Cubase SL; 29-EDO

Two things, real quick:

1) Does anyone know if Cubase SL has microtonal capabilities at all,
and if so, how to access them? I've heard it does, but I've been
through every inch of the program and can't find any trace. Also
can anyone recommend any good cheap PC-compatible softsynths to make
some micro music with?

2) Does anyone have any music in 29-EDO? I was just examining this
scale in Scala and realized that it has very strong 11-limit
implications, but I've yet to encounter anyone who's a fan of this
tuning.

Thanks in advance.

-Igliashon

Ig,

{you wrote...}
>1) Also can anyone recommend any good cheap PC-compatible softsynths to make
>some micro music with?

In ascending order of cost, from about $60 to just over $200 (with file format):

1. LinPlug CronoX (.tun)
2. Big Tick Rhino (.tun)
3. rgc:audio z3ta+ (.scl)
4. LinPlug Alpha2 (.tun)
5. Native Instruments FM7 (I think .scl?)
6. VirSyn Tera (.scl)

I know there are a few others, but they aren't in my realm of experience (I use all except #4). I'd love to post links, but am pressed - a quick Google will get you to each developers site.

The good part is that all of these have demos that you can try out. There are a lot of differences: differing synthesis methods, how cpu intensive they are, etc. CronoX, while it doesn't always sound like a complete killer on it's own, is modest in cost and resources, you can import samples and do a credible job of emulating sounds, and is fairly flexible. The LinPlug and Big Tick instruments supported the more robust .tun file format by virtue of lobbying/education from a couple of past/current MMM members, Jacky Ligon and Rick McGowan. You might want to check out a microtonal demo by Jacky:

http://www.linplug5.com/mp3/JackyLigon_CronoX_Galang_Taathe.mp3

HTH,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "cityoftheasleep" <igliashon@s...> wrote:
> 2) Does anyone have any music in 29-EDO? I was just examining this
> scale in Scala and realized that it has very strong 11-limit
> implications, but I've yet to encounter anyone who's a fan of this
> tuning.

Is there an embarrassing lack of support for 29-EDO? Did the only theorist who examined
it Émile Chevé do so by mistake, as monz <http://tonalsoft.com/enc/eqtemp.htm> notes?

The only 29-tone music I've heard are the 3 midi compositions by Mats Öljare <http://
www.angelfire.com/mo/oljare/midicomp.html> and one of Warren Burt's dissonant
etudes. What else is out there?

I'm writing something in it, for one.

It's inspired by some Margo Schulter ideas, I think she has some MIDI's
lying around or what-not.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"

/makemicromusic/topicId_8119.html#8122

<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> Ig,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >1) Also can anyone recommend any good cheap PC-compatible
softsynths to make
> >some micro music with?
>
> In ascending order of cost, from about $60 to just over $200 (with
file
> format):
>
> 1. LinPlug CronoX (.tun)
> 2. Big Tick Rhino (.tun)
> 3. rgc:audio z3ta+ (.scl)
> 4. LinPlug Alpha2 (.tun)
> 5. Native Instruments FM7 (I think .scl?)
> 6. VirSyn Tera (.scl)
>

***Jon, since you use both z3tz+ (which you've recommended for a
while) and VirSyn Tera, could you briefly outline
similarities/differences, positives/negatives of these two which use
native Scala formats?

Thanks so much!

Joe

Hello, everyone, and I want to respond to the thread about 29-EDO both by
sharing two short pieces in this excellent temperament, and quickly
mentioning some of the resources touched on in these pieces.

<http://www.calweb.com/~mschulter/mary2-29.mid>
<http://www.calweb.com/~mschulter/librar29.mid>

Thank you, Christopher, for getting involved in this thread also; what
appears below was written before seeing your message, and I'm much looking
forward to your piece (and maybe soon having sound set up so that I can
hear it from a MIDI or mp3 or ogg, etc.). Please let me lend you every
encouragement!

If there's any time when I'm tempted to get into theoretical
discussions on MMM, it's when someone has inquired about a tuning with
which I'm familiar and like, and which I consider greatly
underappreciated. My purpose is to give enough information here to
suggest that 29-EDO is a beautiful and resourceful tuning, inviting
responses to my music here and discussions on compositional or
improvisational theory on non12comp.

First of all, 29-EDO has fifths only about 1.49 cents from a pure 3:2,
so it can serve as a mildly enhanced or "brightened" version of a
classic Pythagorean tuning. Additionally, it has three attractive
families of thirds and sixths, often approximating just ratios
involving 11 (mentioned in this thread) and/or 13.

(1) Regular major thirds (10 steps) and minor thirds (7 steps), around
414 and 289 cents, very nicely approximate JI ratios of 33:26 and
13:11 -- one of my favorite regions for thirds, a general
neighborhood also including 14:11 and 33:28. You can hear these
thirds in both pieces. Like Pythagorean thirds, they tend to be
active, inviting resolutions to stable intervals like unisons or
the near-just fourths and fifths. The usual diatonic semitone of
two 29-EDO steps is around 83 cents, a bit more compact than in
Pythagorean, which makes for nicely defined melody and efficient
cadences.

(2) Semineutral or supraminor/submajor thirds of 8 steps (~331 cents)
and 9 steps (~372 cents) are close to just ratios of 63:52 and
26:21 -- you can hear an internal cadence using these thirds in
the piece for Mary Beth Ackerley. The cadence involves melodic
motion by a 3-step interval, about 124 cents -- not too far from
14:13, a kind of "2/3-tone."

(3) Ultraminor/ultramajor thirds are _way cool_, and get used in the
piece for Mary Beth Ackerley; these intervals of 6 steps (~248
cents) and 11 steps (~455 cents) are very close to just ratios of
15:13 and 13:10, and often in my style cadence to stable intervals
with motions of a single 29-EDO or diesis, about 41 cents! The
ultramajor sixth -- or ultraminor seventh! -- at 23 steps (~952
cents) can serve as something like either a large 12:7 or a small
7:4 -- and yet delightfully different from either (and I say this
as someone with a taste pure 7-based intervals also).

Really, I'd invite further discussion about the more theoretical side
of composing or improvising in 29-EDO on non12comp; my concern is that
I wouldn't want anyone curious about this fine temperament to get
discouraged.

By the way, there are some articles about 29-EDO available on the Web:
check the Tuning List archives (or try a Web search with "+29-tET
+diesis").

Most appreciatively,

Margo Schulter
mschulter@...

Joe,

{you wrote...}
> <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> > 1. LinPlug CronoX (.tun)
> > 2. Big Tick Rhino (.tun)
> > 3. rgc:audio z3ta+ (.scl)
> > 4. LinPlug Alpha2 (.tun)
> > 5. Native Instruments FM7 (I think .scl?)
> > 6. VirSyn Tera (.scl)
>
>***Jon, since you use both z3tz+ (which you've recommended for a while) >and VirSyn Tera, could you briefly outline similarities/differences, >positives/negatives of these two which use native Scala formats?

No.

Well, that is kind of a flip answer. :) Without going into the actual synthesis methods used, I'm finding it is pretty weak to try and put into words the 'qualities' of a particular instrument, as many of them are pretty wide-ranging. In general, the z tends to work best with pads and smoother sounds, the Tera had a little more bite and edge. But all it has taken is new banks of presets by others, and some programming by me, to see that both of them can go in the opposite direction.

Beyond sound, then there is flexibility in programming and user interface. The former I would say both are deep instruments, capable of a lot of useful exploration (the Tera actually is about 6 different synth types at once). As for the UI, only *you* can say which suits you.

Which is the bottom line: ALL of these had demos, and words are somewhat wasted compared to a person simply downloading the instrument and trying it out. I haven't found anyone's comments remotely as helpful as just using a synth.

Lastly: don't know what you mean by .scl being 'native' - I realize that is the default format for Scala, but creating .tun files (which are a bit more specific and would be a plus for some composers) adds only about 2 steps of work in Scala, so I consider *any* synth that supports either .tun or .scl as completely valid and useable. Which is why I listed some of the others.

HTH,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"

/makemicromusic/topicId_8119.html#8173

<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> Joe,
>
> {you wrote...}
> > <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> > > 1. LinPlug CronoX (.tun)
> > > 2. Big Tick Rhino (.tun)
> > > 3. rgc:audio z3ta+ (.scl)
> > > 4. LinPlug Alpha2 (.tun)
> > > 5. Native Instruments FM7 (I think .scl?)
> > > 6. VirSyn Tera (.scl)
> >
> >***Jon, since you use both z3tz+ (which you've recommended for a
while)
> >and VirSyn Tera, could you briefly outline
similarities/differences,
> >positives/negatives of these two which use native Scala formats?
>
>
> No.
>
>
> Well, that is kind of a flip answer. :) Without going into the
actual
> synthesis methods used, I'm finding it is pretty weak to try and
put into
> words the 'qualities' of a particular instrument, as many of them
are
> pretty wide-ranging. In general, the z tends to work best with pads
and
> smoother sounds, the Tera had a little more bite and edge. But all
it has
> taken is new banks of presets by others, and some programming by
me, to see
> that both of them can go in the opposite direction.
>
> Beyond sound, then there is flexibility in programming and user
interface.
> The former I would say both are deep instruments, capable of a lot
of
> useful exploration (the Tera actually is about 6 different synth
types at
> once). As for the UI, only *you* can say which suits you.
>
> Which is the bottom line: ALL of these had demos, and words are
somewhat
> wasted compared to a person simply downloading the instrument and
trying it
> out. I haven't found anyone's comments remotely as helpful as just
using a
> synth.
>
> Lastly: don't know what you mean by .scl being 'native' - I realize
that is
> the default format for Scala, but creating .tun files (which are a
bit more
> specific and would be a plus for some composers) adds only about 2
steps of
> work in Scala, so I consider *any* synth that supports either .tun
or .scl
> as completely valid and useable. Which is why I listed some of the
others.
>
> HTH,
> Jon

***Hi Jon,

Thanks for the help. I'm actually writing this with the new
computer, which was set up today (!) I just got Sibelius working
(pretty easily!) with the Audiophile 2496 card. Some acoustic pieces
to work on and finish right now with Sibelius and then on to the new
softsynth frontiers! Thanks again!

JP