Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic Re: [MMM] Bartók and non-12

hey Aaron!
I happen to catch the tour at UCLA royce hall where they played along side each
other. it was great and even had a chance to exchange a few words of praise with
Marta!

"Aaron K. Johnson" wrote:

> Hey,
>
> There's an album out by a group called 'Muzsikï¿½s' that reproduces the folk
> sources for Bartï¿½k's inspiration:
>
> http://www.musicweb.uk.net/classrev/march99/bartok.htm
>
> At my Tuesday listening session last night, we listened to it, and it was
> really great, and there were certainly some microtonal things going on in the
> folk music of Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, etc. There is also the evident
> influence of Arabic sources.
>
> Having read the Fokker article
> (http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/doc/fokkerorg.html) on the use of 31-tet for
> things like Bartï¿½k, I think Fokker is right that 31-tet can do justice to a
> great variety of folk and folk inspired musics of the world.
>
> an excerpt:
>
> ".....Nowadays there is a new demand that the system underlying our music be
> improved. Well known is the attempt by Alois Hï¿½ba. He was aware that in order
> to preproduce native songs of his countrymen in Czechoslovakia he needed a
> finer grain, so to speak, and therefore he halved the equal semitones. He
> tried to use quarter-tones. However, it is clear that by simply adding 12
> more notes between the existing 12 notes one cannot improve the harmonic
> relationships and the musical quality of the original 12 notes. What one
> needs for improvement is not quarter-tones but fifths of tones - the system
> Huygens used.
> Again, Bela Bartï¿½k, the Hungarian composer who died in 1945 in the United
> States, recognizing the value of the Hungarian peasant music both as a living
> tradition and as a source of inspiration for modern music, stated that he
> over and over again met the interval of the harmonic seventh and that he
> therefore laid at the bottom, as a basic foundation for music, a chord of
> four notes, adding the perfect seventh to the common chord. Bartï¿½k's
> testimony carries great weight, for he was one of the very greatest modern
> composers. Therefore, for the evolution of music, it is very urgent that we
> find an equal temperament suitable for the reproduction of Bartï¿½k's
> fundamental chord, which may be specified by the harmonic numbers 4:5:6:7.
> The "tricesimoprimal" equal temperament discovered by Huygens 3 centuries ago
> fulfills the requirement..."
>
> now I'm really interested in perusing Bartï¿½k's output for two violins, (the
> 44 duos), which nicely blurs the distinction between the classical style of
> playing, and the earthier 'fiddle' style.....
>
> -Aaron
> --
> Aaron Krister Johnson
> http://www.dividebypi.com
> http://www.akjmusic.com
>
>
> [MMM info]------------------------------------------------------
> More MMM music files are at http://www.microtonal.org/music.html
> ------------------------------------------------------[MMM info]
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST

🔗kraig grady <kraiggrady@...>

Hello Aaron!
Yes 31 ET is a good tuning and was the very first tuning i worked with for
quite a few years when i found i couldn't stand the meantone second. in fact i
don't really like meantone for this same reason. It isn't even bad for quite a
few 11 limit intervals and by it use i was able to chart out what it was that
interested me. For this reason they are quite useful.
I do object to Darreg's notion the JI has a mood. It doesn't have any such
thing as it encompasses an infinite array of intervals in just as many
configurations. On the other hand i do find that ET's do have moods that sooner
or later present themselves. Et's are a closed system and that is a fact not an
opinion. The only way to escape them is to abandon them.
Et 's also have allot in common with electronic music. The most sucessful (
as one can notice in much of the black music use of it ) is most successful when
the timbre are changed all the time. With both that way one avoid the the
listener from really hearing exactly what is there and one uses the contrast
between the various elements use as the basis of saying what one wishes.

"Aaron K. Johnson" wrote:

>
> Well, it's a long way from 'doing justice' to 'panacea'...... ;) 31-tet is a
> darn good tuning that preserves much of the aesthetic of meantone and the
> history of Western music that comes with that thinking, plus having wonderful
> new xentonal resources, and a wonderful calm that to my ears is 'close
> enough' to 7 limit JI to produce that 'hippie vibe', but has modulatory
> resources without the insane multiplicity of pitch required by JI to do the
> same. A nice tradoff, if you ask me.
>
> I'm one of those individuals who tends to think the boundary is, and should
> be, blurry between n-tets and JI.
>

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST

🔗Aaron K. Johnson <akjmicro@...>

On Thursday 03 June 2004 12:10 am, kraig grady wrote:
> Hello Aaron!
> Yes 31 ET is a good tuning and was the very first tuning i worked with
> for quite a few years when i found i couldn't stand the meantone second. in
> fact i don't really like meantone for this same reason. It isn't even bad
> for quite a few 11 limit intervals and by it use i was able to chart out
> what it was that interested me. For this reason they are quite useful.

hmmm... I have no problem with the meantone 2nd. OTOH, sometimes I *do* have a
problem with not being able to use the triad built on D major in a C
major-based tuning because of the D-A fifth sucking!! I stress the
*sometimes* (as you know, I'm fond of Centaur, for instance, for many uses) I
know the JI argument: write differently !!! I can and do: sometimes. But when
I want the D major chord to sound just dandy, I chose not to use JI. It's
practical for me: I don't have time and money to get into alternate keyboards
or hand-made instruments, etc.

I wish I did!

But still, I don't believe that Bach *works* in JI. And I don't believe I want
to cut Bach from my diet, or any Bach-like music, or Renaissance 1/4 comma
meantone (or much of Western music history) on a technicality related to an
a-priori attachment to JI !!

> I do object to Darreg's notion the JI has a mood. It doesn't have any
> such thing as it encompasses an infinite array of intervals in just as many
> configurations. On the other hand i do find that ET's do have moods that
> sooner or later present themselves. Et's are a closed system and that is a
> fact not an opinion. The only way to escape them is to abandon them.

Well, I could turn the tables on this argument: If you have an infinite array
of intervals, presumably to keep them from beating, where is your contrast?
The contrast you speak of applies to JI's limitations within a finite set of
pitches, no? Or to an unequal temperament. Modulation from one beatless chord
to another is as contrast-less as from one slightly beating chord to another,
as in ET's, no?

If one is not interested in limiting oneself, one shouldn't stick to *only*
JI, but either mix tunings as Jon suggests, or use the infinite spectrum of
intervals, and include the irrationals as well, of which there is an even
greater infinity, as Cantor proved (athough you could argue that the ear
hears only a finite practical subset of any infinite set of usable intervals)

Stravinsky said he liked to compose with a sense of knowing the limits of what
he was working with. In fact he said he couldn't compose without limits. In a
sense, I agree with his sentiment. As you do too, in practice. You pick the
limits of Eikosany. I pick, say 19-tet or 31-tet. I'm througly convinced
great music can be written in any tuning whatsoever ;)

It seems awfully severe to 'abandon' or dimiss any music making based on ET's
to me....that's fine though, if that's your personal mission, to write great
stuff as you have, based on that philosophy. I just know it's not my path to
reject, but to remain open and explore. I will say however, that in the
interest of getting down to writing, it helps to pick a path to explore and
stick to it--one of the maddening things about tuning is how many great
possibilities there are--perhaps this is what Stravinsky was talking about
when he talked about picking limits !!

Anyway, I find that JI does have a certain 'mood' to me: to my ears, it's hard
not to sound New Age writing in JI, something I'm keen to avoid. Most, not
all music written in JI comes across as having a static-contemplative-relaxed
vibe, and that's fine if you want it, but it's not the only thing I want my
music to express. I certainly love JI tunings that are rich in beating, in
which case, for me, it seems absurd to insist that the beating be derived
from rational tuning designed to eliminate beating for other intervals !!

I don't know...I rarely judge music based on its technical features, which are
a means to an end. Tuning to me is a technical feature, not an end in itself.
If the music moves me, I don't care what tuning it's in, although I prefer the
otherness of *any* alternate tuning for the variety it would offer from
12-tet.....but even 12-tet is fine for me many times. Why be reactionary?
Should I stop listening to Stravinsky's music in 12-tet? I *like* being an
omnivore !

What about electronic music with no apparantly clear tuning at all? ('Silver
Apples of the Moon' of Morton Subotnick) Is it not good because it doesn't
have a array of clear pitches to start with, and is it even worse for the
pitches not being JI?

> Et 's also have allot in common with electronic music. The most
> sucessful ( as one can notice in much of the black music use of it ) is
> most successful when the timbre are changed all the time. With both that
> way one avoid the the listener from really hearing exactly what is there
> and one uses the contrast between the various elements use as the basis of
> saying what one wishes.

Hey: I think that's true, but I think hearing a wide variety of electronic
timbres in a short span *can* be very overwhelmingly interesting !!!

Best,
--
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.dividebypi.com
http://www.akjmusic.com

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

Aaron,

No, there *won't* be another tuning war - I'll see to that! :)

I did want to address one point, which I am indelibly connected with:

{you wrote...}
>Anyway, I find that JI does have a certain 'mood' to me: to my ears, it's >hard
>not to sound New Age writing in JI, something I'm keen to avoid. Most, not
>all music written in JI comes across as having a static-contemplative-relaxed
>vibe, and that's fine if you want it, but it's not the only thing I want my
>music to express.

This statement flies in the face of the entire output of one guy, Harry Partch. I defy anyone to find a piece that Partch composed that sounds "new age"! And while there are, here and there, either a piece, movement, or section of a large work - usually by necessity of the dramatic needs (staged works) - that creates a static or inert mood, it does so purposely.

I would also point out a composer like Kyle Gann, who has written music that explores a lot of the dissonances that can be found in an expanded JI system.

Again: I did not mean to start or rehash anything. And your earlier post nailed it quite well - this is just my take on things. I liken it very much to visual arts: how many paintings have you seen with equal-spaced gridmarks on them? :) I just happen to feel uncomfortable, on a conceptual/design level, with starting my date with the muse armed with intervals that are all the same. Doesn't mean I don't do it from time to time, but it's usually one of those bad dates with the muse.

Cheers,
Jon

🔗David Beardsley <db@...>

🔗Aaron K. Johnson <akjmicro@...>

On Thursday 03 June 2004 10:55 am, Jonathan M. Szanto wrote:
> Aaron,
>
> No, there *won't* be another tuning war - I'll see to that! :)
>
> I did want to address one point, which I am indelibly connected with:
>
> {you wrote...}
>
> >Anyway, I find that JI does have a certain 'mood' to me: to my ears, it's
> >hard
> >not to sound New Age writing in JI, something I'm keen to avoid. Most, not
> >all music written in JI comes across as having a
> > static-contemplative-relaxed vibe, and that's fine if you want it, but
> > it's not the only thing I want my music to express.
>
> This statement flies in the face of the entire output of one guy, Harry
> Partch. I defy anyone to find a piece that Partch composed that sounds "new
> age"! And while there are, here and there, either a piece, movement, or
> section of a large work - usually by necessity of the dramatic needs
> (staged works) - that creates a static or inert mood, it does so purposely.

True enough, but I would point out that Partch used an awful lot of
instruments with percussive decay lengths! It's hard to sound New Age with
percussion.

Well, even the stuff I'm batting at as being New Age-ey, I sort of
like--Riley, Young, Robert Rich....

Its an internal love-hate thing for me I guess.

> I would also point out a composer like Kyle Gann, who has written music
> that explores a lot of the dissonances that can be found in an expanded JI
> system.

That's true. Iwould still question why one would go for JI *exclusively* if
one were interested in dissonance, though. I see no reason to think
low-numbered rational intervals make dissonance any better than they
consonance. (i.e. I have to agree with McLaren that the subjective idea of
consonance and dissonance is not so simple as the ratio idea)

> Again: I did not mean to start or rehash anything. And your earlier post
> nailed it quite well - this is just my take on things. I liken it very much
> to visual arts: how many paintings have you seen with equal-spaced
> gridmarks on them? :)

Cute analogy, but one that doesn't work long for me--you would have to prove
that pitch space maps to grid space on a canvas. I don't think visual arts
and music can be quite literally mapped at all together without drastically
changing the nature of either.....first of all, music has a grammer and
temporality.....well, let's not get into it, but you see my point ! ;)

My final word is that ET's are useful to me, to avoid drowning in thousands of
ratios, comma drift, etc. while still getting something of that JI 'purity',
and the added feature of interesting 'impurity'. (example: 2^(15/19)) from
19-tet......a wonderful sound !)

Best,
Aaron.

--
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.dividebypi.com
http://www.akjmusic.com

🔗Aaron K. Johnson <akjmicro@...>

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

Aaron,

{you wrote...}
>True enough, but I would point out that Partch used an awful lot of >instruments with percussive decay lengths! It's hard to sound New Age with >percussion.

Tell that to the drum circles! But I would also point out that the first 20 years of Partch's output contained very little percussion, as he started his non-12 composing in 1929/30 and didn't actually have the start of his percussion until 1949 and later.

>Its an internal love-hate thing for me I guess.

We all battle our demons. :) Besides, it sounds like what you dislike is the label, not the music.

>I would still question why one would go for JI *exclusively* if one were >interested in dissonance, though.

I don't know why anyone would go for something exclusively, but I certainly would be happy having them pursue that option.

>Cute analogy, but one that doesn't work long for me--you would have to >prove that pitch space maps to grid space on a canvas. I don't think >visual arts and music can be quite literally mapped at all together >without drastically changing the nature of either.....first of all, music >has a grammer and temporality.....well, let's not get into it, but you see >my point ! ;)

Absolutely, I do. I simply don't have any way to quantify, delineate, or codify my feelings about not wanting to divide music up by equal-natured constructs. Must be a character flaw or something...

>My final word is that ET's are useful to me, to avoid drowning in >thousands of
>ratios, comma drift, etc. while still getting something of that JI 'purity',
>and the added feature of interesting 'impurity'. (example: 2^(15/19)) from
>19-tet......a wonderful sound !)

Good enough for me.

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

I hate to add verbiage to this age-old time waster. Also, it
seems a topic more suited to the tuning list than MMM. Though
I find it heartening that it has thus far remained civil here.
Let's see what I can do to change that. :)

When comparing two things, such as "ETs" and "JI", it helps to
have some idea of what those things are. Perhaps Jon and Aaron
have a mutual understanding of the definitions I'm not aware of,
but ultimately it seems "ETs" = irrational numbers, while
"JI" = rational numbers. If this is the case, a comparison
between the two is pointless, as there is no practical difference
with respect to music. Any irrational can be approximated as
closely as one likes with the rational numbers and vice versa.

Someone said something about ETs being closed systems, while
JI is an open system. Not true. Any single ET is closed, but
so is any single JI scale. The possible variety of either
*class* of tunings is infinite.

So what is meant by this age-old debate? My guess is that
through some accident of history, a particular style associated
itself with JI, while another style associated itself with ET.
And the two styles, for some other reason, are really just into
arguing with one another -- the content of the argument is
secondary -- and 'ETs" vs. JI' is just a welcome focal point.

Or perhaps what is meant is: 'low-numbered ETs' vs. 'high-limit
JI'. Or maybe it's: '12-tET vs. 5-limit JI'. Or maybe it's:
'tunings that approximate JI' vs. 'tunings that don't try to
approximate JI'. Or perhaps it's: 'people who think 2-cent
errors are acceptable' vs. 'people who think 0.0002-cent errors
are acceptable'.

But if it is any of those things, why not just use those terms
instead of 'ETs vs. JI'? A little clarity goes a long way.

Yours,

-Carl

🔗Gene Ward Smith <gwsmith@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson"
<akjmicro@c...> wrote:
> On Thursday 03 June 2004 10:55 am, Jonathan M. Szanto wrote:

> > This statement flies in the face of the entire output of one guy,
Harry
> > Partch. I defy anyone to find a piece that Partch composed that
sounds "new
> > age"! And while there are, here and there, either a piece,
movement, or
> > section of a large work - usually by necessity of the dramatic
needs
> > (staged works) - that creates a static or inert mood, it does so
purposely.
>
> True enough, but I would point out that Partch used an awful lot of
> instruments with percussive decay lengths! It's hard to sound New
Age with
> percussion.

One thing n-et makes it easy to do is the endlessly modulating effect
that was driving both of you nuts with my last piece. If all of your
available chords are closely tied harmonically, you are kind of like
a dog on a leash instead of one running wild through the neighborhood
pooping on lawns. That does tend to create an element of stasis. With
temperament, and especially equal temperament, you have "puns" which
allow the dog to go a little crazy.
> Well, even the stuff I'm batting at as being New Age-ey, I sort of
> like--Riley, Young, Robert Rich....
>
> Its an internal love-hate thing for me I guess.
>
> > I would also point out a composer like Kyle Gann, who has written
music
> > that explores a lot of the dissonances that can be found in an
expanded JI
> > system.
>
> That's true. Iwould still question why one would go for JI
*exclusively* if
> one were interested in dissonance, though. I see no reason to think
> low-numbered rational intervals make dissonance any better than
they
> consonance. (i.e. I have to agree with McLaren that the subjective
idea of
> consonance and dissonance is not so simple as the ratio idea)
>
> > Again: I did not mean to start or rehash anything. And your
earlier post
> > nailed it quite well - this is just my take on things. I liken it
very much
> > to visual arts: how many paintings have you seen with equal-spaced
> > gridmarks on them? :)
>
> Cute analogy, but one that doesn't work long for me--you would have
to prove
> that pitch space maps to grid space on a canvas. I don't think
visual arts
> and music can be quite literally mapped at all together without
drastically
> changing the nature of either.....first of all, music has a grammer
and
> temporality.....well, let's not get into it, but you see my
point ! ;)
>
> My final word is that ET's are useful to me, to avoid drowning in
thousands of
> ratios, comma drift, etc. while still getting something of that
JI 'purity',
> and the added feature of interesting 'impurity'. (example: 2^
(15/19)) from
> 19-tet......a wonderful sound !)
>
> Best,
> Aaron.
>
> --
> Aaron Krister Johnson
> http://www.dividebypi.com
> http://www.akjmusic.com

🔗Gene Ward Smith <gwsmith@...>

🔗George D. Secor <gdsecor@...>

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

George!

{you wrote...}
>Should I conclude, then that you are also uncomfortable with musical notes >equally spaced rhythmically, or all having durations that are multiples of >a 16th or 32nd-note? ;-)

Hah! Leave it to you to come up with that! Well, it is a clever analog, probably no closer to painting/ET comparisons than anything, but worthy of consideration. Sure, there are times when absolute grid-like rhythmic constructs work for me; for instance, contemporary dance music (trance, electronica) seems perfectly suited, esp. since most of it is computer-derived, not to mention that the regularity of the beat makes it easier on Western youth to find the rhythm.

But even when one constructs, ahead of time, a 16th-note rhythm, there are always - when it sounds good to me - subtle inflections of time. A good example would be to listen to a samba pattern played by a college percussion ensemble (that has never learned Brazilian music) and then the same stuff played by Brazillians. You'd need lots of beams and dots to adequately notate the feel they give to the pattern. Lots of musical cultures could be looked at this way.

For insight into how much someone might care in the *opposite* direction, albeit in a creative vein, check out at your leisure the nano-correction of tempo and other aspects done by BT in some of his music:

http://tinyurl.com/33u25

I know you were being sly in your response, but it does cause me pause: there *is* symmetry in nature, and there are instances of "equality" that I like. But words sometimes fail when discussing the deepest aspect of the art(s) we love. I initially loved the work of Frank Lloyd Wright, certainly not shy of straight lines and even spacing (at times); it kind of fell by the wayside when I discovered the work of Charles Rennie Macintosh, who combined similar elements with more rounded and organic structures. A perfect blend, for me.

Cheers,
Jon

🔗David Beardsley <db@...>

🔗kraig grady <kraiggrady@...>

"Aaron K. Johnson" wrote:

>
>
> Well, I could turn the tables on this argument: If you have an infinite array
> of intervals, presumably to keep them from beating, where is your contrast?

It is by JI that i am able to tune my beats to do exactly what i want them to do.
Just because one uses bricks, one does not have to always make rectangles and
chimneys

>
> The contrast you speak of applies to JI's limitations within a finite set of
> pitches, no? Or to an unequal temperament. Modulation from one beatless chord
> to another is as contrast-less as from one slightly beating chord to another,
> as in ET's, no?

you are making an assumption about users of JI

> If one is not interested in limiting oneself, one shouldn't stick to *only*
> JI, but either mix tunings as Jon suggests, or use the infinite spectrum of
> intervals, and include the irrationals as well, of which there is an even
> greater infinity, as Cantor proved (athough you could argue that the ear
> hears only a finite practical subset of any infinite set of usable intervals)

In reality each type of continuum is infinite and at a certain point
indistinguishable

>
>
> Stravinsky said he liked to compose with a sense of knowing the limits of what
> he was working with. In fact he said he couldn't compose without limits. In a
> sense, I agree with his sentiment. As you do too, in practice. You pick the
> limits of Eikosany. I pick, say 19-tet or 31-tet.

yet the history of music is more about setting new horizons that putting one self
in a cage. but could you stand doing only 19 for say 5 years and nothing else,
and if not why?

> I'm througly convinced
> great music can be written in any tuning whatsoever ;)

I believe so too. It is in the long term that i am concerned. I have no wish to
construct new walls for future development.

> It seems awfully severe to 'abandon' or dimiss any music making based on ET's
> to me....that's fine though, if that's your personal mission, to write great
> stuff as you have, based on that philosophy.

I recently mentioned some fine ET music i was sent. i don't dismiss any music but
do object to my own experience with how working in such systems make me think.

> I just know it's not my path to
> reject, but to remain open and explore. I will say however, that in the
> interest of getting down to writing, it helps to pick a path to explore and
> stick to it--one of the maddening things about tuning is how many great
> possibilities there are--perhaps this is what Stravinsky was talking about
> when he talked about picking limits !!
>
> Anyway, I find that JI does have a certain 'mood' to me: to my ears, it's hard
> not to sound New Age writing in JI, something I'm keen to avoid.

I suggest you listen to some of Kyle Gann music. Although my last CD might have
leaned that way, I am for the most part not inclined that direction. most New
Age music is written in an ET- 12

> Most, not
> all music written in JI comes across as having a static-contemplative-relaxed
> vibe, and that's fine if you want it, but it's not the only thing I want my
> music to express. I certainly love JI tunings that are rich in beating, in
> which case, for me, it seems absurd to insist that the beating be derived
> from rational tuning designed to eliminate beating for other intervals !!

as someone who uses beats in live situations , it is by having them tuned that i
am able to play unamplified and create sonic effects from all different
directions in the room. Anyone one on these list that have heard me live will
testify to that. The thing is that By using JI i could stumble into such a thing,
with an ET the structure is always the same and

>
>
> I don't know...I rarely judge music based on its technical features, which are
> a means to an end. Tuning to me is a technical feature, not an end in itself.
> If the music moves me, I don't care what tuning it's in, although I prefer the
> otherness of *any* alternate tuning for the variety it would offer from
> 12-tet.....but even 12-tet is fine for me many times. Why be reactionary?
> Should I stop listening to Stravinsky's music in 12-tet? I *like* being an
> omnivore !
>
> What about electronic music with no apparantly clear tuning at all? ('Silver
> Apples of the Moon' of Morton Subotnick) Is it not good because it doesn't
> have a array of clear pitches to start with, and is it even worse for the
> pitches not being JI?

Sidewinder is my favorite of his but he has ruined that by butchering it.
He is, by the way, very anti tuning.

>
> Hey: I think that's true, but I think hearing a wide variety of electronic
> timbres in a short span *can* be very overwhelmingly interesting !!!

I completely agree

>
>
> Best,
> --
> Aaron Krister Johnson
> http://www.dividebypi.com
> http://www.akjmusic.com
>
>

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST

🔗kraig grady <kraiggrady@...>

193.54 in 31

David Beardsley wrote:

> Aaron K. Johnson wrote:
>
> >On Thursday 03 June 2004 12:10 am, kraig grady wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hello Aaron!
> >> Yes 31 ET is a good tuning and was the very first tuning i worked with
> >>for quite a few years when i found i couldn't stand the meantone second. in
> >>fact i don't really like meantone for this same reason. It isn't even bad
> >>for quite a few 11 limit intervals and by it use i was able to chart out
> >>what it was that interested me. For this reason they are quite useful.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >hmmm... I have no problem with the meantone 2nd.
> >
> Is the meantone 2nd in question 194 cents or 232 cents?
>
> --
> * David Beardsley
> * microtonal guitar
> * http://biink.com/db
>
>
> [MMM info]------------------------------------------------------
> More MMM music files are at http://www.microtonal.org/music.html
> ------------------------------------------------------[MMM info]
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST

🔗kraig grady <kraiggrady@...>

I will acknowledge i have no experience with any et above 72 except the
762? ( i can't remember off hand) used on some old synths, which i did
not like at all!

Gene Ward Smith wrote:

> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, kraig grady <kraiggrady@a...>
> wrote:
>
> On the other hand i do find that ET's do have moods that sooner
> > or later present themselves. Et's are a closed system and that is a
> fact not an
> > opinion. The only way to escape them is to abandon them.
>
> Very high number ets all sound alike, since they all sound like JI.
> As the division number climbs, the theoretical closure also means
> less and less in practice. When the commas of the system are all so
> tiny they don't arise in practice as "puns", it becomes dubious to
> draw any distinction between the et and JI. You still get "puns" for
> 612-equal, but when you get highly accurate systems in the high four
> digits I think you can forget about the distinction; the same is true
> for 196608-equal (the midi accuracy limit) for that matter. I
> consider than to be JI, and its commas to be irrelevant.
>
>
> [MMM info]------------------------------------------------------
> More MMM music files are at http://www.microtonal.org/music.html
> ------------------------------------------------------[MMM info]
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST

🔗kraig grady <kraiggrady@...>

🔗David Beardsley <db@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Andrew Heathwaite <gtrpkt@...>

Hi!

I have enjoyed reading the comments about ETs and JI that have been given
lately. My microtonal studies started with equal temperaments, and now I'm
looking at JI. I think both approaches are totally interesting and totally
different, and I intend to continue studying both (and whatever I find that
exists in between).

Kraig, I found one of your comments very curious.

--- kraig grady <kraiggrady@...> wrote:

> I recently mentioned some fine ET music i was sent. i don't dismiss any
> music but
> do object to my own experience with how working in such systems make me
> think.

I'd be interested to know what, specifically, you mean by how equal tempered
tunings systems make you think. I understand that the statement was a
personal one, not a general one, and I'm not challenging you to defend the
statement or any such thing. I'm just really curious what that means.

Thanks!

Andrew

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/

🔗kraig grady <kraiggrady@...>

Hi Andrew and yes do enjoy your CD!
When i work in JI i am always aware of how i am plowing in a particular
field where from each point it is possible to expand further. With Et i am in a
closed cycle and there is no way to add anything to it. It is unable to grow. (
of course one can always start dividing each temperment into smaller equal
divisions).
Partch referred to his 43 tone scale. In actuality he had way more because
on any of these degrees he could and would put whole harmonic and subharmonic
hexads. The instruments themselves found their own natural way out of the
system.
Even if one does not have a particular note for example, it is quite easy
to ask any player to play a fifths a fourth or a Just third relations to it
without too much trouble.

Andrew Heathwaite wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I have enjoyed reading the comments about ETs and JI that have been given
> lately. My microtonal studies started with equal temperaments, and now I'm
> looking at JI. I think both approaches are totally interesting and totally
> different, and I intend to continue studying both (and whatever I find that
> exists in between).
>
> Kraig, I found one of your comments very curious.
>
> --- kraig grady <kraiggrady@...> wrote:
>
> > I recently mentioned some fine ET music i was sent. i don't dismiss any
> > music but
> > do object to my own experience with how working in such systems make me
> > think.
>
> I'd be interested to know what, specifically, you mean by how equal tempered
> tunings systems make you think. I understand that the statement was a
> personal one, not a general one, and I'm not challenging you to defend the
> statement or any such thing. I'm just really curious what that means.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Andrew
>
>

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST

🔗George D. Secor <gdsecor@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"
<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> George!
>
> {you wrote...}
> >Should I conclude, then that you are also uncomfortable with
musical notes
> >equally spaced rhythmically, or all having durations that are
multiples of
> >a 16th or 32nd-note? ;-)
>
> Hah! Leave it to you to come up with that! Well, it is a clever
analog,
> probably no closer to painting/ET comparisons than anything, but
worthy of
> consideration. Sure, there are times when absolute grid-like
rhythmic
> constructs work for me; for instance, contemporary dance music
(trance,
> electronica) seems perfectly suited, esp. since most of it is
> computer-derived, not to mention that the regularity of the beat
makes it
> easier on Western youth to find the rhythm.
>
> But even when one constructs, ahead of time, a 16th-note rhythm,
there are
> always - when it sounds good to me - subtle inflections of time. A
good
> example would be to listen to a samba pattern played by a college
> percussion ensemble (that has never learned Brazilian music) and
then the
> same stuff played by Brazillians. You'd need lots of beams and dots
to
> adequately notate the feel they give to the pattern. Lots of
musical
> cultures could be looked at this way.

Hmmm, it occurred to me that I could also turn the analogy around and
equate precisely spaced rhythm with JI and subtle inflections of time
with micro-tempering and thereby argue that a microtemperament is the
*best* intonation -- but, I don't want to start a war on this list,
so I won't do that. ;-)

But I would equate precisely spaced rhythm with an ET and subtle
inflections of time with well-temperament and thereby argue that a
well-temperament (or alternatively, a rational approximation of a
dissonant ET) is often better than the ET it's designed to replace.
For example, I much prefer 13:15:17:20:23 or 12:14:16:18:21 or
26:30:34:39:45 to 5-ET.

--George

🔗Aaron K. Johnson <akjmicro@...>

🔗George D. Secor <gdsecor@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson"
<akjmicro@c...> wrote:
> On Monday 07 June 2004 01:13 pm, George D. Secor wrote:
>
> > Hmmm, it occurred to me that I could also turn the analogy around
and
> > equate precisely spaced rhythm with JI and subtle inflections of
time
> > with micro-tempering and thereby argue that a microtemperament is
the
> > *best* intonation -- but, I don't want to start a war on this
list,
> > so I won't do that. ;-)
> >
> > But I would equate precisely spaced rhythm with an ET and subtle
> > inflections of time with well-temperament and thereby argue that a
> > well-temperament (or alternatively, a rational approximation of a
> > dissonant ET) is often better than the ET it's designed to
replace.
> > For example, I much prefer 13:15:17:20:23 or 12:14:16:18:21 or
> > 26:30:34:39:45 to 5-ET.

> Except on fretted string instruments, where expediency and ease of
use dictate
> an ET--the trade of in $$$ and extra skill for staggered frets
might not be
> worth it to some.

True, if you're only thinking about replacing only a single ET. But
if you consider the option of replacing ETs with rational intervals,
then you might also find that:

17:19:21:23:25:28:31 or 18:20:22:24:27:30:33 can simulate 7-ET
22:24:26:28:30:32:35:38:41 or 24:26:28:30:33:36:39:42:45 can simulate
9-ET
and I've found other sets that will approximate up to about 14-ET.

Since these are all integers, you could have a single rational
superset from which you could select subsets to approximate various
octave divisions. A single tuning having multiple applications might
then justify the added expense, not to mention the fact that you
would also get (high-prime-limit) JI as well.

You might enjoy taking a few minutes to read a short piece of
microtonal fiction I wrote a couple of years ago, which presents this
approach to tonality in an unusual way:

/makemicromusic/files/secor/blarney.txt

> This is the kind of post that makes me think life is too short...

It is! And the longer you've lived, the more likely you'll agree
with that observation.

> you give a
> person almost *too* much to explore, George !!

Ah, yes, but better that than to be frustrated by the limitations
imposed by the more obvious alternate-tuning choices.

After about 12 years in microtonality I found that I wanted to pursue
a middle ground between JI and ETs, so I started thinking of ways to
create tunings that combine certain characteristics of both -- for a
given (ballpark) number of tones: more modulation than JI and better
intonation than an ET, not to mention a range of moods. I'm so sold
on the advantages of these tunings, that if were writing ad copy I
would say: "If you're looking for fun and adventure in a tuning,
then let yourself go -- take a trip down the middle path!"

--George

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

🔗Andrew Heathwaite <gtrpkt@...>

Kraig,

Thanks for sharing your perspective! You're talking about using a JI system
not as a way to create scales, but a way to create whatever sound you need
in any instance. This is a new idea for me.

In my very preliminary experiments in JI, I've played some common scales and
made a bunch of my own, but I've been limited to twelve notes on my software
synthesizer. I have often found that I want an interval above some note of
the scale, and it's not there, while it's there for a different note.

I think one of the greatest differences between a JI scale and an equal
tempered scale is this:

In an equal tempered scale, there are exactly as many different intervals as
there are notes to the octave. Each note of the scale has the ability to
travel the distance of any one of those intervals.

In a JI scale, there are many more intervals than notes in the scale. Each
note has a collection of different intervals it can move in either
direction. It is different among notes.

You're talking about a new kind of JI (new for me), one that isn't bound to
a scale. In this kind of system, there are infinite possible intervals, and
each note is capable of traveling the distance of any interval you can think
of. Infinity!

Wow!

Well, I know I'm not ready for infinity, for a variety or reasons. I think
all composers need to set limits for themselves so they don't go crazy and
can make sense of things. To me, an equal temperament seems like a
reasonable limit to set. x number of intervals, x number of notes, each
interval available to each note. An interconnected but not infinite JI
scale makes sense as a different kind of limit. Lots of intervals,
dispersed all over the place. A limited number of notes and a limited
collection of abilities given to each note. These two kinds of scale
satisfy different needs. They create different limits. They're wonderfully
different.

Thanks again for your perspective, Kraig. It got me thinking.

-Andrew

--- kraig grady <kraiggrady@...> wrote:
> Hi Andrew and yes do enjoy your CD!
> When i work in JI i am always aware of how i am plowing in a
> particular
> field where from each point it is possible to expand further. With Et i am
> in a
> closed cycle and there is no way to add anything to it. It is unable to
> grow. (
> of course one can always start dividing each temperment into smaller equal
> divisions).
> Partch referred to his 43 tone scale. In actuality he had way more
> because
> on any of these degrees he could and would put whole harmonic and
> subharmonic
> hexads. The instruments themselves found their own natural way out of the
> system.
> Even if one does not have a particular note for example, it is quite
> easy
> to ask any player to play a fifths a fourth or a Just third relations to
> it
> without too much trouble.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/

🔗George D. Secor <gdsecor@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"
<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> George,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >Hmmm, it occurred to me that I could also turn the analogy around
and
> >equate precisely spaced rhythm with JI and subtle inflections of
time
> >with micro-tempering and thereby argue that a microtemperament is
the
> >*best* intonation -- but, I don't want to start a war on this list,
> >so I won't do that. ;-)
>
> That's OK, you're too genial to start even a squabble, much less a
war.
> Besides, I think we've all seen that comparing rhythm and tuning is
like
> comparing music and painting, or apples and kiwi fruit, etc. Our
analogies
> work, at best, when both sides can see the general point already;
it has
> been my experience that my trying to use analogies to explain - to
people
> in the microtonal communities - personal thoughts on these matters
has been
> a dismal failure.
>
> Maybe that is what makes something an art and not a science: you
can't
> explain it to someone else.

Yes, exactly. What all of these examples have in common are the
contrasting of mathematically (or mechanically) precise relationships
with intentional small departures from those relationships. For some
those departures are defects, but for others they are devices or
nuances that contribute to the artistic value of a work. It would be
unfortunate if all of us were always in agreement about which is
which, because we would then not have such a variety of creative
ideas as are now occurring in this group.

(We got riddim! -- who could ask for anything more?)

--George

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

🔗kraig grady <kraiggrady@...>

Hi Andrew!
Glad this was useful. i would like to say add that even using a limited pitch
set it is nice to know one is surrounded by infinite tone space on all sides .
like looking at a small jewel on a large piece of black velvet.

Andrew Heathwaite wrote:

> Kraig,
>
> Thanks for sharing your perspective! You're talking about using a JI system
> not as a way to create scales, but a way to create whatever sound you need
> in any instance. This is a new idea for me.
>
> In my very preliminary experiments in JI, I've played some common scales and
> made a bunch of my own, but I've been limited to twelve notes on my software
> synthesizer. I have often found that I want an interval above some note of
> the scale, and it's not there, while it's there for a different note.
>
> I think one of the greatest differences between a JI scale and an equal
> tempered scale is this:
>
> In an equal tempered scale, there are exactly as many different intervals as
> there are notes to the octave. Each note of the scale has the ability to
> travel the distance of any one of those intervals.
>
> In a JI scale, there are many more intervals than notes in the scale. Each
> note has a collection of different intervals it can move in either
> direction. It is different among notes.
>
> You're talking about a new kind of JI (new for me), one that isn't bound to
> a scale. In this kind of system, there are infinite possible intervals, and
> each note is capable of traveling the distance of any interval you can think
> of. Infinity!
>
> Wow!
>
> Well, I know I'm not ready for infinity, for a variety or reasons. I think
> all composers need to set limits for themselves so they don't go crazy and
> can make sense of things. To me, an equal temperament seems like a
> reasonable limit to set. x number of intervals, x number of notes, each
> interval available to each note. An interconnected but not infinite JI
> scale makes sense as a different kind of limit. Lots of intervals,
> dispersed all over the place. A limited number of notes and a limited
> collection of abilities given to each note. These two kinds of scale
> satisfy different needs. They create different limits. They're wonderfully
> different.
>
> Thanks again for your perspective, Kraig. It got me thinking.
>
> -Andrew
>
> --- kraig grady <kraiggrady@...> wrote:
> > Hi Andrew and yes do enjoy your CD!
> > When i work in JI i am always aware of how i am plowing in a
> > particular
> > field where from each point it is possible to expand further. With Et i am
> > in a
> > closed cycle and there is no way to add anything to it. It is unable to
> > grow. (
> > of course one can always start dividing each temperment into smaller equal
> > divisions).
> > Partch referred to his 43 tone scale. In actuality he had way more
> > because
> > on any of these degrees he could and would put whole harmonic and
> > subharmonic
> > hexads. The instruments themselves found their own natural way out of the
> > system.
> > Even if one does not have a particular note for example, it is quite
> > easy
> > to ask any player to play a fifths a fourth or a Just third relations to
> > it
> > without too much trouble.
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
>
>
> [MMM info]------------------------------------------------------
> More MMM music files are at http://www.microtonal.org/music.html
> ------------------------------------------------------[MMM info]
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST