Creating

I agree that probably every list member responding to Igliashon &
co. had only the best intentions.

Many of us have found that we don't want to be tied to one tuning
system and have designed and sometimes built instruments accordingly.

I was very fortunate to basically see the chance to build the
Clavette fall into my lap! It likely would've remained an
abstraction had I not ended up at the Institute of Sonology in '93-4
in The Hague, Netherlands.

Anyway, I think its important that we not only conceive of tunings,
but, as one's own vision requires, to BUILD the devices (mechanical
& virtual) to play in 'em. And to document what we do in audio &
video recordings.
And even if you don't feel the need to build instrument(s), to
create music with the tunings that interest you, if you have the
creative urge.
So go for it, Igliashon!

And when we theorize about music, it's important that we stay close
enough to the listening experience,
and not get too seduced by the beautiful formulas and diagrams we
can make, which can even
obscure some important aspects of the listening experience. For
example, I personally find a strict
"n-limit" way of thinking about intervals and tunings to be too
detached from listening realities.
For these reasons I haven't found it useful to become more than a
casual observer of
most tuning mathematics.

Well, I guess I've also managed to summarize why I'm on this list,
and not say on tuning-math.
But I'm glad we live in a web-verse where the various viewpoints can
inform each other.

Constructively yours,
Harold