Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup mills-tuning-list TUNING digest 1009

4096 is 100 cents
2048 is 50 cents
1024 is 25 cents,
-4096 is -100 cents, etc.

It's that simple

-Kami

** I am a peach tree,
** Blossoming in a deep pit.

----------
> De : tuning@ella.mills.edu
> A : Multiple recipients of list
> Objet : TUNING digest 1010
> Date�: 10 mars, 1997 18:49
>
> TUNING Digest 1010
>
> Topics covered in this issue include:
>
> 1) Re: A=443 ?
> by rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes)
> 2) Dominant 7th chord = 4:5:6:7:8?
> by rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes)
> 3) Re: Universe and Sound
> by rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes)
> 4) Re: TUNING digest 1009
> by Johnny Reinhard
> 5) pitch bend units?
> by Daniel Wolf
> 6) RE: pitch bend units?
> by Manuel.Op.de.Coul@ezh.nl (Manuel Op de Coul)
> 7) C# and Db:I said KEYS, not PITCHES
> by kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk (Jonathan Walker)
> 8) Re: Ancient Geeks and irrationals
> by kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk (Jonathan Walker)
> 9) Re: winding down on ET
> by kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk (Jonathan Walker)
> 10) mapping spectra
> by William Sethares
> 11) RE: Meaner Tones (Paul E)
> by Manuel.Op.de.Coul@ezh.nl (Manuel Op de Coul)
> 12) Danielou = bugger
> by TONY SALINAS
> 13) Re: Danielou = bugger
> by kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk (Jonathan Walker)
> 14) Auditory Display Conference
> by John Chalmers
> 15) Dynamic Timbres with MIDI and DSP.
> by Stephen Alexander Ruthmann
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 1
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 00:29:46 GMT
> From: rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes)
> To: tuning
> Subject: Re: A=443 ?
> Message-ID: <336b49f1.802701832@kcbbs.gen.nz>
>
> Gary Morrison wrote:
>
> > Speaking for myself personally, I find this sort of "cosmic =
> resonance"
> >argument worthless, for two reasons:
>
> >1. You can almost certainly come up with other equally valid cosmic
> >resonances. For example Lyndon LaRouch's followers claim that
C=3D256Hz=
> =20
> >tuning is natural because the Earth rotates around its axis at a =
> frequency=20
> >equal to a (very very low) G in that tuning. (Actually that claim is =
> not=20
> >true, but it does suggest a lower tuning than A=3D440Hz.)
>
> Agreed that there are multiple cosmic influences and we don't in all
> cases know which ones are insignificant and which ones aren't.
>
> >2. There is almost certainly no way (zippo!) that our ears and minds =
> could
> >possibly be sensitive to such a thing. =20
>
> Wrong!
>
> Our brains have a variety of different frequencies depending on
> conditions, but it is now recognised that theses frequencies are related
> to the Schumann resonance. Also, experiments show when we are subjected
> to ELF (extra low frequency) waves which are a little slower or faster
> than the typical Schumann resonance frequency our reaction times are
> either slowed or speeded up. Also, strong natural 3 Hz ELF waves have
> been shown to correlate strongly with accidents (confirming that our
> reactions are too slow). So you see, our brains can be entrained by
> natural ELF waves near the normal brain frequencies.
>
> When a chord is played in a key then there is also present in our brains
> a frequency which is the HCF (highest common factor) of the notes
> played. This frequency will often be in the ELF range and will
> generally match either the key or the subdominant.
>
> So you see, given that both e/m and sound can entrain the brain, it is
> quite possible that our brains would also feel whether these two
> frequencies are in tune.
>
> I accept the previous comments about the variations in natural
> frequencies and so it is necessary to say that there is no hard and fast
> absolute rule but the relationships at a moment in time will be
> important.
>
> -- Ray Tomes -- rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz -- Harmonics Theory --
> http://www.kcbbs.gen.nz/users/rtomes/rt-home.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 2
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 00:29:49 GMT
> From: rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes)
> To: tuning
> Subject: Dominant 7th chord = 4:5:6:7:8?
> Message-ID: <336c4f90.804140894@kcbbs.gen.nz>
>
> Andrew Milne wrote:
>
> >If the 7th in a dominant 7th chord is tuned to 7/4, then it loses its
> >dissonance and instability. Indeed such a chord can function as a tonic
> >(as it does, quite exceptionally for the time, in Chopin's 22nd
> >Prelude).
>
> Even if perfectly tuned, the 4:5:6:7:8 chord is more tense than the
> 4:5:6:8 chord. Certainly it is still more so if the 7 is something
> else, as you say. I acknowledge that sometimes composers want "out of
> tune" chords for effect.
>
> These are not good reasons to deny ourselves the possibility of the
> 4:5:6:7:8 chord however and I like the idea of it being available.
>
> -- Ray Tomes -- rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz -- Harmonics Theory --
> http://www.kcbbs.gen.nz/users/rtomes/rt-home.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 3
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 00:29:52 GMT
> From: rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes)
> To: tuning
> Subject: Re: Universe and Sound
> Message-ID: <336e5402.805278802@kcbbs.gen.nz>
>
> Gary Morrison wrote:
>
> > Interesting... It would be curious to hear the chords produced by =
> the
> >absorption patterns of various chemical elements and compounds, after
> >transposing them down some enormous number of octaves. =20
>
> > Were I to guess though, it would be little more than a curiosity. I
> >personally doubt if they would have any particularly significant
meaning=
> to
> >our ears. The two physical/physiological mechanisms are far too =
> unrelated
> >for there to be much correlation. =20
>
> =46or the simple part of the Hydrogen spectrum explained by Rydberg etc,
> the frequency ratios are 1:4:9:16... which would be quite pleasant and
> under some circumstances the differences between these frequencies also
> (3, 7, 9, 12, etc) which is still quite tolerable.
>
> =46or heavier elements like Iron which have many many more frequencies I
> suspect that it would sound like heavy metal :-)
>
> Hey, I got to crack that joke twice in 3 days (I used at the anvil
> chorus on Saturday). There was a big concert for the opening of a large
> new stadium near here (mainly for rugby). The highlight of the night
> (which was all very spectacular) was when they did the "Dance of the
> Diggers" to honour the people who worked on the project. This consisted
> of two large digging machines, lit by an erie light against the dark
> sky, doing a wonderfully elegant dance to the music of Swan Lake. They
> did an amazing job and at the end the digger operaters took a bow in
> full evening dress. They got an ovation.
>
> In another post in this thread, based on my statement:=20
> >" If the substance of the universe, the aether, is taken as a
> >medium then the speed of sound in the aether is what we know as light
> >The aether is very high tensile stuff). So these two statements are in
> >agreement."
>
> Gary Morrison wrote:
> > I suppose there's not much point in getting into the well-accepted =
> fact
> >that the aether has been found not to exist in any physical sense, or at
> >least not as the medium that light "makes waves in" as it was originally
> >theorized. =20
>
> It is only well accepted by people who don't understand it. The people
> who made the dicoveries that are supposed to have discredited the ether,
> namely Einstein, Michelson, Lorentz etc, all continued to believe in an
> ether. If you doubt this, read Einstein's speech on the subject
> delivered in 1920. It is on the WWW, just search for "einstein ether".
> There is no reason not to believe in an ether (except fashion).
>
> -- Ray Tomes -- rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz -- Harmonics Theory --
> http://www.kcbbs.gen.nz/users/rtomes/rt-home.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 4
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 19:34:41 -0500 (EST)
> From: Johnny Reinhard
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Re: TUNING digest 1009
> Message-ID:
>
> There is no concept of absolute pitch in Bach's time. Ellis discovereda
> myriad of pitch diversity as a result of collecting Baroque-era tuning
> forks. Arthur Mendel spent his lifetime trying to discern the basis of
> pitch in Bach's music, only to realize there was none at all.
>
> Johnny Reinhard
> 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
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 5
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 02:13:26 -0500
> From: Daniel Wolf
> To: "INTERNET:tuning@eartha.m"
> Subject: pitch bend units?
> Message-ID: <199703100213_MC2-1257-EC6B@compuserve.com>
>
> Are MIDI pitch bend units for soundcards standardized? If so, what is the
> value, if not, what is the Soundblaster value?
>
> Thanks!
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 6
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 11:36 +0100
> From: Manuel.Op.de.Coul@ezh.nl (Manuel Op de Coul)
> To: tuning@eartha
> Subject: RE: pitch bend units?
> Message-ID: <009B10CFC1888FA2.6236@vbv40.ezh.nl>
>
> Yes, the default pitch bend range is standardised to +- 200 cents.
> Many instruments allow this range to be changed, but the way to do that
> is not specified in the MIDI standard.
> The allowed values are 0 .. 16383 or, if you take the offset of 8192 into
> account, -8192 .. 8191. A change of 100 cents corresponds to 4096.
> The Soundblaster conforms to this range.
> If you give the command SET ATTRIBUTE PITCH_BEND to Scala, it gives the
> relative pitch bends for the nearest semitone, in the range
> -2048..2047.
>
> Manuel Op de Coul coul@ezh.nl
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 7
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 11:28:31 +0000
> From: kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk (Jonathan Walker)
> To: tuning
> Subject: C# and Db:I said KEYS, not PITCHES
> Message-ID: <3323F05F.27E0@cavehill.dnet.co.uk>
>
> Gary Morrison wrote:
> >
> > I'm jumping into this conversation in mid-course, so I may well be
> > missing the context. If so, my apologies.
>
> I'm afraid you are; but this isn't the only problem.
>
> > A previous writer, quoted by Gary Morrison, wrote:
> >
> > "ergo, the distinction between C# and Db makes sense
> > _only_ in well temperament. But of course, you can't
> > set two different temperaments at once, at least not
> > on a piano."
>
> In what we earthlings call "well-temperament", there is no possible
> distinction between C# and Db -- everyone knows this on our planet. The
> well-tempered systems were specifically designed for a 12-note per
> octave keyboard; they were WELL-tempered specifically because they
> removed the wolf of the meantone temperaments, and this was by means of
> closing the "circle" of fifths. No closed temperament offering only 12
> pitch classes can possibly distinguish between and C# and Db -- this is
> a bland truism on planet earth.
>
>
> Then Gary Morrison himself:
>
> > Welll...
> >
> > Certainly C# and Db are different in meantone temperaments and just
> > intonation as well as in well temperaments. And also in 17TET, 19TET
> > and 31TET as well.
>
> Meantone, yup.
>
> Just intonation, sure thing. Pythagorean too.
>
> 19TET and 31TET, if you treat them as closures of 1/3-comma and
> 1/4-comma meantone, yessir. 17TET, I suppose, can also be regarded as
> the closure of a chain of fifths.
>
> But well-temperament? NO! (in 72-point Gothic font)
>
> What's going on here? Has someone just devised an all new well-tempered
> scheme for >12 pitch classes?
>
> > But even if they are tuned exactly the same as they are in 12TET or
> > 24TET, the two notes are functionally different. C# is nominally the
> > leading tone in the key of D, and Db ... well, Db could be a number of
> > formulations, like the seventh of a dominant seventh in the key of Ab,
> > or the root of a Neapolitan in C.
>
> For the record, when I introduced this Beethoven example, I said that he
> was talking about KEYS and not single pitches. I was saying that
> Beethoven distinguished various keys, assigning them characteristics of
> their own, and that we might be tempted to guess that well-temperament
> was the main or sole cause of Beethoven's distinctions. But then I said
> that we cannot simply ignore one of his distinctions, namely between C#
> major and Db major; since this distinction cannot arise in any
> well-temperament, Beethoven's thinking must have been motivated, at
> least in part by less concrete considerations, such as the accumulated
> associations of certain keys with certain pieces, or the association of
> certain instruments with their most congenial keys, or relational
> associations depending on the difference between modulating in a
> flat-wards direction and in a sharp-wards direction. This is only a
> paraphrase of what I said in two earlier messages.
>
> --
> Jonathan Walker
> Queen's University Belfast
> mailto:kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk
> http://www.music.qub.ac.uk/~walker/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 8
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 12:06:24 +0000
> From: kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk (Jonathan Walker)
> To: tuning
> Subject: Re: Ancient Geeks and irrationals
> Message-ID: <3323F940.D9C@cavehill.dnet.co.uk>
>
> Jonathan Wild wrote:
>
> > "Repugnance" towards irrationals was strictly limited to disciplines
> > regarded as subordinate to mathematics. Look at the Greek quadrivium
> > to see how music fits in:
> >
> > MATHEMATICS GEOMETRY
> > (number) (magnitude)
> >
> > MUSIC ASTRONOMY
> > (number as embodied (magnitude as embodied
> > in sound) in celestial motion)
> >
> > The schism between the sciences dealing with the discrete vs those
> > dealing with the continuous (number vs magnitude) was a huge factor
> > in the development of mathematical methods.[etc.]
>
> Many thanks to Jonathan Wild for such a fine posting, which has brought
> the thread, I would imagine, near to a consensual close. I'll confess I
> was feeling a little guilty at having addressed only Paul Erlich's
> general statement about Greeks and irrationals, without moving on to
> their treatment of music, where, for the reasons Jonathan has given,
> irrationals were indeed shunned. I would still maintain, of course, that
> if the Greeks had broken their quadrivial constraints, and tried to
> reinterpret Aristoxenus in terms of irrational equal divisions, the 30th
> root of 4/3 would have been by far the most likely choice of a basic
> unit. The fact that when this break was eventually made, in the 16th
> century, Aristoxenus was taken to be the father of 12TET, reflects the
> needs of Renaissance theorists, and not those of Greek antiquity.
> Aristoxenus was needed as a precedent, to justify the abandonment of
> numerus sonorus dogma; without citing a precedent, these ideas could, in
> the intellectual environment of the times, have been summarily
> dismissed. Renaissance theorists were therefore primarily interested in
> the use that could be made of Aristoxenus to serve their purposes; the
> truth of their interpretation of Aristoxenus was only a secondary
> consideration.
>
> --
> Jonathan Walker
> Queen's University Belfast
> mailto:kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk
> http://www.music.qub.ac.uk/~walker/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 9
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 13:39:25 +0000
> From: kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk (Jonathan Walker)
> To: tuning
> Subject: Re: winding down on ET
> Message-ID: <33240F0D.27CE@cavehill.dnet.co.uk>
>
> Ed Foote (A440A@aol.com) wrote:
>
> > Hmmmm. I am a lot less interested in winning an argument than I
> > am in learning all I can about the history and application of tuning.
> > I would hope that the nature of these interchanges doesn't become so
> > adversarial as to limit that.
>
> Sorry if you misunderstood academic manners -- an "adversarial" stance
> is adopted only in order to sharpen arguments (granted, the temperature
> can rise somewhat if a lucidly stated argument is distorted).
> Furthermore, I've strongly hinted before that I'm playing devil's
> advocate -- I'm not against what you say, but I want to hear the best
> possible arguments for the case, so that even the most dogged and
> sceptical supporter of the 18th-century ET thesis will be convinced.
>
> > > Walker asks;
> > > if ET was well-nigh impossible in the 18th century, as you
> > >argue, how come it was in popular use for lutes and viols during the
> > >16th century?
> > The placement of frets, by linear measurement, is a piece of cake
> > compared to tuning by string tension. According to Jorgenson, this
> > was mentioned by Mersenne, in his Harmonie Universelle, when he states
> > that the equal division of the octave could not be formed on spinets,
> > as the string tension had to be judged by ear.
>
> Here's an example, I think, of the adversarial game drawing out a better
> argument. In reply, I suppose one might ask why a fretted string
> instrument could not then be used as a point of reference by the
> keyboard tuner. But otherwise I'm satisfied on this matter.
>
> > However, to say that I am trying to "label anything with
> > noticeable differences a well-temperament" does something of a
> > disservice to my intentions. These well-temperaments were very
> > specific constructions, I use my term "Harmonic Toolbox" to describe.
> > what they were offering composersThis supposes that the levels of
> > tempering were carefully selected, not just a helter-skelter of missed
> > thirds.
>
> So what you would want to establish is that 18th-century keyboard tuners
> considered the achievement of ET, accurate beyond audible margins of
> error, considered such a hopeless task that it was not worth attempting.
> If so, I trust that we would eventually be able to find some recorded
> statements to this effect.
>
> > >[JW] forgive me if I'm disinclined to
> > >accept any far-reaching thesis purely on the grounds that the ears of
> > >some (no doubt able) musician have convinced him of its truth.
> >
> > This thesis is not, in all fairness, based purely on the the ears.

> > The opinions formed by listening have a substantial amount of
> > historical support, do they not? I was originally listening to well
> > temperaments with the skepticism of one who had heard and tuned
> > nothing but ET for many years, but could find no reasons to disbelieve
> > the temperaments, ( Schubert too!)
> >
> > >[JW again] What of the converse: would you like to say that anyone
> > >whose stomach doesn't churn at the sound of Beethoven in ET lacks
> > some essentials of when I first heard Beethoven played in
>musicianship?
> >
> > Yes, I would like to say that, but I can't. Churn is too strong a
> > word. What I can say is that after pianists that I work with have
> > become acquainted with the difference in temperament for Beethoven,
> > they all prefer something other than ET.
>
> I'm afraid that this, and much else that you've said, goes no further
> than to say that well-temperament was a possibility for this music. But
> I never argued with this. What I was asking you to do, rather, was to
> back up your categorical statement that equal temperament was _not_ used
> at all (as a keyboard tuning) in Germany/Austria c.1800. I suspect by
> now that you said all you can on this matter, and I thank you for this.
>
> My concern is simply that there is not so far any case which would
> withstand scrutiny as an academic paper; since your interests are
> practical rather than academic, you may not be worried by this. But it
> will prove a difficult task, since at present revisionists such as
> Rudolf Rasch, are (as Manuel Op de Coul reminded us) prepared even to
> say that Bach might indeed have intended the WTK for equal temperament,
> notwithstanding all that has been argued to the contrary. If respected
> academics are still prepared to place ET (as a keyboard tuning) back
> even as far as the 1720s, there is a great deal to be done before we can
> hope to establish the counter-thesis that ET didn't begin to emerge as a
> practical possibility (for keyboards) until at least a century later.
> Whatever the merits of Rasch's case, there is a very long way to go
> before the historical case for the prevalence of well-temperament into
> the 19th century has been established. There are two routes by which we
> can attack the consensual thesis that ET was well-nigh universal in
> Germany/Austria by 1800: one is to provide convincing documentary
> evidence to the contrary from contemporary sources (I've still seen
> nothing in this respect); the other is to shift the burden of proof onto
> those following the consensual thesis, by demonstrating that ET was so
> far beyond the capabilities of 18th-century tuners that its supposed
> establishment by 1800 is most improbable (you have said a couple of
> things which move in this direction). Does anyone know of more material,
> or can anyone suggest further arguments which would contribute to either
> of these possible lines of attack?
>
> > >Was Chopin (advocate of ET, as I've said before) less than
> > >a true musician?
> > No, but Chopin was not composing music in the time of Mozart and
> > Beethoven, I assume he cut his teeth on a lot less meantone than
> > Beethoven, or Mozart.
>
> Meantone? Yes, probably 1/6-comma from good string players, and on some
> keyboards (it was Silbermann's choice), but I thought we were talking
> about well temperament. Was this a typo?
>
> In any case, would you agree then that for music which modulates freely,
> but which remains locally diatonic in most passages (as in Beethoven),
> well-temperaments are best, but where local chromaticism becomes more
> prevalent (as in later Chopin), then equal temperament is more
> satisfactory?
>
> > (For a real treat, listen to his Opus 28
> > preludes performed on a DeMorgan temperament. It is a very different
> > music indeed, and it could have happened!)
>
> Definitely a typo here (op. 39 Preludes "durch alle Tonarten"). The date
> of composition is thought to have been 1789 -- certainly a later Bonn
> work -- so the opus number, 39, is misleading in this respect. In this
> case, even if (contrary to your view) ET was prevalent by 1800, there is
> still a fairly high probability that in relatively provincial Bonn, well
> temperament would still have been much in evidence at this date. Tuning
> matters aside, I find it particularly interesting that the two preludes
> traverse the circuit of keys in different ways: the first reaches C#
> major by fifths, then manages to reverse all of this and more in a
> wonderful chromatic passage to arrive on a genuine Db major (genuine in
> the sense that it is not just a notational convenience), whereupon the
> fifths sequence resumes until the final (genuine) C major is reached.
> The second prelude, maintains the fifths sequence throughout, and passes
> through the cycle twice, so removing changes due to notational
> convenience, we pass from C major to A*# major. The first prelude even
> manages to maintain a high level of inventiveness, and deserves to be
> heard more often on the concert platform.
>
> --
> Jonathan Walker
> Queen's University Belfast
> mailto:kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk
> http://www.music.qub.ac.uk/~walker/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 10
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 11:26:20 -0600
> From: William Sethares
> To: tuning
> Subject: mapping spectra
> Message-ID: <199703101726.AA06357@eceserv0.ece.wisc.edu>
>
>
> A recent thread reads:
>
> " Each chemical element is uniquely identifiable in the
> electromagnetic spectrum by its special set of unique frequencies.
> These frequency sets interact to produce more complexly unique
> cycle frequencies, which are unheard by human ear but which
> resonate just as do humanly hearable musical chords or dissonances."
>
> to which Gary M. replied...
>
> Interesting... It would be curious to hear the chords produced by
> the absorption patterns of various chemical elements and
> compounds, after transposing them down some enormous number of
> octaves. Were I to guess though, it would be little more than a
> curiosity. I personally doubt if they would have any particularly
> significant meaning to our ears. The two physical/physiological
> mechanisms are far too unrelated for there to be much correlation.
>
> A few years ago, Tom Staley and I wrote an article called "Sounds of
> Crystals" in Experimental Musical Instruments (EMI) that did
> something very similar (ref. below). We looked at x-ray diffraction
> patterns (spectra) and mapped them into the audio spectra. Many of
> the resulting sounds were exceedingly complex (*very* many
> nonharmonic partials), but there were some real standouts. One of
> our favorites was the sound of the morphine crystal, which we used
> for a piece titled "Duet for Morphine and Crystal" that appeared in
> the EMI compilation cassette that year.
>
> Though it can be an interesting way of generating "new" sounds, I
> would agree with Gary's assessment that there is nothing inherently
> significant about the sounds - for instance - the effects of listening to

> the morphine derived sounds in no way have the same effects as
> consumption of the material itself.
>
> In the same issue of EMI, there is also an article by Susan Alejander
> called DNA tunings that uses data from DNA sequences to generate
> interesting tunings that she then plays on a synth.
>
> W. A. Sethares and T. Staley, ``Sounds of crystals,'' Experimental
> Musical Instruments, Vol. VIII, No. 2, Sept. (1992).
>
> and
>
> S. Alexjander, ``DNA tunings,'' Experimental Musical Instruments, Vol.
> VIII, No. 2, Sept. (1992).
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 11
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 18:55 +0100
> From: Manuel.Op.de.Coul@ezh.nl (Manuel Op de Coul)
> To: tuning@eartha
> Subject: RE: Meaner Tones (Paul E)
> Message-ID: <009B110D18CFE75F.6887@vbv40.ezh.nl>
>
> From: PAULE
>
> John Chalmers has derived some meantone tunings using the augmented sixth
as
> the approximation to the harmonic seventh. But what if, more relevant to
> modern practice, the minor seventh must approximate the harmonic seventh,

> the minor third must approximate the 7:6, and the diminished fifth must
> approximate the 7:5? Add terms for these to the usual 5-limit terms, and
the
> following "optimal" tunings are found:
>
> Equal-weighted:
> Fifth=(43+(log(3)+13*log(5)-11*log(7))/log(2))/75 octaves, or
> 702.2260 cents
>
> Limit-weighted:
> Fifth=(2075+(81*log(3)+469*log(5)-539*log(7))/log(2))/3035 octaves, or
> 703.4736 cents
>
> So if one wants a diatonic system with optimal dominant seventh (and
> half-diminished seventh, if you subscribe to some form of duality)
chords,
> one must use fifths slightly _larger_ than pure.
>
> -Paul
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 12
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 18:24:14 +0000 (GMT)
> From: TONY SALINAS
> To: EARTHA
> Subject: Danielou = bugger
> Message-ID:
>
> With all the respect for all his work done, his assumptions
> are considered an offence for some Indian music theorists.
>
> Tony Salinas
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 13
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 18:43:42 +0000
> From: kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk (Jonathan Walker)
> To: tuning
> Subject: Re: Danielou = bugger
> Message-ID: <3324565E.4C33@cavehill.dnet.co.uk>
>
> TONY SALINAS wrote:
> >
> > With all the respect for all his work done, his assumptions
> > are considered an offence for some Indian music theorists.
>
> On what grounds?
>
> --
> Jonathan Walker
> Queen's University Belfast
> mailto:kollos@cavehill.dnet.co.uk
> http://www.music.qub.ac.uk/~walker/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 14
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 10:51:42 -0800 (PST)
> From: John Chalmers
> To: tuning
> Subject: Auditory Display Conference
> Message-ID:
>
> International Community for Auditory Display
>
> This might be of interest to Tuning List'ers as sonification,
> aka Auditory Display, is a possible commercial application of
> the type of material we work with. For example, converting mass
> spec or IR spectra to sound sometimes makes recognition easier
> as some people's acoustic pattern recognition ability is superior
> to their visual. The resulting sounds when presented seriatim become
> non-just, non-ET scales and when presented simultaneously, non-harmonic
> timbres.
>
>
> The notice (forwarded I think from the IMCA mailing list):
>
> ICAD '97, is a program of the International Community for Auditory
> Display. ICAD is a not-for-profit corporation created to support
> research, education and community formation in the emerging field of
> auditory display. The primary projects of ICAD are the conferences, the
> listserve (icad-request@santafe.edu) and the ICAD Web site
> (http://www.santafe.edu/~icad). Since auditory display researchers come
> from a wide variety of disciplinary, professional, and geographical
> backgrounds, ICAD seeks, above all, to facilitate communication across
> boundaries. A membership organization founded in 1996, ICAD welcomes
> participation in its programs and governance. For more information
> about ICAD please contact Gregory Kramer at kramer@listen.com.
>
> about ICAD please contact Gregory Kramer at kramer@listen.com.
> CALL FOR PARTICIPATION
> ICAD '97:
> The Fourth
> International Conference on Auditory Display
> Palo Alto, California
> Dates: November 2-5, 1997
>
> Sponsored by:
> Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
>
>
> --John
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 15
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 18:09:45 -0500 (EST)
> From: Stephen Alexander Ruthmann
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Dynamic Timbres with MIDI and DSP.
> Message-ID:

>
> Hi. Does anyone on the list know of any research into dynamic timbral
> changes of an electronic sound fed by continuous controls generated by
> an acoustic instrument in real time? I've been interested in achieving
> this on the French Horn and wondered if anyone had heard of this before?
> I realize the physical problems with tis but I think DSP might provide
the
> answer. Any help would be appreciated.
> -Alex Ruthmann
>
> *************************************************************************
> * * "Some Scientists claim that hydrogen, *
> * Alex Ruthmann * because it is so plentiful, is the basic *
> * sruthman@umich.edu * building block of the universe. I dispute*
> * http://www-personal.umich* that. I say there is more stupidity than *
> * .edu/~sruthman * hydrogen, and that is the basic building *
> * * block of the universe." -Frank Zappa *
> *************************************************************************
> * -> Horn Performance and Engineering Major *
> * -> Undergraduate Research Assistant in Frank Zappology and Schlepping*
> * University of Michigan-Ann Arbor -- Schools of Music and Engineering *
> *************************************************************************
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of TUNING Digest 1010
> *************************

Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 18:06 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA03263; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 18:06:11 +0100
Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA03261
Received: from by ella.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
id JAA13729; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 09:04:40 -0800
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 09:04:40 -0800
Message-Id: <009B129761E537D5.6B91@vbv40.ezh.nl>
Errors-To: madole@mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@ella.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@ella.mills.edu

TUNING digest 1009

🔗Johnny Reinhard <reinhard@...>

🔗"Kami Rousseau" <kami@...>