Talking to yourself

Hello everyone. I have a question for you.

I have started using just intonation and microtones recently and
playing a fretless guitar.

I feel the need to change my vocabulary for describing music to
myself. At the moment, I'm trying to find notes mainly by ear
rather
than from theory. From a `tonic' note I get around 20
distinct
intervals.

It doesn't seem to make sense any more to use terms like
`7th'
or `2nd' as they describe the function within a system of
harmony
that I'm not using, and frame the way I think of using the note.

Improvising is ok as you just work with the sound itself, but when
composing or figuring things out I do feel the need for a way to
think about how notes are related in abstract terms.

I wonder if you have come across this, and what thoughts you had.

Jay

one can use the old terms and not think of them in the way they were originally meant. or in the case of the guitar you could invent some form of tableture that works for you

j_aylon wrote:

>Hello everyone. I have a question for you.
>
>I have started using just intonation and microtones recently and >playing a fretless guitar. >
>I feel the need to change my vocabulary for describing music to >myself. At the moment, I'm trying to find notes mainly by ear
>rather >than from theory. From a `tonic' note I get around 20
>distinct >intervals. >
>It doesn't seem to make sense any more to use terms like
>`7th' >or `2nd' as they describe the function within a system of
>harmony >that I'm not using, and frame the way I think of using the note. >
>Improvising is ok as you just work with the sound itself, but when >composing or figuring things out I do feel the need for a way to >think about how notes are related in abstract terms.
>
>I wonder if you have come across this, and what thoughts you had.
>
>Jay
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> >
>
>
> >

--
Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

tab on a fretless guitar???

Kraig Grady wrote:

>one can use the old terms and not think of them in the way they were >originally meant. or in the case of the guitar you could invent some >form of tableture that works for you
>
>j_aylon wrote:
>
> >
>>Hello everyone. I have a question for you.
>>
>>I have started using just intonation and microtones recently and >>playing a fretless guitar. >>
>>I feel the need to change my vocabulary for describing music to >>myself. At the moment, I'm trying to find notes mainly by ear
>>rather >>than from theory. From a `tonic' note I get around 20
>>distinct >>intervals. >>
>>It doesn't seem to make sense any more to use terms like
>>`7th' >>or `2nd' as they describe the function within a system of
>>harmony >>that I'm not using, and frame the way I think of using the note. >>
>>Improvising is ok as you just work with the sound itself, but when >>composing or figuring things out I do feel the need for a way to >>think about how notes are related in abstract terms.
>>
>>I wonder if you have come across this, and what thoughts you had.
>>
>>Jay
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>
> >

--
* David Beardsley
* microtonal guitar
* http://biink.com/db

not the old type of tab. one could mark the 20 pitches he liked and go from there with sharps flats plus and minuses to get those that is found .i am sure there would be other ways to organize it

David Beardsley wrote:

>tab on a fretless guitar???
>
>Kraig Grady wrote:
>
> >
>>one can use the old terms and not think of them in the way they were >>originally meant. or in the case of the guitar you could invent some >>form of tableture that works for you
>>
>>j_aylon wrote:
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>>>Hello everyone. I have a question for you.
>>>
>>>I have started using just intonation and microtones recently and >>>playing a fretless guitar. >>>
>>>I feel the need to change my vocabulary for describing music to >>>myself. At the moment, I'm trying to find notes mainly by ear
>>>rather >>>than from theory. From a `tonic' note I get around 20
>>>distinct >>>intervals. >>>
>>>It doesn't seem to make sense any more to use terms like
>>>`7th' >>>or `2nd' as they describe the function within a system of
>>>harmony >>>that I'm not using, and frame the way I think of using the note. >>>
>>>Improvising is ok as you just work with the sound itself, but when >>>composing or figuring things out I do feel the need for a way to >>>think about how notes are related in abstract terms.
>>>
>>>I wonder if you have come across this, and what thoughts you had.
>>>
>>>Jay
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>
>
> >

--
Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

>Hello everyone. I have a question for you.
>
>I have started using just intonation and microtones recently
>and playing a fretless guitar.
>
>I feel the need to change my vocabulary for describing music
>to myself. At the moment, I'm trying to find notes mainly by
>ear rather than from theory. From a `tonic' note I get around
>20 distinct intervals.

I might suggest coming up with a syllable system, like "do
re me...". You could try singing while playing and see what
comes out, and work with it until you arrive at something
you like.

-Carl

Our Persian music teacher uses Western notation, with special
accidentals to denote the quarter tones.

Paolo

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...>
wrote:
> one can use the old terms and not think of them in the way they were
> originally meant. or in the case of the guitar you could invent some
> form of tableture that works for you
>
> j_aylon wrote:
>
> >Hello everyone. I have a question for you.
> >
> >I have started using just intonation and microtones recently and
> >playing a fretless guitar.
> >
> >I feel the need to change my vocabulary for describing music to
> >myself. At the moment, I'm trying to find notes mainly by ear
> >rather
> >than from theory. From a `tonic' note I get around 20
> >distinct
> >intervals.
> >
> >It doesn't seem to make sense any more to use terms like
> >`7th'
> >or `2nd' as they describe the function within a system of
> >harmony
> >that I'm not using, and frame the way I think of using the note.
> >
> >Improvising is ok as you just work with the sound itself, but when
> >composing or figuring things out I do feel the need for a way to
> >think about how notes are related in abstract terms.
> >
> >I wonder if you have come across this, and what thoughts you had.
> >
> >Jay
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Kraig Grady
> North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
> The Wandering Medicine Show
> KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

From: "j_aylon":

> Hello everyone. I have a question for you.
>
> I have started using just intonation and microtones recently and
> playing a fretless guitar.

And welcome to our world. I do fretless bass myself.

> I feel the need to change my vocabulary for describing music to
> myself. At the moment, I'm trying to find notes mainly by ear
> rather
> than from theory. From a `tonic' note I get around 20
> distinct
> intervals.

What are those twenty intervals? I didn't even start with just intonation; the first tuning I used was 19-tone equal temperament. In JI or near-JI, I probably use up to 41 pitches in practice (and winging it with 53- or 72-equal).

> It doesn't seem to make sense any more to use terms like
> `7th'
> or `2nd' as they describe the function within a system of
> harmony
> that I'm not using, and frame the way I think of using the note.

Well you can't vaguely call anything a "major second" or "minor seventh" anymore, since a major second can be either 9/8, 10/9 or even 8/7. So I think of things being one or two commas up or down, or "small", "great", "grave" or "acute".

> Improvising is ok as you just work with the sound itself, but when
> composing or figuring things out I do feel the need for a way to
> think about how notes are related in abstract terms.

In a song I'm writing right now, I came up with this chord: G# B D F C (G#o7b11). No problem in 12-tone or any meantone, but I'm contemplating how that should be tuned in JI. In 5-limit, a diminished seventh with all-equal minor thirds would be [1/1 6/5 36/25 216/125], but you might prefer [1/1 6/5 64/45 128/75] instead. Or in 7-limit, [1/1 6/5 10/7 12/7].

Anyway, I think the best advice for a beginner is to draw a lattice first in 5-limit, then move on to 7, then 11 if you want. See how everything is related to each other. I was told the same thing by some of the veterans.

(And familiarize yourself with Scala, if you can run it on your computer. It's amazing.)

~Danny~

Danny wrote...

>since a major second can be either 9/8, 10/9 or even 8/7.

This may be true in your approach, but it is not a universal
fact.

>Anyway, I think the best advice for a beginner is to draw a
>lattice first in 5-limit, then move on to 7, then 11 if you
>want. See how everything is related to each other. I was told
>the same thing by some of the veterans.

Didn't Jay say he wanted a non-theoretical approach, based
on listening to his playing and talking to himself?

-Carl

> Danny wrote...
>
>>since a major second can be either 9/8, 10/9 or even 8/7.
>
> This may be true in your approach, but it is not a universal
> fact.

It's not an exhaustive list. But aren't those the simplest and most common intervals for a M2?

>>Anyway, I think the best advice for a beginner is to draw a
>>lattice first in 5-limit, then move on to 7, then 11 if you
>>want. See how everything is related to each other. I was told
>>the same thing by some of the veterans.
>
> Didn't Jay say he wanted a non-theoretical approach, based
> on listening to his playing and talking to himself?

The one part of the post I missed.

That sounds all good, but you still need a *little* theory don't you? Maybe I'm just theoretically-minded.

Danny,

{you wrote...}
>Maybe I'm just theoretically-minded.

I'm sure there are people on the list that can recommend an appropriate 12-step program... ;)

Cheers,
Jon

>> Danny wrote...
>>
>>>since a major second can be either 9/8, 10/9 or even 8/7.
>>
>> This may be true in your approach, but it is not a universal
>> fact.
>
>It's not an exhaustive list. But aren't those the simplest and
>most common intervals for a M2?

Depends on the framework. Some frameworks would reject all of
those intervals as "major seconds".

>>>Anyway, I think the best advice for a beginner is to draw a
>>>lattice first in 5-limit, then move on to 7, then 11 if you
>>>want. See how everything is related to each other. I was told
>>>the same thing by some of the veterans.
>>
>> Didn't Jay say he wanted a non-theoretical approach, based
>> on listening to his playing and talking to himself?
>
>The one part of the post I missed.
>
>That sounds all good, but you still need a *little* theory
>don't you?

Nope. You really don't.

-Carl

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Danny Wier" <dawiertx@s...> wrote:
> From: "j_aylon":
> > It doesn't seem to make sense any more to use terms like
> > `7th'
> > or `2nd' as they describe the function within a system of
> > harmony
> > that I'm not using, and frame the way I think of using the note.
>
> Well you can't vaguely call anything a "major second" or "minor
seventh"
> anymore, since a major second can be either 9/8, 10/9 or even 8/7. So I
> think of things being one or two commas up or down, or "small",
"great",
> "grave" or "acute".

Here's one consistent system for doing that. It gives unique names for
all intervals tunable by ear (in ordinary timbres) and then some.

http://dkeenan.com/Music/Miracle/MiracleIntervalNaming.txt

The above is just a table, with little explanation. A slightly simpler
system (but mostly consistent with the above) is described in more
detail here.

http://dkeenan.com/Music/IntervalNaming.htm

-- Dave Keenan

Hi Jay,

You wrote:
________________________________________________________________________
Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 11:56:13 -0000

Hello everyone. I have a question for you.

I have started using just intonation and microtones recently and
playing a fretless guitar.

I feel the need to change my vocabulary for describing music to
myself. At the moment, I'm trying to find notes mainly by ear
rather than from theory. From a `tonic' note I get around 20
distinct intervals.

It doesn't seem to make sense any more to use terms like
`7th' or `2nd' as they describe the function within a system
of harmony that I'm not using, and frame the way I think of
using the note.

Improvising is ok as you just work with the sound itself, but when
composing or figuring things out I do feel the need for a way to
think about how notes are related in abstract terms.

I wonder if you have come across this, and what thoughts you had.

Jay
________________________________________________________________________
[YA] Jay, I'd go with Carl's suggestion of singing along and
perhaps developing your own solfa - whatever syllables seem
to you to best fit the sounds you're making. At the very
least, you may end up with some memorable song that, indeed,
helps you remember what you've discovered.

I've spent some time playing with a fretless Chinese instrument
before this, and love how you can always invent the right note
to fit the mood of the music. But I've not spent enough time
with it to start to systematise it, nor have I recorded any of
the improvisations.

In my youth, I tried to notate some "wordless songs" that I
improvised, very fluid and melismatic, with lots of bends and
glides and no pitch very definite except the tonic. The best I
could do was to make a rough graph of pitch against time -
rather like a piano roll with lots of notes falling between the
keys. Went to read them back several months later, and found
that the graphs were indeed very rough - too rough to be very
useful. Obviously, I would have been better off with a tape
recorder!

But I wonder - unless you're actually going to _use_ those
names systematically, say to create a theory of melody or
harmony, or to tell some other musician what pitch or interval
to play - are you any better off with names (or notation)?
Do you, in fact, _need_ to "talk to yourself"? Or might you
make better music, explore more freely, without such a
system of names? Just a thought!

Regards,
Yahya

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 6/5/05

Thanks for the discussion. I think it might be worth making the effort
to think in ratios. This may turn out to be quite intuitive as I am
stopping strings at certain points.

I do feel that I need a system for my music, as standard just intonated
intervals seem to have a strong `gravity' or maybe familiarity, and it
is too easy to slip into playing a well used mode. I think for me
having an abstract way of thinking about things enables me to explore
past the obvious.

Yahya, do you know what the fretless Chinese instrument was called?

Jay

Jay,

You wrote:
> Yahya, do you know what the fretless Chinese instrument was called?

It's a show version of the erh-hu (old style, Wade romanisation),
or erhu (modern, or Pinyin romanisation), the Chinese fiddle.
I call it a show version because it has only a shallow, flatbacked
wooden resonator, rather than the deep tambour of the better
instruments, such as the one you can see illustrated at:
http://www.mms.qld.edu.au/musical-instruments/erh-hu.htm

I believe my instrument was intended more for hanging and
displaying on a wall than actually for playing :-(. It also came
without a bow. Still, it's possible to make music out of anything,
even tin cans!

It rather resembles a p'i-p'a (old style, Wade romanisation)
or pi-pa (modern, or Pinyin romanisation), the Chinese lute,
because of its flat, shallow resonator and flat fingerboard.
However, the pi-pa has very thin steel frets set in high mounts
or bridges of ivory (or a plastic substitute). On the pi-pa, you
have to hear the bends to believe them! :-) You can bend the
string (thin steel wire) very rapidly, making for some
excellent and idiosyncratic ornamentation. With practice,
you can also play an alternate tuning on the pi-pa without any
noticeable glide or pitch bend, but not at great speed.

Regards,
Yahya

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 10/5/05