RE: "punning"

I used the term ''intonational pun'' in a talk at Santa Cruz in 1982 and
everyone who knows me has heard it repeated too often. I have no idea if
this was a spontaneous invention on my part (having studied poetics with
N.O.Brown, puns were very much on my mind at the time) or if there is a
precedent for it. Anybody know one?

Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:46 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA03075; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:49:03 +0100
Received: from eartha.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA03073
Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
for id JAA16061; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:48:57 -0800
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:48:57 -0800
Message-Id: <199701061247_MC2-E50-A5D4@compuserve.com>
Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu

> Yes, 41 is simplest, but 53 system is much better. Fifts are even better,
> and thirds are much better than in 41 system.

That's certainly true for the traditional thirds, but 41 fits 9:7 and
7:6 better, although only slightly better. 41 is however significantly
better at the 11:9 neutral third. Then again, 11:9 isn't 9-limit of
course.

Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 05:36 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA21367; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 05:39:39 +0100
Received: from eartha.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA21364
Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
for id UAA26529; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 20:39:36 -0800
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 20:39:36 -0800
Message-Id: <32D0CD66.42BF@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

PAULE wrote:

> Matt Nathan wrote,
> >--which leads me to
> >think
> >it best use the rational intervals directly.
>
> Unfortunately, real music is more than just an isolated presentation of
> harmonic intervals. Therefore, I do not reach this conclusion. In fact,
> there are many musical considerations which contradict, and need to be
> balanced against, the desire for pure intervals. I chose to reinterpret the
> 9-limit example in 41-tet so that I could add notes which would form
> consonances with more of the existing notes than would be possible in just
> intonation (what is often called "punning").

If you had instruments which could provide you as easily with any pitch
as any other, would you still do this? It seems to me that the adding
of consonances would be more possible (endless) with just intonation than
with any ET. Punning is purposely using the wrong pitch.

Matt Nathan


Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:53 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA06789; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:56:40 +0100
Received: from eartha.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA06833
Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
for id MAA17168; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:56:36 -0800
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:56:36 -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