Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic Re: Surprise -- new timbres (thank you, Paul!)

Hello, there, Paul Erlich and everyone.

Thank you, Paul, for feedback which is all the more valuable to me for
reasons I'll explain, and for which I hope the following "command
performance," however modest, may offer some small token of my
appreciation.

While "Puff Pipes" on the Yahama TX-802 is indeed what I use for an
emulation of Vicentino's arciorgano (a kind of chamber organ with wood
pipes), and has maybe a sound a bit like a medieval or Renaissance
portative or positive organ, I'm not sure if General MIDI has anything
corresponding.

What I selected for those first examples was a GM voice which I
happened to notice was used in one of the sample Scala files for the
EXAMPLE feature, with a "program 54" setting -- something like
SynthVoice. I'm not sure what it might sound like, but its choice for
a Scala example and the feedback I got on one posting that it seemed
to fit the music have led me to make it a "standard."

Maybe if I explain how I create these examples, you'll understand why
your feedback is so important and valuable:

1. Often I may get an idea while playing or improvising
at the synthesizer keyboard, anything from a quick
two-sonority progression to a piece;

2. Having come up with the music, I code it using a text
editor (GNU Emacs) in the Scala format for an example
file, much as one might write down a traditional score;

3. After generating a MIDI file with Scala, I have no
hardware or software to play it, but I can convert
the MIDI file to text and proofread the notes and
pitchbend messages (conveniently converted to cents
by a macro in Emacs using the GNU Emacs Calc program).

Your feedback not only suggested that GM "Reed Organ" might be better
for this kind of 5-limit adaptive JI -- on the TX-802, I have an
"archiregal" using a (non-GM) voice called "Oboe" that reminds me of a
crumhorn with a very prominent fifth partial, I would say -- but
spurred me on to actually look on the Web and find a list of GM
voices.

The _regal_, I should explain, is a double reed organ of the
16th-century era sounding quite crumhorn-like -- "buzzy," as the
crumhorn is often known in some circles -- and although I'm not sure
whether this kind of organ was built for fifthtone music, I'd call it
a sonorous idea whose time has come, whether realized through
traditional or digital technologies.

Of course, your "Reed Organ" suggestion also recalls the harmonium of
Bosanquet and Helmholtz/Ellis and others, so it has rich associations.

I wonder which GM instruments Dave Keenan might recommend as a
connoisseur of JI and near-JI sonorities with their "locking in" of
partials?

Anyway, now that I have the list of GM instruments, I should be able
to do some creative instrumentation, with lots of advice and feedback
encouraged.

Here's the Vicentino cadence in two GM "Reed Organ" versions, the
first slower and the second a bit faster:

"Reed Organ," slower: <http://value.net/~mschulter/qcmav005.mid>
"Reed Organ," faster: <http://value.net/~mschulter/qcmav006.mid>

Another very historically appropriate timbre with a bright fifth
partial (at least if the GM instrument is like its model) is, of
course, the archicembalo itself, or "superharpsichord," basically a
harpsichord with lots of notes per octave (36 or 38 for Vicentino), so
here's a GM harpsichord version in the same two tempi:

"Harpsichord," slower: <http://value.net/~mschulter/qcmav007.mid>
"Harpsichord," faster: <http://value.net/~mschulter/qcmav008.mid>

Paul, please let me emphasize how your posts and discussions on
"adaptive JI" have really lent me encouragement in this, and it's very
fitting that your musical advice about instrumentation and timbre
should help now in making these examples more effective.

Thank you, and please enjoy -- while feeling free to offer more
constructive suggestions like this.

With peace and friendship,

Margo

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@...>

🔗mschulter <MSCHULTER@...>

Hello, there, everyone, and I'm pleased, with Mary's creative impetus
and Paul's very helpful feedback about timbres, to share this first
MIDI version of my _Invocatio in Quarto Tono_ or _Invocation in the
Fourth Mode_ (i.e. Hypophrygian, the plagal form of the Phyrgian mode
centered in its untransposed form on E).

This piece involves "enharmonicism," or the use of fifthtones, and
although Vicentino's adaptive tuning for "perfect fifths" at a pure
ratio of 3:2, here realized using a 62-note scale based on 1/4-comma
meantone (pure 5:4 major thirds) with two 31-note cycles at 1/4-comma
apart.

MIDI: <http://value.net/~mschulter/invoc4a.mid>

Paul, thank you so much for your "Reed Organ" recommendation as a
General MIDI timbre. Today, I was playing this piece as I often have
using my "archiregal" registration (regular 24-note meantone),
actually the TX-802 "Oboe" (voice A22). It very pleasantly gives me
the "buzzies" -- something crumhorn lovers may understand. Might the
GM "Reed Organ" have anything like this effect?

Mary, I'm looking forward to hearing your orchestration of the
fifthtone passage from Colonna; it's really wonderful to see you make
this example a real germinal source of creativity both for singing and
for further electronic development.

Of course, Monz, please let me join Mary in thanking you for sharing
just the right pitch information she needed to make the most of this
example, and for your many talents as a composer, theorist, and
devoted educator here and elsewhere.

Jon, this civil and friendly wave of musicmaking has indeed has its
effects: I've been waiting to write down this piece in a settled form
and do a score for some time, and now I wind up doing a MIDI with
Manuel Op de Coul's Scala. Thanks to you and everyone for providing
the energy, inspiration, and forum.

Peace and love to all,

Margo

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

Well, well, Margo,

Among all the other stuff, {you wrote...}

>MIDI: <http://value.net/~mschulter/invoc4a.mid>
>
>Today, I was playing this piece as I often have using my "archiregal" >registration (regular 24-note meantone), actually the TX-802 "Oboe" (voice >A22). It very pleasantly gives me the "buzzies" -- something crumhorn >lovers may understand.

...and then...

>Jon, this civil and friendly wave of musicmaking has indeed has its
>effects: I've been waiting to write down this piece in a settled form
>and do a score for some time, and now I wind up doing a MIDI with
>Manuel Op de Coul's Scala. Thanks to you and everyone for providing
>the energy, inspiration, and forum.

Boy, the giving just brings all this receiving! So, to make the synchronicity seem quite thick, I just tonight got the TX-802 into the rack and figured out (almost all the Performances had been set up...weird, with odd outputs and midi channels, so at first I wasn't hearing anything!). I'll hook up the laptop tomorrow, fire up the sequencer and play "Invocation" through A22 (though I am going to have to get SoundQuest, at Rick's suggestion: I just can't go through life with 'stock' patches, and I'll gladly post them to share with other TX-802 folks).

I'm happy this is all happening. There must be a reason, but I just don't want to know; I'm liking seeing all of this positive churn and synergy. To music...

Cheers,
Jon

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@...>

🔗David J. Finnamore <daeron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., mschulter <MSCHULTER@V...> wrote:
> MIDI: <http://value.net/~mschulter/invoc4a.mid>

This is an audio stained glass window in a polydimensional universe.
A journey through the inside of a kaleidescope. I feel myself
rotating counterclockwise (looking down on myself from above) with
each shift, and rising slightly each time, until finally dropping back
down on the last cadence, having gone full circle.

> Paul, thank you so much for your "Reed Organ" recommendation as a
> General MIDI timbre. Today, I was playing this piece as I often have
> using my "archiregal" registration (regular 24-note meantone),
> actually the TX-802 "Oboe" (voice A22). It very pleasantly gives me
> the "buzzies" -- something crumhorn lovers may understand. Might the
> GM "Reed Organ" have anything like this effect?

The Reed Organ on my PC is softer toned and less comical than a
crumhorn ensemble, and sounds more like a microtonal concertina with
this sequence. Wish I had a good crumhorn sample set to play it on,
though! That would be perfect, short of building a set of 5th tone
crumhorns, then hiring and training the players.

David

🔗nanom3@...

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@...>

🔗mschulter <MSCHULTER@...>

Hello, there, everyone, and thank you to all who have lent
encouragement to the creation of new music, including the most helpful
feedback on my _Invocatio_.

Right now I'm a bit tired, a topic also discussed in some wise recent
messages, so I'll try to respond quickly for the moment and apologize
to anyone whose reply I might have overlooked, promising to check
again more carefully tomorrow when the newer digests should be in.

First, John, thank you for your encouragement as someone whose
experience with microtonality I've admired for years; your Web site
was immensely helpful when I was getting started in this area, and
it's a pleasure now to be getting the benefit of your wisdom through
this precious forum.

Jon, your adventures with that TX-802 are eagerly awaited, and it's
really appropriate that this should be happening just when this group
is bringing musical nourishment and renewal to so many. I ask myself
how you might approach synthesized music as someone with a background
in handcrafted instruments of a unique kind. One musician tells me
that he can approach a keyboard in a better way because of his feel
for playing the cello, and I wonder if this kind of metaphor might
apply.

David, your words are about the most moving I could ask for, and
indeed this piece has a special "polydimensional" aspect for me, but
your experience lends to it a perspective and imagery taking shape in
your own creative act of listening. Thank you for such a gift.

Mary, your orchestration idea is something I'd love to hear; but from
hearing some of your music, I can predict it will be unique and
awesome. I'd love to hear your "Aria" version of Colonna's passage
also, maybe on CD or cassette.

For now, maybe I should explain that _Invocatio_ is a complete piece,
something like the organ preludes or Psalm-tone settings of the era
around 1600 which sets the general style of the music. However, you
could do what has often been done in recordings of 15th-16th century
music: combine a few such pieces into a set, maybe a few minutes in
all. Of course, this means that I have to write more of these pieces!
-- and there's at least one that I've been meaning to do for a long
time. How's that for a bit of a welcome push?

Paul, if I coded correctly from my ASCII score (which I'll post after
prudently proofing it when a bit less tired), fifths and thirds should
be just except for a few sonorities around suspensions where I went
with usual meantone intervals to avoid complications like shifts in
the middle of sustained notes. While I proofed the pitchbend messages
and they _looked_ correct at the time, my known fallibility is a
factor not to be dismissed out of hand <grin>.

One approach might be to go over the score together, and see where the
beats are occurring. A different approach is to check those pitchbend
messages again, since that's about the most objective measure of
whether I've coded correctly, at least.

From your posts on the Colonna example, Monz, I wonder if your
software could check the "justness" of sonorities in a MIDI file
easily?

It's very important to me to get it right, and that means precisely
the kind of feedback that you've offered, Paul.

I'd much rather learn about any glitches now than later, and one of
the nicest things about this group is that we can join in some
creative "debugging."

Most appreciatively, with peace and love,

Margo

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

🔗mschulter <MSCHULTER@...>

Hello, there, Monz and Paul and everyone.

Maybe this thread illustrates a practical complication of making
microtonal music: "How can I validate that sonorities that I intended
to be `just' will actually sound just to people who hear a composition
as a General MIDI (GM) file?"

This saga started last Thursday, when I posted a link to a new
composition in "adaptive JI":

MIDI file: <http://value.net/~mschulter/invoc4a.mid>

This piece uses a tuning with 62 notes per octave, actually two
31-note cycles in 1/4-comma meantone with pure 5:4 major thirds. By
mixing notes from the two cycles, it is possible to obtain just
sonorities with intervals tempered within each cycle such as fifths
and minor thirds also pure, as I did for all except a few sonorities
in this piece.

Here's a Scala file for the complete 62-note system, of which, as Monz
points out, 27 notes are used in this piece:

<http://value.net/~mschulter/qcm62a.scl>

Now came a "complication," Paul, when you reported that although my
sonorities would be expected to have pure fifths and thirds in this
tuning, you heard some beating, and wondered what might be happening.

This raises at least four possible hypotheses:

(1) Maybe I goofed in my original ASCII score, choosing the wrong
notes or inflections at some level for getting the desired pure
concords (3:2 fifths, 5:4 major thirds, 6:5 minor thirds);

(2) Maybe I got the score right, but coded the note numbers
incorrectly in my text file of instructions used by Scala to generate
the MIDI file;

(3) Maybe the MIDI file is correct, but for some reason the GM "Reed
Organ" voice might produce beats for theoretically just sonorities; or

(4) Maybe the beats occur with some systems or sound cards, but not
with others.

To illustrate what issues (1) and (2) might involve, I'll include a
copy of my ASCII score for the piece, _Invocatio in Quarto Tono_, as
promised in a previous article.

Here an ASCII asterisk (*) shows a note raised by a "fifthtone" or
diesis of 128:125 (~41.06 cents), while an ASCII apostrophe or "comma
sign" (') shows a note raised by 1/4 syntonic comma (~5.38 cents) to
obtain pure concords such as fifths or minor thirds; "r" shows a rest;
a pause sign (,) in the line showing the rhythm (which might be taken
as 2/2) indicates the conclusion of a phrase:

7
1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 + | 1 2 | 1 2 ,|
G#4 A4 A4 A4 A4 A4 A4 G#*4
E4 E'4 E'4 F4 E'4 D4 C4 D4 E*4
B'3 C'4 C'4 C'4 C'4 A3 A3 B*'3
E3 A3 A3 F3 A3 F3 F3 E*3

1 2 + | 1 2 + | 1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 + | 1 2 |
G#*4. G#*4 A*4 B*4 B*4 C'5 C#5 D5
E*4. E*4 E*'4 G*4 G*4 A4 A4 G4 F4 G4
B*'3. B*'3 C*'3 D*'4 D*'4 F4 E'4 D4
E*3. E*3 A*3 G*3 G*3 F3 A3 Bb3

14
1 2 | 1 , 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 | 1 + 2 |
C#*5. C#*5 D*'5 D*'5 D*'5 B*4 C*5 B*4 A*'4 B*4
A*4. A*4 B*4 B*4 B*4 G*4 G'*4 G*4
E*'4. E*'4 G*4 G*4 G*4 D*'4 E*4 D*'4
A*3. A*3 G*3 G*3 G*3 G*3 C*4 G*3

20 25
1 2 ,| 1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 |
C*5 C'5. A4 A'4 A'4 G#*4
G*'4 A4. E'4 D4 D4 E*4
E*4 E'4. C'4 A'3 A'3 B*'3
C*4 A3. A3 F'3 F'3 E*3

1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 | 1 2 ||
A4 G#4
E'4 E4
C'4 B'3
A2 E3

To obtain just sonorities, we raise the upper note of a fifth or minor
third by a "quartercomma" (e.g. E3-B'3-E3-G#4), and likewise raise the
lower note of a fourth or major sixth (e.g. F'3-A'3-D4-A'4). Most of
the sonorities in my piece follow these rules.

The exceptions occur at measures 5-6 and 12-13, passages involving
suspensions leading up to cadences where maintaining pure sonorities
would have involved some complications and a bit of subtle tension
didn't seem so out of place. Also at measure 19, the suspended fourth
C*5 and ornamental major second A*'4 appear in nonjust sonorities,
regarded in this kind of style as dissonances so that a bit of
tempering may again be no major problem.

For the other sonorities, which are indeed intended to be just, my own
proofing of the pitchbends in the MIDI file suggests that the coding
may be correct -- but I'm open to correction, maybe in short order.

Monz, your thorough analysis seems to confirm that at least I've used the
right subset of 27 notes from the tuning, although that might not rule out
all mistakes on my part as to getting the right notes in the right
sonorities.

If the MIDI file itself is as intended, Paul, then your helpful
feedback might raise an even more interesting question for those of us
using these files to share various kinds of "JI" pieces.

Under what circumstances might a MIDI file correctly defining "pure"
intervals nevertheless cause notable beating? Could this be a result
of the timbre (here GM "Reed Organ"), or maybe of some factor that
could vary from one system or soundcard to the next?

Also, please let me express my very special appreciation, Monz, for a
very thorough analysis of the set of MIDI pitches used for this
example, an especially generous effort so close to your impending trip
to Europe, on which I wish you much joy, success, and musical delight.

In peace and love,

Margo

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "monz" <joemonz@y...> wrote:
>
> > From: mschulter <MSCHULTER@V...>
> > To: <MakeMicroMusic@y...>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 11:50 PM
> > Subject: [MakeMicroMusic] New composition -- Invocatio (MIDI)
> >
> >
> > This piece involves "enharmonicism," or the use of fifthtones, and
> > although Vicentino's adaptive tuning for "perfect fifths" at a
pure
> > ratio of 3:2, here realized using a 62-note scale based on 1/4-
comma
> > meantone (pure 5:4 major thirds) with two 31-note cycles at 1/4-
comma
> > apart.
> >
> > MIDI: <http://value.net/~mschulter/invoc4a.mid>
>
>
> Oh well... I see you've already given away the "key" to solving
> the puzzle... but you're not using anywhere near the complete
> 62-note set, but only 27 different pitches.
>
> (complete tuning to be posted only after everyone else gives up!)

What's the puzzle? I though Margo was simply asking you to verify
that most of the vertical triads are in exact JI (to within one
cawapu or whatever). Also, if the 27 different pitches fall within
the 36 of Vicentino's second tuning of 1555, then the latter might be
a better descriptor of the tuning of the piece, rather than the 62-
tone description . . . but who cares, as long as it sounds good?

🔗mschulter <MSCHULTER@...>

Hello, there, Paul and Monz and everyone.

To keep this brief, I should confirm that _Invocatio_ uses some notes
not included in either of Vicentino's two 38-note tunings as designed
for an ideal version of his keyboard instruments with two 19-note
manuals -- 36 notes in practice, since he could fit only 17 keys per
octave on the upper manual.

Therefore I find it simplest to describe the tuning for this piece as
based on my full 62-note system, with two 31-note cycles of 1/4-comma
meantone (pure major thirds) at 1/4-comma apart.

Most specifically, neither of Vicentino's tunings include just
sonorities on "enharmonic" steps a diesis or "fifthtone" above usual
ones, for example A*3-E*'4-A*4-C#*5. Here, as in my score recently
posted, an asterisk (*) shows a note raised by a fifthtone or diesis
of 128:125 (~41.06 cents), while an apostrophe (') shows a note raised
by 1/4 comma (~5.38 cents) to achieve pure vertical concords.[1]

Applying both inflections at the same time takes us beyond Vicentino's
tunings, although it can viewed simply as a logical further step
combining the features of the two tunings: a complete cycle of
fifthtone steps _and_ adaptive JI, or "enharmonic adaptive JI," as I
term it.

However, since the focus of this group is on xenharmonic composing and
musicmaking, I might add that I play this piece in its usual meantone
version (with the regular tempered intervals) in a very useful subset
of Vicentino's first tuning: a 24-note system with two 12-note manuals
a fifthtone or diesis apart, here 128:125 or ~41.06 cents.

Simply by disregarding the adaptive JI or "quartercomma" signs ('),
you can read the score as I play it in this accustomed tuning, with
the lower manual in Eb-G# and the upper in Eb*-G#*.

</makemicromusic/topicId_62.html#143>

This keyboard arrangement is reflected in my notation, borrowed in
part from Vicentino (who uses a dot above a note, my *, to show its
raising by a fifthtone). I call this a "regularized keyboard," since
each keyboard has the same arrangements of steps of intervals.

To produce adaptive JI versions of pieces originally composed in this
24-note system, we actually need only an additional 24 notes, or a
subset of 48 notes in all out of the complete set of 62 produced by
two full 31-note meantone cycles.

Anyway, from the viewpoint of this group, it may be relevant to note
how my experience with a 24-note keyboard can shape both my usual
compositional approach and notation for this kind of enharmonic music
in a "Xeno-Renaissance" style inspired by Vicentino.

Doing the "adaptive JI," in contrast, is mostly a process of adding
the right "quartercommas" to make tempered concords just, with a bit
of judgment exercised now and then in places where these small
inflections could cause complications.

Now for the "puzzle" mentioned in recent messages.

As far as MakeMicroMusic is concerned, Monz, I would say that your
confirmation that the notes used in my MIDI are the ones intended for
adaptive JI is indeed an artful solution of a practical puzzle, and
one for which I am much indebted, especially at a time when you are
preparing for your trip to Italy and other parts of Europe.

However, on crazy_music, I did post the piece as a kind of "puzzle,"
one involving the writings of Ivor Darreg:

</crazy_music/topicId_210.html#732>

For this group, Monz, I would say that your solution to the "puzzle"
of verifying the note set is a model not only of skill and patience,
but of generosity; together, we can share knowledge, techniques, and a
bit of sheer inspiration mixed with much mutual encouragement.

Also, Paul, thanks both for your initial query about the beating --
something it might be good to caution people can happen even with
theoretically pure intervals -- and for your supportive remarks about
my use of a subset of the full 62-note adaptive JI system I have
described, and will present at more length on the Alternate Tuning
List.

--------------------
Note for the curious
--------------------

1. Vicentino's first system includes a complete 31-note meantone
cycle, providing "enharmonic" sonorities on steps a diesis or
fifthtone from the usual ones, e.g. A*3-E*4-A*4-C#*4, plus five or
seven extra keys supporting a few just sonorities on common diatonic
steps (D',E',G',A', B' -- and also F' and C' in a 38-note version).
His second system includes the same 19 notes of regular meantone on
the lower manual (Gb-B#), with all the notes on the second manual
tuned to pure fifths with these -- the same tuning a quartercomma
higher (Gb'-B#'), or all these notes except E#' and B#' on his 36-note
instruments. Neither tuning includes quartercomma keys on enharmonic
steps such as E*' in A*3-E*'4-A*4-C#*5. While scholars have at times
disagreed on the interpretation of assorted features of Vicentino's
two tunings, this last assertion at least seems undisputed.

In peace and love,

Margo

🔗John A. deLaubenfels <jdl@...>

Margo, I've read with pleasure the feedback you've gotten on your new
sequence,

http://value.net/~mschulter/invoc4a.mid

Today I finally got the chance to listen to it, and it's lovely! The
tuning, too, is very interesting: extremely just vertically and at the
same time rather jarring to my ear horizontally, at times.

Just for fun, I threw my methods at your sequence. First, I reduced it
to 12-tET, in which it sounds just _horrible_ (kudos, Paul E, for
recommending this timbre); and from there I applied a 5-limit adaptive
tuning. The numbers astonished me:

12-tET spring pain: 256781.974
31 from Eb to G# : spring pain: 36190.294
31 from Bb to D# : spring pain: 36190.294
COFT Total spring pain: 23506.275
COFTbig Total spring pain: 23456.046
After relaxing, Total spring pain: 2965.583
nSpring Strength Pain RMS deviation
------- -------- ---- -------------
Vertical 124 3594.836 507.824 0.532 cent
Horizontal 118 1296.616 410.643 0.796 cent
Melodic 66 0.832 21.728 7.227 cent
Grounding 128 1125.408 2025.388 1.897 cent
TOTAL 436 6017.693 2965.583 0.993 cent

As expected, 12-tET shows as terrible, and 1/4 comma meantone (31-tET)
looks quite good. The adaptive numbers are beyond anything I can recall
ever seeing: only .532 cents RMS deviation in the vertical intervals!
Normally, I see several cents here.

Not surprisingly, I think my adaptive tuning of your sequence sounds
nice :-) . May I share it, Margo? And how about the 12-tET varient,
just for horror?

Thanks again for bringing this music to life.

JdL

🔗John A. deLaubenfels <jdl@...>

[Margo wrote:]
>Hello, there John deLaubenfels, and please let me warmly thank you for
>taking such an interest in my piece, and encourage you to post your
>retunings -- yes, including the one in 12-tET <grin>, a standard lute
>tuning from around 1545 or 1550 on.

Thanks, Margo; you are gracious as ever.

I played the piece for my unsuspecting wife, and she loved the 12-tET,
but she's used to having different tastes from me, as anyone on this
list may well imagine! ;-> To my ear, especially in the Reed Organ
timbre, 12-tET is really horrible, like fingernails on a blackboard.

>My first guess might be that your impression of the music as "rather
>jarring to my ear horizontally, at times" could be a very
>understandable reaction not to the small adaptive JI adjustments (~5.38
>cents), but to the enharmonic diesis or fifthtone shifts of 128:125, or
>about 41.06 cents -- 1/31 octave in the almost identical 31-tET model
>you mention, or about 38.71 cents.

I'm busted, Margo; I missed the details in your post 143. That larger
number explains my reaction for sure! It's strongest, to my ear, in the
transition between measures 20 and 21 (around 26 seconds in the
sequence). Here, C*5 falls to C'5, and E*4 falls to E'4, very
noticeable and something I need to get used to. Again, as the piece
concludes, between measures 25 and 27 E*4 falls to E'4, and I hear that
as a bit of a "strained" sound (to my unaccustomed ear).

>This can be startling to listeners in the 16th century or 21st
>century, definitely "xenharmonic," and something that got Vicentino
>very mixed reviews.

Startling, that's the word! I guess what's not clear to me, without
further analysis, is whether the '*' notes are pushed higher by a
falling stack of major thirds, or whether this is style in its purest
form, a conscious decision where one could have gone either way. I'm
guessing it's actually the latter; it that true?

>Vincenzo Galilei, for example, a noted lutenist and theorist who wasn't
>at all afraid to take on the musical establishment of the time (much
>like his son, the astronomer Galileo, with the science establishment),
>concluded that "the enharmonic diesis is contrary to the nature of
>singing and disproportionate with our sense of hearing."

Har! Those were hot times in Old Italy, no? I'm reluctant to side
against Vicentino, however, at least without giving my ear a chance to
get used to the effect.

>Vicentino, interestingly, gives performers the option of ignoring his
>fifthtone shifts, something which would permit his enharmonic pieces
>to be played on usual 12-note meantone keyboards without the extra
>notes a fifthtone apart.

And, at least in theory, whether or not the fifths were corrected by
1/4 comma or not.

>Here's a link to my score, where the fifthtone steps are indicated by
>an asterisk (*) raising a note by 128:125 in 1/4-comma meantone, or by
>1/31 octave in 31-tET.

></makemicromusic/topicId_62.html#143>

Oh good, now it's much clearer...

>If you're reducing the piece to 12-tET before doing the adaptive
>retuning, then I suspect that in effect you're doing just what
>Vicentino discusses: converting an enharmonic piece with fifthtone
>inflections to one with more familiar diatonic and chromatic steps.

Yes, I think so. What I _don't_ have is a 12-note meantone rendition
of the piece, however.

>In fact, quite apart from the adaptive tuning or adaptive JI aspects,
>this kind of playing around with different versions could be a great
>way to let people try out what Renaissance or Xeno-Renaissance music
>is all about. We could have versions of the same piece with or without
>fifthtone shifts or progressions, and with or without adaptive tuning
>or JI as opposed to usual meantone or 31-tET.

>Please post those retunings, and thank you for a dialogue through
>words and music which brings together 16th-century and 21st-century
>approaches to adaptive tuning and JI.

Thanks, Margo. I realize that anything other than your original tuning
may be a debasement of the piece in some way; it stands with all its
original and complete flavor just as you have done it. So anything I
do is meant to be regarded in its proper light, subservient to your
version, if you will.

Your fan,

JdL

/makemicromusic/files/JdL/

Then download your choice(s):

invoc4a.mid Margo's Invocatio in Margo's own tuning
invoc4a12.mid Margo's Invocatio in 12-tET
invoc4aer3.mid Margo's Invocatio in JdL's 5-limit adaptive tuning

Re: Surprise -- new timbres (thank you, Paul!)

🔗mschulter <MSCHULTER@...>

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@...>

🔗mschulter <MSCHULTER@...>

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@...>

🔗David J. Finnamore <daeron@...>

🔗nanom3@...

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@...>

🔗mschulter <MSCHULTER@...>

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

🔗mschulter <MSCHULTER@...>

🔗Paul Erlich <paul@...>

🔗mschulter <MSCHULTER@...>

🔗John A. deLaubenfels <jdl@...>

🔗John A. deLaubenfels <jdl@...>

🔗Robert Walker <robertwalker@...>