches sound good together which also severely complicates composition in most cases, the grating sound that often results, etc.

So if non-drum research isn't generally at the point that it helps in music making, does it at least hold this promise for the future and are people here actively and productively researching non-drum music to achieve that goal?

Well, somewhat actively yes, but productively? I'd have to say no.

What I see is a whole lot of people sticking their head in the sand for what really needs to be done.

Some of the great errors in non-drum practice are so incredibly apparent, but nobody seems to be doing any serious work in these directions.

I'm saying this very unpopular speech in the hope it's of help to some of you and to music research in general. (Not to troll Og, I'm not saying this for attention. But if it brings on flames, that's not so bad. Fire is tough to make. You have to rub the sticks together, keep straw dry, etc.)

=====

I don't even know Marcel, but this is how his email came across to me. Then I realized he was just pushing his own solution to the tuning "problem", and a completely different satirical take came to mind... Not sure if I'll post it or not...

Regards,
Jake

🔗jonszanto <jszanto@...>

🔗chrisvaisvil@...

🔗Ozan Yarman <ozanyarman@...>

LOL!

✩ ✩ ✩
www.ozanyarman.com

Jake Freivald wrote:
> Through some amazing technological advances, scientists are starting to
> be able to read the echoes of ancient sounds, mathematically mapping
> current-day echoes back to the original sounds. When they applied this
> to an old caveman dwelling, they heard this most amazing transcript of a
> group of people who were speaking.
>
> =====
> My fellow cavemen,
>
> After listening to most of the undrum competition entries, all I can
> think is what a bunch of crap.
>
> It's all musically extremely uninteresting combined with the poor
> qualities of the materials used and varying degrees of out of rhythm-ness.
>
> It made me wonder (shake my head in disbelief even) how such a large
> group of largely intelligent cavemen can be so extremely unproductive
> after such a long time.
>
> Using non-drum instruments is supposed to do several things I think.
> - Provide better sound when such heavy emphasis on banging is not wanted
> - Give interesting new musical possibilities with a deeper or new "feel"
> or sound to them.
> - And most importantly, using non-drum instruments should give insight
> into the function of sound and rhythm that normal drumming theory can't.
> Which should make making musically interesting music easyer, not harder.
>
> I'm not hearing any of the above benefits back in the undrum competition.
>
> I really think just about any forum with the same amount of people
> holding a music competition for normal drum music would produce many
> more better sounding more enjoyable music.
>
> So in my opinion, non-drum research as far as it stands now in these
> meetings, is not giving any overall advantage for making actual music,
> rather it's a big disadvantage.
>
> The disadvantage probably comes from many things, such as difficulty /
> extra work in stretching strings across drum bodies or making tubes to
> blow through, all the extra work in trying to make pitches sound good
> together which also severely complicates composition in most cases, the
> grating sound that often results, etc.
>
> So if non-drum research isn't generally at the point that it helps in
> music making, does it at least hold this promise for the future and are
> people here actively and productively researching non-drum music to
> achieve that goal?
>
> Well, somewhat actively yes, but productively? I'd have to say no.
>
> What I see is a whole lot of people sticking their head in the sand for
> what really needs to be done.
>
> Some of the great errors in non-drum practice are so incredibly
> apparent, but nobody seems to be doing any serious work in these directions.
>
> I'm saying this very unpopular speech in the hope it's of help to some
> of you and to music research in general. (Not to troll Og, I'm not
> saying this for attention. But if it brings on flames, that's not so
> bad. Fire is tough to make. You have to rub the sticks together, keep
> straw dry, etc.)
>
> =====
>
> I don't even know Marcel, but this is how his email came across to me.
> Then I realized he was just pushing his own solution to the tuning
> "problem", and a completely different satirical take came to mind... Not
> sure if I'll post it or not...
>
> Regards,
> Jake
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

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

🔗chrisvaisvil@...

No I didn't expect a reasonable conversation.

My point is Marcel does not attempt true xenharmonic music so therefore was barred from entry.

That is NOT to say JI can't be used to create mind bending music. Its just that application is not part of Marcel's JI system as I understand it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ozan Yarman <ozanyarman@...>
Sender: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 21:32:55
To: <MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.

That's right. Even I did not enter my kemeches-piano sonata on the same
grounds though I have used 53-54 pitches to the octave in total.

Do you really expect a civilized discussion with someone who judges
everything as a bunch of crap?

Oz.

✩ ✩ ✩
www.ozanyarman.com

Chris Vaisvil wrote:
> Marcel had a problem with entering the competition. Music that sounded
> like 12 tet was expressly forbidden.
>
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 12:50 AM, jsmith9624@...
> <jsmith9624@...> wrote:
> Yet these good
>> folks still managed to create *something* both microtonal& musical.
>> That much (or perhaps all) of it isn't to your taste is irrelevant. They
>> stepped forward& created new music.
>>
>> You sir, did not.
>>
>> Regards,
>> jlsmith
>>
>
>

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

🔗ixlramp <ixlramp@...>

🔗Juhani <jnylenius@...>

🔗cityoftheasleep <igliashon@...>

🔗Daniel Forró <dan.for@...>

🔗Ozan Yarman <ozanyarman@...>

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

Yep,

I've been doing a lot of work lately with using various midi routings during
my improvisations. I find using a "cantus firmus" drum loop and then routing
every other midi input device to the percussion yields reasonable results -
as well as laying the percussion instruments receiving said input. Its been
a lot of fun.

Chris

On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 7:55 PM, Daniel Forr� <dan.for@...> wrote:

>
>
> I'm sure this was done, at least by me in more New music works, as
> one possibility of over-ciphering music parameters.
>
> And sometimes I have changed melodic MIDI track to drum channel and
> get more or less interesting results...
>
> Daniel Forro
>
>
> On 14 Feb 2011, at 9:43 AM, cityoftheasleep wrote:
>
> > --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Juhani" <jnylenius@...> wrote:
> >
> >> It just seems so obvious to me. Solve how to write drum music for
> >> non-drums and you will > lay the foundation for how music works
> >
> > LOL!!! That is TOO GOOD. "Drum music for non-drums"--I am TOTALLY
> > going to write some of that!
> >
> > -Igs
>
>
>

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

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗m.develde@...

Hi Chris,

Sorry, I did not mean anything personal. And I like both you and what you're doing in music.
I merely found (after listening to most of the entries) that the overal musical and production quality was very low.

But as for your personal composition.
First of all, my ears don't agree to pianoteq being the best piano sound.
It may be the most playable / responsive computer piano around. But it's timbre isn't as good as a real / well sampled piano. Bare like you pay it pianoteq sounds weak and unrich in several ways to me.
I'm not really up to date on the latest sampled pianos. Last time I did a quick check I think I found galaxy pianos or something like that ok for general grand pianos sound.
Though I know usable grand piano sample libraries have been around for about a decade now that if produced right sound better than pianoteq (for instance postpiano produced nice characterful ones, listen to the piano pieces on aphex twin drukqs where I think he uses them through an old quantec reverb. Every piano pieces has it's own sound, all very nice.
As for your piece, I like some parts of your composition, but not all, it's often a bit empty amongst other things. Though I think it's good you've managed to use such extreme microtonality and yet not create a strong out of tune / hurts my ears feel to it as is most often the case in strong microtonal songs on these lists.
As for your playing, I don't like the dynamics. Notes pop out etc, sounds amateurish (especially combined with the pianoteq sound). Though this could be because of the way you have pianoteq and your keyboard set up, this I don't know, but it's on the recording as it is.

-Marcel

From: Chris Vaisvil
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 4:16 PM
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.

Marcel,

I am deeply hurt. What was so terrible about my entry?

I used the very best piano sound available and poured my heart into
the composition.

Please, please tell me what was so awful about it?

Chris

🔗m.develde@...

Hi Chris,

I'm not going to write a detailed description for every entry in the competition because it would cost me too much time and would make me even less popular as most of my words would not be very kind haha.
But, I have listened to all entries now, and I'd like to exclude 2 from my "crap list" :p

Martin Loridan's piece I hadn't heard untill just now, and it prompted me to write about it.
It's the best piece I've heard on these lists ever by far.
Finally, real music!!! :)
Finally music that could be put on a cd and enjoyed by music lovers.
Not saying it's perfect or anything like that, but the composition, playing, production, soundquality etc are all good enough.
Great work! And amazing in a way to get such expressive music from what I think is a sample library? Which one btw, vsl?
My only real negative comment on this piece is the "stuttering".. What's up with that?
Sound like a computer running out of juice when playing the song or something, what's going on there? Can't be intentional it seems to me.

One other one I hadn't heard yet was Domina Catrina Lee's piece.
I don't think the music is very strong, and it could do with slightly better mixing and a mastering touch-up.
But overall very well produced! I like it.

These were the only 2 that to me that met competition goals, of finished recordings that would be ready for the general public (with the reserves I've mentioned above)
There were many other entries that had things in them that I liked though. For instance the winning entry has a lot going for it, but don't get me started on all the things I find wrong with it etc.

-Marcel

From: Chris Vaisvil
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 5:58 PM
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.

Chris

🔗m.develde@...

Haha thanks for this post Jake! :)
I'll wear a smile the rest of the evening.

Btw just one comment, I'm not promoting my own solution to JI here now or anything like that.
The only thing I'm hoping for on these lists is for more people to get involved in serieus JI research.

-Marcel

From: Jake Freivald
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 7:59 PM
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [MMM] Overheard in a meeting of stone-age musicians

Through some amazing technological advances, scientists are starting to
be able to read the echoes of ancient sounds, mathematically mapping
current-day echoes back to the original sounds. When they applied this
to an old caveman dwelling, they heard this most amazing transcript of a
group of people who were speaking.

=====
My fellow cavemen,

After listening to most of the undrum competition entries, all I can
think is what a bunch of crap.

It's all musically extremely uninteresting combined with the poor
qualities of the materials used and varying degrees of out of rhythm-ness.

It made me wonder (shake my head in disbelief even) how such a large
group of largely intelligent cavemen can be so extremely unproductive
after such a long time.

Using non-drum instruments is supposed to do several things I think.
- Provide better sound when such heavy emphasis on banging is not wanted
- Give interesting new musical possibilities with a deeper or new "feel"
or sound to them.
- And most importantly, using non-drum instruments should give insight
into the function of sound and rhythm that normal drumming theory can't.
Which should make making musically interesting music easyer, not harder.

I'm not hearing any of the above benefits back in the undrum competition.

I really think just about any forum with the same amount of people
holding a music competition for normal drum music would produce many
more better sounding more enjoyable music.

So in my opinion, non-drum research as far as it stands now in these
meetings, is not giving any overall advantage for making actual music,
rather it's a big disadvantage.

The disadvantage probably comes from many things, such as difficulty /
extra work in stretching strings across drum bodies or making tubes to
blow through, all the extra work in trying to make pitches sound good
together which also severely complicates composition in most cases, the
grating sound that often results, etc.

So if non-drum research isn't generally at the point that it helps in
music making, does it at least hold this promise for the future and are
people here actively and productively researching non-drum music to
achieve that goal?

Well, somewhat actively yes, but productively? I'd have to say no.

What I see is a whole lot of people sticking their head in the sand for
what really needs to be done.

Some of the great errors in non-drum practice are so incredibly
apparent, but nobody seems to be doing any serious work in these directions.

I'm saying this very unpopular speech in the hope it's of help to some
of you and to music research in general. (Not to troll Og, I'm not
saying this for attention. But if it brings on flames, that's not so
bad. Fire is tough to make. You have to rub the sticks together, keep
straw dry, etc.)

=====

I don't even know Marcel, but this is how his email came across to me.
Then I realized he was just pushing his own solution to the tuning
"problem", and a completely different satirical take came to mind... Not
sure if I'll post it or not...

Regards,
Jake

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

Hello Marcel, copied from the website

Competition goals were:

Here are the rules and regulations:

- The contest is international. You may be of any nationality, or any
age, to enter
- Work and online application data must be presented to us by the
deadline of *Dec. 15th, 2010*
- Works must be *composed specifically for this competition*
- Works are to be judged on their final recorded form in FLAC audio
format. Scores will not be considered; in fact, you will have no means to
send us a score.
- Works must be *between 5 and 10 minutes* in length
- Works must be in a tuning or temperament other than 12-tone equal
temperament, and should NOT be in a closely related temperament to 12-equal
such as a Baroque well-temperament. Suggested example tunings: Just
Intonation (preferably exploiting sonorities beyond the 5-limit traditional
triad), Wilson 'CPS tunings' like the Dekany or Eikosany, any non-12 equal
division of the octave, the Bohlen-Pierce scale, or any other such
non-octave scale, or any tunings invented by the composer based on
mathematical principles or formulae, etc. An exhaustive list of such tunings
is impossible, but one might have a look at a database such as the SCALA
scale archive <http://www.huygens-fokker.org/docs/scales.zip> for ideas
or inspiration...the format of SCALA files, for those curious and
unfamiliar, is explained
here<http://www.huygens-fokker.org/scala/scl_format.html>
- *No fee is required to enter*
- UnTwelve reserves the right to grant no prize if no piece is determined
to be of sufficient quality.
- The panel of judges will include the musical expertise of: *David
Schrader, Kraig Grady, Dante Rosati, Elaine Walker, Robert Voisey, Andy
Hasenpflug, and Terumi Narushima.*

I don't see mention of what you stated.

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:16 PM, <m.develde@...> wrote:

> These were the only 2 that to me that met competition goals, of finished
>
>
> recordings that would be ready for the general public (with the reserves
> I've mentioned above)
> There were many other entries that had things in them that I liked though.
> For instance the winning entry has a lot going for it, but don't get me
> started on all the things I find wrong with it etc.
>
> -Marcel
>
> From: Chris Vaisvil
> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 5:58 PM
>
> To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.
>
> I don't know about you Dante, but I'm very curious as to why my music is
> being rejected out of hand by Marcel.
> In fact I'd like a detailed explanation for every entry in the competition.
> I'd like Marcel to back up his words with some substance.
>
>

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

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

If you are going to take me to task for using a piano sound you don't like
then I ask you to provide a better one, or en better yet a real piano, for
me to work on.

As for you not liking my piece of music - everyone has their own personal
taste - and to be honest, I'm not concerned. I was being sarcastic because
the person who brought up the fact you didn't submit an entry was right. And
until you pony up with a true original composition I consider your point of
view to be that of an uninformed spectator.

There is an old saying

He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches.

Man and Superman (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists"

George Bernard Shaw.

And I'll add those who can't even teach are nothing but windy critics.

Chris

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:00 PM, <m.develde@...> wrote:

>
>
> Hi Chris,
>
>
> As for your piece, I like some parts of your composition, but not all, it's
>
> often a bit empty amongst other things. Though I think it's good you've
> managed to use such extreme microtonality and yet not create a strong out
> of
> tune / hurts my ears feel to it as is most often the case in strong
> microtonal songs on these lists.
> As for your playing, I don't like the dynamics. Notes pop out etc, sounds
> amateurish (especially combined with the pianoteq sound). Though this could
>
> be because of the way you have pianoteq and your keyboard set up, this I
> don't know, but it's on the recording as it is.
>
> -Marcel
>
> From: Chris Vaisvil
> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 4:16 PM
>
> To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.
>
> Marcel,
>
> I am deeply hurt. What was so terrible about my entry?
>
> I used the very best piano sound available and poured my heart into
> the composition.
>
> Please, please tell me what was so awful about it?
>
> Chris
>
>
>

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

🔗m.develde@...

?Hi Chris,

Yes you're right.
I do see:
- Works are to be judged on their final recorded form

And my remarks are about the recorded form in their totality.
I care about the music and if it gets through.

-Marcel

From: Chris Vaisvil
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 12:39 AM
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.

Hello Marcel, copied from the website

Competition goals were:

Here are the rules and regulations:

I don't see mention of what you stated.

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:16 PM, <mailto:m.develde%40gmail.com> wrote:

> These were the only 2 that to me that met competition goals, of finished
>
>
> recordings that would be ready for the general public (with the reserves
> I've mentioned above)
> There were many other entries that had things in them that I liked though.
> For instance the winning entry has a lot going for it, but don't get me
> started on all the things I find wrong with it etc.
>
> -Marcel
>
> From: Chris Vaisvil
> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 5:58 PM
>
> To: mailto:MakeMicroMusic%40yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.
>
> I don't know about you Dante, but I'm very curious as to why my music is
> being rejected out of hand by Marcel.
> In fact I'd like a detailed explanation for every entry in the > competition.
> I'd like Marcel to back up his words with some substance.
>
>

🔗m.develde@...

But off course.
I never thought anybody would see my remarks any different than the remarks of a windy critic :)
Which is what I am in this case, I agree.

Hope to create and teach soon though, working on that :)

-Marcel

From: Chris Vaisvil
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 12:48 AM
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.

If you are going to take me to task for using a piano sound you don't like
then I ask you to provide a better one, or en better yet a real piano, for
me to work on.

There is an old saying

He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches.

Man and Superman (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists"

George Bernard Shaw.

And I'll add those who can't even teach are nothing but windy critics.

Chris

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

There was no mention of of finished
"recordings that would be ready for the general public"

But whatever. You have been hanging around here for quite some time and have
produced no original work that I can remember yet have repeatedly criticized
not only people such as my self but also composers of the stature of Lassus
claiming he wrote the wrong notes on his score.

While Marcel I'm interested in your theories you seem to be satisfied in
just sitting back and telling others how to write music that pleases you.

When you pay me I shall do so.

Chris

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:55 PM, <m.develde@...> wrote:

>
>
> ?Hi Chris,
>
> Yes you're right.
> I do see:
> - Works are to be judged on their final recorded form
>
> And my remarks are about the recorded form in their totality.
> I care about the music and if it gets through.
>
> -Marcel
>
> From: Chris Vaisvil
> Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 12:39 AM
>
> To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.
>
> Hello Marcel, copied from the website
>
> Competition goals were:
>
> Here are the rules and regulations:
>
> - The contest is international. You may be of any nationality, or any
> age, to enter
> - Work and online application data must be presented to us by the
> deadline of *Dec. 15th, 2010*
> - Works must be *composed specifically for this competition*
> - Works are to be judged on their final recorded form in FLAC audio
> format. Scores will not be considered; in fact, you will have no means to
> send us a score.
> - Works must be *between 5 and 10 minutes* in length
> - Works must be in a tuning or temperament other than 12-tone equal
> temperament, and should NOT be in a closely related temperament to 12-equal
> such as a Baroque well-temperament. Suggested example tunings: Just
> Intonation (preferably exploiting sonorities beyond the 5-limit traditional
> triad), Wilson 'CPS tunings' like the Dekany or Eikosany, any non-12 equal
> division of the octave, the Bohlen-Pierce scale, or any other such
> non-octave scale, or any tunings invented by the composer based on
> mathematical principles or formulae, etc. An exhaustive list of such
> tunings
> is impossible, but one might have a look at a database such as the SCALA
> scale archive <http://www.huygens-fokker.org/docs/scales.zip> for ideas
>
> or inspiration...the format of SCALA files, for those curious and
> unfamiliar, is explained
> here<http://www.huygens-fokker.org/scala/scl_format.html>
> - *No fee is required to enter*
>
> - UnTwelve reserves the right to grant no prize if no piece is determined
> to be of sufficient quality.
> - The panel of judges will include the musical expertise of: *David
> Schrader, Kraig Grady, Dante Rosati, Elaine Walker, Robert Voisey, Andy
> Hasenpflug, and Terumi Narushima.*
>
> I don't see mention of what you stated.
>
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:16 PM, <mailto:m.develde%40gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > These were the only 2 that to me that met competition goals, of finished
> >
> >
> > recordings that would be ready for the general public (with the reserves
> > I've mentioned above)
> > There were many other entries that had things in them that I liked
> though.
> > For instance the winning entry has a lot going for it, but don't get me
> > started on all the things I find wrong with it etc.
> >
> > -Marcel
> >
> > From: Chris Vaisvil
> > Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 5:58 PM
> >
> > To: mailto:MakeMicroMusic%40yahoogroups.com
>
> > Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists.
> >
> > I don't know about you Dante, but I'm very curious as to why my music is
> > being rejected out of hand by Marcel.
> > In fact I'd like a detailed explanation for every entry in the
> > competition.
> > I'd like Marcel to back up his words with some substance.
> >
> >
>
>
>

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