Interstylisticism

As lurkers continue to delurk and we begin to review each other's music,
it seems increasingly important to consider interstylisticism versus style
preferences.

Travelling to make music in different cities often reveal certain
preferences in their compositional styles. This is not unlike Wessleyan
ethnomusicology flexing performance, while Colubia University considers
only anthropology.

The American Festival of Microtonal Music has always been interstylistic,
which is synonymous with tolerant, open, and eclectic. There has never
been any reason to change the programming though I admit it is difficult
to ascertain one's objectivity on musical styles.

A few questions:

Do you consider impovisation inferior or superior to planned
composition?

Do you have a favoirite music? A music you detest?

How do deal with music that has an audience but which simply does
not move you personally?


When programming I try to recognize styles of music that have an
enthusiastic audience and seek out what accounts for the fascination.
It's always there to be found. I remember a time when I didn't get jazz.
And Brahms was a bore.

Now I have learned to dig the color of sound, along with the nuances that
make for a Giacinto Scelsi or a La Monte Young.

Oh, yeah, I still prefer Eric Dolphy to Dizzy Gillespie, but we're only
human. We come in many different varieties and flavors. I still don't
like drinking beer.

There will never be laws or degrees that determine accomplishment in music
creation that are just. Anyone and everyone should be encouraged to
express themselves in music. There are no guarantees.

>From a proffessional point-of-view there are different expectations. From
a playing point of view there can be a virtuosity that can be put in
reserve and appear even nonchalant.

>From a composer or improvisor there much value is based on the likelihood
of repeated listeners in a a release and initial buys. And yet truly
original music is almost by definition unlike any thing previously
experienced. Sometimes they use unique instruments and are based on
completely different philosophies and aesthetics, or in the case of
politics (e.g. luigi nono).

Johnny Reinhard
Director
American Festival of Microtonal Music
318 East 70th Street, Suite 5FW
New York, New York 10021 USA
(212)517-3550/fax (212) 517-5495
reinhard@ios.com


Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Wed, 18 Dec 1996 01:26 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA00889; Wed, 18 Dec 1996 01:28:51 +0100
Received: from eartha.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA00887
Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
for id QAA28124; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 16:28:49 -0800
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 16:28:49 -0800
Message-Id: <32B739FB.720A@ix.netcom.com>
Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu

> As far as I remember, Doty got his arithmetic correct, yet
> insisted on comparing everything to integer frequency ratios,
> which of course entirely missed the significance of
> the beating.

Equal-beating in a meantone framework, yes. Or, well, almost yes. Erv
Wilson's meta-meantone has equal-beating between 1-3 and 3-5 of a
close-voiced, root-position major triad, with no doubling, and no notes
omitted. As Dan Wolf pointed out, LucyTuning is close to, but not exactly
identical with, meta-meantone, so the value behind the pi-based definition
is unclear.

The usual 4:5:6 JI version of that same chord is also equal-beating, but
not in a meantone framework as with meta-meantone.

As for patenting and copyrighting tunings, Mr. Lucy might want to ponder
whether that approach will backfire on him. That in the sense that
requiring people to get his permission (and probably pay royalties) to use
LucyTuning commercially is likely to pretty much ensure that nobody will
use it. There's a lot of "tuner fish" (har har) in the musical ocean.

Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Wed, 18 Dec 1996 22:10 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA02494; Wed, 18 Dec 1996 22:13:08 +0100
Received: from eartha.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA02492
Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
for id NAA20461; Wed, 18 Dec 1996 13:13:00 -0800
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 13:13:00 -0800
Message-Id:
Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu