Etude No. 1

Hi everyone,

I wrote an etude, so far just titled Etude no. 1:

http://www.mikebattagliamusic.com/music/EtudeNo1.mp3

This was a simple exercise for me to learn the nuances of four-part
polyphonic xenharmonic writing. I tried to shoot for as wide of a
harmonic territory as possible so as to see how some of the scales
we've been talking about on the tuning list fit into four-part
harmony. I have no idea if the pianos we're going to use in the future
will facilitate four part harmony of this nature or if this will be
practically unrealizable, so this is the first draft.

Can anyone guess the tuning? :)

-Mike

can't guess the tuning, but I really like the piece!

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...>wrote:

>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I wrote an etude, so far just titled Etude no. 1:
>
> http://www.mikebattagliamusic.com/music/EtudeNo1.mp3
>
> This was a simple exercise for me to learn the nuances of four-part
> polyphonic xenharmonic writing. I tried to shoot for as wide of a
> harmonic territory as possible so as to see how some of the scales
> we've been talking about on the tuning list fit into four-part
> harmony. I have no idea if the pianos we're going to use in the future
> will facilitate four part harmony of this nature or if this will be
> practically unrealizable, so this is the first draft.
>
> Can anyone guess the tuning? :)
>
> -Mike
>
>

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

17 et

I like it very much too!

I like your harmonies a lot.

Chris

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...>wrote:

>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I wrote an etude, so far just titled Etude no. 1:
>
> http://www.mikebattagliamusic.com/music/EtudeNo1.mp3
>
> This was a simple exercise for me to learn the nuances of four-part
> polyphonic xenharmonic writing. I tried to shoot for as wide of a
> harmonic territory as possible so as to see how some of the scales
> we've been talking about on the tuning list fit into four-part
> harmony. I have no idea if the pianos we're going to use in the future
> will facilitate four part harmony of this nature or if this will be
> practically unrealizable, so this is the first draft.
>
> Can anyone guess the tuning? :)
>
> -Mike
>
>

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

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
>
> 17 et
>
> I like it very much too!
>
> I like your harmonies a lot.

I'd suggest Mike try something else.

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:40 PM, genewardsmith
<genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
> >
> > 17 et
> >
> > I like it very much too!
> >
> > I like your harmonies a lot.
>
> I'd suggest Mike try something else.

Egads! What would you suggest? I was going to do one in 22 next.

-Mike

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
> 17 et

That was easy.

> I like it very much too!
>
> I like your harmonies a lot.

Thanks buddy, appreciate it. I'm still trying to figure out what works
and what doesn't. Sometimes I felt I managed to get the higher-limit
effect I was going for, and sometimes it sounds like bullets are
ricocheting off the walls. Either way I wanted to give it a shot.

-Mike

Incredible work. Great playing, great dynamics, just great all
the way around. Blackwood would be jealous.

The last bar might use a touch of something (retard? an extra
beat?) -Carl

At 06:51 PM 3/24/2011, you wrote:
>Hi everyone,
>I wrote an etude, so far just titled Etude no. 1:
> http://www.mikebattagliamusic.com/music/EtudeNo1.mp3
>This was a simple exercise for me to learn the nuances of four-part
>polyphonic xenharmonic writing. I tried to shoot for as wide of a
>harmonic territory as possible so as to see how some of the scales
>we've been talking about on the tuning list fit into four-part
>harmony. I have no idea if the pianos we're going to use in the future
>will facilitate four part harmony of this nature or if this will be
>practically unrealizable, so this is the first draft.
>Can anyone guess the tuning? :)
>-Mike

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:
>
> Incredible work. Great playing, great dynamics, just great all
> the way around. Blackwood would be jealous.
>
> The last bar might use a touch of something (retard? an extra
> beat?) -Carl

Thanks for the critique, but to be clear this isn't me playing it - I
don't have a 17-tet keyboard so I had to plug stuff into the piano
roll in MIDI. I just took extra time to go over it and add in dynamics
as though I were playing it.

As it stands I don't think this piece is playable on a standard
Halberstadt piano at all unless you can play parallel 15ths. I didn't
take pianistic limitations into account because I have no idea what
the standard keyboard for 17-equal is going to be.

-Mike

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:40 PM, genewardsmith
> <genewardsmith@...> wrote:

> > I'd suggest Mike try something else.
>
> Egads! What would you suggest? I was going to do one in 22 next.

Sounds like a good plan--in fact trying out one of those porcupine scales would be a great plan.

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

> Thanks buddy, appreciate it. I'm still trying to figure out what works
> and what doesn't. Sometimes I felt I managed to get the higher-limit
> effect I was going for, and sometimes it sounds like bullets are
> ricocheting off the walls. Either way I wanted to give it a shot.

After hearing the 29edo piece Igs disliked, I'm enthusiastic about the possibilities of 29, which seem to be a good deal greater than what 17 has to offer.

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:05 AM, genewardsmith
<genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:40 PM, genewardsmith
> > <genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> > > I'd suggest Mike try something else.
> >
> > Egads! What would you suggest? I was going to do one in 22 next.
>
> Sounds like a good plan--in fact trying out one of those porcupine scales would be a great plan.

I'm writing an orchestral work based around porcupine in 22 now. I
will probably need to do a bit of work on the 100 cent MODMOS's first
though and map everything out before I feel really comfortable though.

-Mike

Mike,

This is impressive work! You weave a nice thread here, and the angular work
keeps my attention. The voice leading and harmonies are really well thought
out, I can tell you took the time to polish things. Funny you mentioned not
digging Mozart, since there is a grotesque pseudo-Alberti neo-classical
things going on here...kind of like Poulenc meets Mozart meets absinthe!!!
:D

Don't change the ending. I like how it just stops. Kind of humorous and
shocking, in a good way!

The piano sound is strangely synthetic....it's musical in shading, but not
in a realistic way though...I'm guessing Pianoteq? I still like a good multi
sampled piano (much) better, but I'm in the minority these days!

Congrats!

AKJ

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...>wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I wrote an etude, so far just titled Etude no. 1:
>
> http://www.mikebattagliamusic.com/music/EtudeNo1.mp3
>
> This was a simple exercise for me to learn the nuances of four-part
> polyphonic xenharmonic writing. I tried to shoot for as wide of a
> harmonic territory as possible so as to see how some of the scales
> we've been talking about on the tuning list fit into four-part
> harmony. I have no idea if the pianos we're going to use in the future
> will facilitate four part harmony of this nature or if this will be
> practically unrealizable, so this is the first draft.
>
> Can anyone guess the tuning? :)
>
> -Mike
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.akjmusic.com
http://www.untwelve.org

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

Next time I suggest you remove the title from the mp3 which in this case was
"17tetetude" :-)

The piece seemed to progress as it went along - I enjoyed the harmonies more
at the end then the begining.

How did you realize the piece - pianoteq?

Chris

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

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:11 AM, Aaron Krister Johnson
<aaron@...> wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> This is impressive work! You weave a nice thread here, and the angular work
> keeps my attention. The voice leading and harmonies are really well thought
> out, I can tell you took the time to polish things. Funny you mentioned not
> digging Mozart, since there is a grotesque pseudo-Alberti neo-classical
> things going on here...kind of like Poulenc meets Mozart meets absinthe!!!
> :D

Thanks Aaron. I did go for the Alberti bass here a bit, the sonata in
A major inspired the feel of this one. I basically treated this as a
purely technical exercise to see how 13-limit counterpoint might work,
it's not the kind of stuff I usually write. I just strove to imitate
Bach as much as possible, really.

> The piano sound is strangely synthetic....it's musical in shading, but not
> in a realistic way though...I'm guessing Pianoteq? I still like a good multi
> sampled piano (much) better, but I'm in the minority these days!

Yeah, Pianoteq. It's the only softsynth piano I have that can support
scala files, unfortunately, unless you could suggest something better.

-Mike

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 7:17 AM, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
>
> Next time I suggest you remove the title from the mp3 which in this case was
> "17tetetude" :-)

Oh. Whoops.

> The piece seemed to progress as it went along - I enjoyed the harmonies more
> at the end then the begining.

It all started to make more sense by the end of the piece than the
beginning. For brevity's sake I just reprised the beginning and called
it done. I sort of got a glimpse of what a "machine" tonal structure
might sound like with the harmonies at the very end. Maybe I'll try to
explore that next time.

> How did you realize the piece - pianoteq?

Yep.

-Mike