TUNING digest 1293

> TUNING Digest 1293
>
>Topics covered in this issue include:
>
> 1) Microtonal instruments
> by Denis.Atadan@mvs.udel.edu
> 2) Re: Hexany article, etc.
> by Paul Rapoport
> 3) blues scale
> by "Paul H. Erlich"
> 4) How to order the Bosanquet book from Diapason Press
> by "J. Pusey"
> 5) Tuning-List CD
> by mr88cet@texas.net (Gary Morrison)
> 6) Special Way
> by Carl Lumma
> 7) Re: MIDI/Audio wish list
> by "jloffink"
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Topic No. 1
>
>Date: Wed, 7 Jan 98 14:45 EST
>From: Denis.Atadan@mvs.udel.edu
>To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
>Subject: Microtonal instruments
>Message-ID: <199801071948.OAA15581@copland.udel.edu>
>
>It's been pretty interesting to see who plays what so here's my 2 cents-
>
>I've got an electric guitar and bass both with warmouth necks in 19tet.
They
>were both fenders- a Stratocaster and a Precision bass. Todd keehn of
Denver
>Colorado did the work. Todd does excellent work, unfortunately, last I
heard
>was carpal tunnel syndrome had slow his luthiership down to a crawl. In any
>case, the Strat sounds nothing like a classic Strat now. It got more
sustain
>and timbrally it's much more monochromatic and doesn't have that twang
fenders
>have. The P-bass still sounds and plays like a p-bass. I've lent these
>instruments to a number of excellent musicians and they really like them,
>also. The necks also were made with a flat radius.
>
>I've also got a great double neck Gibson Lee steel guitar form the early
60's
>(I think from the early 60's) It has an amazingly warm sound. I run it
through
>a Hughes and Kettner Triamp into an old Rodgers tone cabinet (from the 50's
I
>think). The sound is so rich. I've got that thing usually tuned to and open
>19tet tuning.
>
>On the synth side of things I've got a Kurzweil K2000 with a sampler.
That's
>also usually tuned to 19tet. It's a great synth but after playing around
with
>it for a couple of years I've got to say that digitally produced synth
music
>leaves me at best luke warm. Even guys that are really excellent with them
>like Brian Eno and the Orb or Tricky don't produce music with them that I
can
>really totally get into. And this is not a criticism of them at all it's
>a criticism of the instruments. It's a shame that we don't have acoustic
>instruments or electro acoustic instruments available to us more readily
and
>ones that are readily playable. In my opinion so much of music has nothing
to
>do with the tuning and has to do with the feel the musician puts behind the
>notes. Compare the sound of a great digital synth to a Hammond B-3 or a
>Wurlitzer electric piano and it's dissapointing. The Hammond or Wurlitzer
>tends to evince musical phrases and nuance but with the Kurzweil I always
have
>felt like I'm sitting behind a glass pane watching music arise in the next
>room. This, of course, is only my experience.
>
>I've got bunch of other 12tet instruments but that's for another time.
>
>
>Denis
>
>------------------------------
>
>Topic No. 2
>
>Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 15:07:06 -0500 (EST)
>From: Paul Rapoport
>To: Carl Lumma
>Subject: Re: Hexany article, etc.
>Message-ID:

>
>I was afraid someone would ask what Musicworks 60 is, and I'd have to
>explain. But no problem, really. No. 60 is simply issue no. 60. Musicworks
>is a long-established, internationally known avant-garde music magazine
>published at
>
>179 Richmond Street West
>Toronto Ontario Canada M5V 1V3
>
>ph. 416 977 3546
>fax 416 204 1084
>
>http://www.web.net/sound/
>e-mail: sound@musicworks.web.net
>
>They're up to almost no. 70 by now. Each issue comes with a CD. I'm
>quite fond of this production and have almost all the issues going back
>many years. It occasionally deals with tuning matters.
>
>Musicworks 60 has the article of mine about the stellated hexany. The
>accompanying CD has a 4-minute piece in that tuning for soprano, choir,
>and synthesizer, plus many other pieces not by me and not microtonal.
>
>Musicworks 61 has an article of mine about 25-note ET. The accompanying CD
>for that has a short piece in that tuning for guitar sound, plus other
>things etc.
>
>Prices:
>
>Musicworks 60 $ 5
>Musicworks 60 CD $10
>
>Musicworks 61 $ 5
>Musicworks 61 CD $10
>
>Add $2 for mailing regardless of what you order. All above prices are
>U.S.$. The prices are different to Canadian addresses.
>
>Hope this is of some interest.
>
>==========================
>Dr. Paul Rapoport
>SADM (Music)
>McMaster University
>
>------------------------------
>
>Topic No. 3
>
>Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 18:22:29 -0500
>From: "Paul H. Erlich"
>To: "'tuning@eartha.mills.edu'"
>Subject: blues scale
>Message-ID:

>
>On that guitar, I seem to be drawn to the following inversionally
>symmetrical scale for blues:
>
>22TET cents
>
>0 0
>6 327
>9 491
>10 545
>13 709
>19 1036
>
>Harmonically, it looks like this:
>
>
>9---------0---------13
> \ / \
> \ / \
> \ / \
> \ / \
> 6---------19--------10
>
>In just intonation, it would be
>
>Ratio cents
>
>1/1 0
>6/5 316
>4/3 498
>27/20 520
>3/2 702
>9/5 1018
>
>but that syntonic comma between 4/3 and 27/20 is too small to function
>as a real melodic interval in a blues context. The 22TET degree is big
>enough to evoke a distinct pitch, but small enough to sound
>interestingly unusual. The 6/5 and 9/5 are not really that "bluesy"
>sounding; their sharpened versions in 22TET do better, especially with
>vibrato added.
>
>"Blue notes" on the guitar are almost always between major and minor
>thirds and between major and minor sevenths. I don't agree with those
>who make them out to be some sort of septimal ratios, though the 7/4 is
>common in harmonica blues, and I myself love to use the 7/6 over the IV
>chord (on the 12-tone guitar by bending the major 2nd up a third-tone).
>
>I think the blues scale has more to do with 7TET than with any just
>ratios.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Topic No. 4
>
>Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 20:26:45 -0500
>From: "J. Pusey"
>To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
>Subject: How to order the Bosanquet book from Diapason Press
>Message-ID:
>
>Orders for Diapason Press books are currently limited to snail-mail.
>Send your request to:
>
> The Diapason Press
> P.O. Box 2376
> 3500 GJ Utrecht
> The Netherlands
>
>Foreign payments can be made to Dutch postal checking account 532614, or
>by sending a Eurocheque. American customers can pay with personal
>checks drawn on American banks in U.S. dollars made out to Rudolf A.
>Rasch. The exchange rate is US$ 1 = HFL 2.
>
>The order number for the Bosanquet book is TTL 4.
>The price is HFL 60 = US$ 30.
>
>John
>
>---
>John G. Pusey xen@tiac.net http://www.tiac.net/users/xen/jgp/
>
>------------------------------
>
>Topic No. 5
>
>Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 21:27:09 -0600 (CST)
>From: mr88cet@texas.net (Gary Morrison)
>To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
>Subject: Tuning-List CD
>Message-ID:
>
> Well, I've plopped down my investment in Neil's proposed Tuning-List CD!
>I'd like to encourage others of you.
>
> One of the other investors mentioned something I hadn't thought of:
>Since contributors get about 100 CDs each (assuming that 10 people
>contribute), it probably won't be difficult to recoup that $200 investment.
>Even if you sell them at the bargain-basement price of $5 you'd only have
>to sell 40 of them.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Topic No. 6
>
>Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 23:20:15 -0500
>From: Carl Lumma
>To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
>Subject: Special Way
>Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980107231843.007ca100@nni.com>
>
>Paul Erlich wrote...
>
>>The 7-limit harmony in barbershop is not merely "stuck on" to the
>>diatonic scale; it consists of dominant seventh chords which are >diatonic
>in function and origin, and the 27-cent adjustments required >to achieve JI
>are not large enough to disturb the essential >diatonicity of the music.
>
>You're nitpicking what I meant by "Stuck on"?
>
>>As for the pitch sets being different for melody and harmony, don't >tell
>me that the sevenths of these dominant seventh chords never occur >in the
>melody!
>
>They do, but not often. If the lead is singing the 7, then usually the
>tenor has the melody. There are many songs where the melody contains no
>pitches outside the 3-limit. What is important is that the melody is not
>really part of the voice leading in the traditional sense, except in the
>case of sustained notes. Chords are built _on_ it. What follows in this
>post may help to clear the issue up.
>
>>>}I think that most people recognize that barbershop harmonies sound
>>>better than piano harmonies. If you can hear the difference, doesn't
>>>that make it a "perceptually distinct pitch set"? Maybe I'm just
>>>splitting hairs...
>>>
>>I think that many people will hear the difference but not know whether
>>any particular pitch is being adjusted upwards or downwards -- they >will
>simply detect a difference analagous to a change in timbral >quality on the
>chordal level. An adjustment large enough to evoke a >non-diatonic pitch (I
>mean diatonic in the sense of several closely >related heptatonic keys),
>however well-motivated harmonically, will >have a different effect,
>probably not one that most people would find >pleasant.
>
>I usually use "pitch set" to mean "all the pitches you need to play the
>thing". Mr. Erlich's "pitch set", as used above, is something very
>different. If I am not mistaken, he uses the term "pitch set" above to
>touch on a model that describes a certain aspect of music: Where harmony
>and melody interact in a Special Way.
>
>What is this Special Way? Krumhansl, quoted by Mr. Erlich, seems to be
>touching on it: "If chord construction is determined in some principled way
>by scale structure, then this further serves to maintain the tonal
>framework for encoding pitch information."
>
>Most western classical music happens to work in this Special Way, and the
>thing it uses to do it is the diatonic scale. Mr. Erlich's goal, if I'm
>not mistaken, is to find a new scale suitable for use in this Special Way.
>
>To recap so far, I am using "Special Way" to mean a way of explaining
>beauty in music from how melody and harmony are related, a construct
>heretobefore unknown to music theory, at least at the level Mr. Erlich
>takes it. In his paper, it is called "Generalizing diatonicity". I
>suggest this is an unfortunate term, as it implies the diatonic scale,
>which is exactly what he wants to replace, kind of how "octave" isn't a
>good way to say "2/1", since it implies 12-tone...
>
>>I think Schonberg may have been right that diatonicism had been played
>>out, but in abandoning the concepts of tonality and scale he threw the
>>baby out with the bathwater.
>
>..Here, Mr. Erlich uses the words "tonality and scale" to mean Special
>Way. His post then translates: "I think Schonberg may have been right that
>the diatonic scale has been exhausted as a tool for making music in the
>Special Way, but he threw out the Special Way, which wasn't what was used
up."
>
>Now follows a review of his paper, which hopes, it seems, to show just how
>the Special Way isn't used up, and just how you can tune an instrument
>that'll make the Special Way seem as new as 1998.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>The author starts by observing that the Western Music is 5-limit, and,
>following the "music evolves up the harmonic series" thing, sets his sights
>on the 7-limit.
>
>He then defines a set of scales as candidates for representing the 7-limit.
> These scales are assumed to be root of 2 equal-step tunings, with only one
>pitch per 7-limit approximation.
>
>The one pitch per approximation thing is necessary for the Special Way to
>work, as far as I can tell. I can't quite tell you how, but I have a gut
>feeling it is, and since the Special Way is what we're after, I won't argue
>it. Besides, it keeps the size of the pitch set manageable.
>
>The root of 2 part is understandable, considering that we need strong low
>identies for our 7's to work. This seems contradictory to the rule that
>the higher identities are more sensitive to mistuning, since there are more
>low-numbered fractions near them. Indeed it is, and perhaps it is a
>counterbalance to this principle. The paper offers only that "octave
>equivalence seems pervasive" and that it is "universally perceived, even by
>some animals".
>
>The matter of mistuning is far from clear, even touching back on our old
>bone about unknowingly passing low-numbered ratios when measuring cent
>detuning of an interval. Paul's paper addresses this by making the
>standard deviation in log-frequency detuning inversely proportional to the
>limit of the interval. Not ideal, but better than any other method I've
>been able to think of, and good enough for root of 2 equal tunings from 12
>to 31.
>
>The equal-step part is the most dubious. The Special Way has always been
>based on temperament of some kind, and it seems that only Bog or God can
>decide if all those schkissmas need to disappear for it to work, insomuch
>as Mr. Erlich has never shown it. He has mentioned, on this digest, some
>modulatory effects that require two D's to be the same note, etc, but this
>is a problem of trying to retune music already written. That Special Way
>music cannot be written for JI, complete with its own list of modulatory
>effects impossible in a temperament, has not been demonstrated.
>
>So the list of scales comes down to 22, 26, 27, and 31 tone equal
temperament.
>
>Then are listed criteria for determining a scale's usefulness for the
>Special Way. Since the Special Way is a relationship between a scale's
>melodic and harmonic usefulness, the criteria are separated in these two
>groups...
>
>1. Melodic. In Paul's paper we have maximal evenness and tetrachordality.
>In Gibson-land, we have the melodic limen. Jules Siegel proposed that the
>intervals should get smaller as you go up the scale. None of these
>convince me in the least even that a scale can "work" melodically. Maybe
>the most useful thing I've heard for describing the melodic properties of a
>scale is "symmetry". I will accept, however, that the criteria used by Mr.
>Erlich are, "enough to ensure an intelligible melodic framework".
>
>2. Harmonic. Now we're talking. This is where the real relations between
>melodic and harmonic are drawn...
> (a)"There exists a pattern of intervals" ... "which produces a complete,
>consonant chord on most scale degrees"
> (b)"The majority of consonant chords have a root that lies" the best
>approximation of a 3/2 "away from another consonant chord"
> (c)"A chord progression of no more than three consonant chords is
>required to cover the entire scale"
>
>..in what would be letter "d", Mr. Erlich makes use of a term I do not
>understand: "characteristic dissonance". He defines it to be any dissonant
>interval that shares the same number of scale steps as a consonant
>interval. Shadings of dissonance aside, what kind of scale steps we
>talkin'? The example of the diminished 5th is given, but why it should be
>considered a type of 5th, or why the P5 should not be considered a 7th is
>not made clear.
>
> (e)The rarest intervals in the scale should be located next to notes in
>the tonic chord. Like leading tones.
>
>What would be "f" makes use again of the term "characteristic dissonance".
>
>The number of scales fitting these criteria is shown to be few. Among them
>are the 5-limit diatonic and the 3-limit pentatonic, two scales proven over
>hundreds of years to be great for the Special Way. While this shouldn't
>come as much of a surprise, considering the author admits to basing his
>criteria on the success of these scales, any time such a unique set of
>properties can be found, they're probably worth looking into.
>
>Finally, it is shown that the decatonic scale in 22TET fits the criteria
well.
>
>So has the paper provided a good definition of the Special Way? Yes. Has
>it succeeded in convincing me that the Special Way is still good, and that
>the 22TET decatonic scale is a fresh vehicle for it? Without a doubt.
>What it hasn't provided is a name for the Special Way. Maybe "tonality" is
>best, but I didn't use it because it has so many other meanings.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>That's the review, and I would like to thank Mr. Erlich in advance for
>letting me quote his paper. All material from the paper is in quotes,
>exactly as it appeared on John Starrett's web site. All spelling mistakes
>are probably mine. I encourage the reader to get the paper for himself, as
>it is well-written and highly self-explanatory (you wouldn't know it :~)
>
>So, to wrap up: Is Barbershop music that uses the Special Way? If so, what
>is the vehicle? Diatonic, decatonic, or maybe JI complete with, as I say,
>"modulatory effects impossible in temperament?"
>
>I say that Barbershop lies on the fence between using the Special Way and
>not. In a pinch, I'd say it does use it. If it does, it's diatonic, for
>sure. It is *not* my JI Special Way.
>
>Now comes the last issue. Every time I make it, Mr. Erlich accuses me of
>not having understood his paper. I hope that the above review will at
>least make it plain what I do and don't understand.
>
>Is the Special Way the only way to make interesting music? No. Is there
>another way already demonstrated? Yes. I gave Barbershop and an excerpt
>of the YES tune "Sound Chaser" as examples of melody and chords coming from
>different pitch sets, as this is the most obvious way to rule out any
>Special Way effects. But the Barbershop example really doesn't satisfy, as
>we've seen, and the YES example is brief.
>
>Serialism is certainly devoid of the Special Way -- and no doubt there is
>good serialism to be done -- but it is also lacks consonance.
>
>Far out avant garde music is certainly lacking of Special Way, if not other
>things.
>
>Indian chamber music and Bagpipe music are good examples, but they stay
>inside one tonality, the fundamental of which is played on a drone. I love
>them both, and they are extremely consonant, but this is not going to
>satisfy hardcore Special Way fans.
>
>What's needed is an example positively guaranteed to Curl Your Toenails....
>
>Arthur Honegger
> Prelude, Arioso, and Fughette on the name BACH
>
>Especially the fugue. It uses the entire 12-tone equal-tempered space.
>Yet it is tonal. But it is not diatonic. There are lots more. The
>Intrada for trumpet and piano. Othmar Schoek's Zwei Klavierstucke. Some
>Prokofiev.
>
>Despite his insistence on his theories, Mr. Erlich says it best...
>
>"What would be most useful in music today to the composer, to the
>performer, and to the music theorizer? Answer: If we could bring it about,
>that the diatonic scale be "spurlos versenkt" and that, instead of busying
>himself with absorbing 'a' scale (that is, "the" diatonic scale of the
>past), the music pupil devote his time to _the invention of scales_ ..."
>
>I encourage the invention not only of scales of all types for use with the
>Special Way, but scales of all types for all uses. If only every inventor
>of scales could present so functional an explanation for their use as Paul.
>
>>The 12-tone system forced the serious, innovative composers into an
>>increasingly academic corner as the vast majority of music lovers
>>gravitated toward recyclings of older ideas that their ears could >still
>digest. The 20th century was an amazing century for Western >music
>primarily due to the incorporation of non-Western influences. >Perhaps the
>21st will see a breaking down of the 12-tone barrier and a >flood of new
>tonal ideas.
>
>May it be so.
>
>Carl
>
>------------------------------
>
>Topic No. 7
>
>Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 00:09:46 -0600
>From: "jloffink"
>To:
>Subject: Re: MIDI/Audio wish list
>
>> As an Appendix to the discussion paper I had the idea of including a
>> list of features/improvements that would specifically benefit
>> composers and others who use MIDI and digital audio for alternative
>> tunings.
>>
>> Anyhow, the gist of all this is : my wish list would include things
>> like :
>>
>> Tuning resolution minimum 1 cent, preferably less (any thoughts on
>> this?); Number of Partials (Keygroups, Zones) limited by memory only,
>> not hard coded into the architecture; Include on-board absolute pitch
>> meter (but would put the price up); Macro and template procedures for
>> building unconventional `instruments';
>>
>Tuning resolution of sample/wavetable based instruments better than 1 cent
>is questionable since no manufacturer will tune their own samples to better
>accuracy than this. This is the issue much more than cost, since adding
>the extra resolution in their custom ICs would be insignificant in terms of
>design resources and transistors. DSP or Virtual Modeling type instruments
>could do better though.
>
>You have to remember that manufacturers need to make a profit in order to
>stay in business, and most provide the bare minimum of features that they
>can get away with. For instance, MIDI pitch bend has supported 14 bit
>resolution for 15 years now, but nobody makes a 14 bit pitch bend
>controller except Big Briar, 98% of them are 8 bit, the other 2% are 10
>bit.
>
>Building tunings into "Partials", Keygroups or Zones is tedious and
>wasteful effort in my opinion. Today's synthesizers support hundreds of
>patches/programs, doing it that way virtually hard codes the tuning into
>the sample set and increases your memory requirements exponentially. I
>don't think there's much question that most users prefer separate tuning
>tables, the issues are:
>
>Do you want octave based tables?
>Do you want keyboard based tables? (Remember, these are virtually
>impossible to retune note by note on the fly, ala Justonic Pitch Palette,
>because of the limited MIDI bandwidth)
>How many tables do you need?
>Are the tables assigned globally or per MIDI channel?
>Do you need to switch between tables or notes in realtime, and if so should
>notes be updated immediately or on new notes only?
>Is the MIDI Tuning Dump Standard supported?
>
>Also, I believe any proposal to manufacturers must be presented in a
>prioritized fashion. If given as an all or nothing situation, you're most
>likely to get nothing, or else get a confused subset of the requested
>features.
>
>The on-board absolute pitch meter is a very, very interesting idea,
>especially for a sampler. It would be a benefit for anyone creating their
>own samples.
>
>> A kind of `kit' mother keyboard with a large number of movable slots
>> into which a user configurable number and arrangement of keys of
>> different sizes and colours could be fitted_ And new types of control
>> for keys (taking the idea of `after touch' further_)
>>
>Starr Labs is working on a generalized microtonal MIDI keyboard that
>supports polyphonic aftertouch.
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of TUNING Digest 1293
>*************************
>


SMTPOriginator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
From: "Fred Kohler"
Subject: Re: TUNING digest 1293
PostedDate: 09-01-98 17:37:37
SendTo: CN=coul1358/OU=AT/O=EZH
ReplyTo: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
$MessageStorage: 0
$UpdatedBy: CN=notesrv2/OU=Server/O=EZH,CN=coul1358/OU=AT/O=EZH,CN=Manuel op de Coul/OU=AT/O=EZH
RouteServers: CN=notesrv2/OU=Server/O=EZH,CN=notesrv1/OU=Server/O=EZH
RouteTimes: 09-01-98 17:37:15-09-01-98 17:37:15,09-01-98 17:37:08-09-01-98 17:37:08
DeliveredDate: 09-01-98 17:37:08
Categories:
$Revisions:

Received: from ns.ezh.nl ([137.174.112.59]) by notesrv2.ezh.nl (Lotus SMTP MTA SMTP v4.6 (462.2
9-3-1997)) with SMTP id C1256587.005B4822; Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:37:31 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA14195; Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:37:37 +0100
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:37:37 +0100
Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA14260
Received: (qmail 27484 invoked from network); 9 Jan 1998 08:36:56 -0800
Received: from localhost (HELO ella.mills.edu) (127.0.0.1)
by localhost with SMTP; 9 Jan 1998 08:36:56 -0800
Message-Id: <001201bd1d1c$89c1a120$b71dc2cf@a1a05977>
Errors-To: madole@mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu