TUNING digest 1462

***Paul Erlich wrote***

>Actually, Bosanquet's extensive studies of 22 were toward the beginning
>of his music theory investigtions; I don't have McLaren's article handy,
>but I'm pretty sure about that much. I'll post the references (if no one
>beats me to it) when I get a chance, as it sounds like they'll be new to
>you.

Rudolph Rasch's definitive account claims...

"Bosanquet spent little ink on tuning and temperament after the publication
of Treatise. Most important in this respect is the paper on the 22-tone
"Hindoo" scale and higher order systems read before the Royal Society on
Feb 8 1877 and subsequently published in Volume 26 of the Proceedings of
the Royal Society."

"Subseqently". Here's the history of the paper...

1. "On the Hindoo division of the octave, with some additions to the theory
of higher orders" [abstract] Sent to H.J.S. Smith (Jan 5 1877)

2. "On the Hindoo division of the octave, with some additions to the theory
of higher orders" [presentation] Read at a meeting of the Royal Society
(Feb 8 1877)

3. "On the Hindoo division of the octave, with some additions to the theory
of higher orders" [full paper] Proceding of the Royal Society #26 (1878)

4. "On the Hindu division of the octave, with some additions to the theory
of higher orders" [reprint of full paper] Hindu music from various authors
(1882) ->edited by S.M. Tagore!

Bosanquet published his first work on music theory in 1874, his only book
in 1876, and #4 above was his last work on music theory. The stuff before
his book could contain information about 22 tone, but I doubt it. But send
the references anyhow.


***Paul Hahn wrote***

>Carl, why do you seem to want to treat this as an either/or?
>Mechanically, increasing the cross-sectional area of a member increases
>its stiffness (those of you with dirty minds, keep it to yourselves
>8-)> ), so it seems to me your two respondents are at least roughly in
>agreement with each other.

Makes sense to me. But maybe something else caused stiffness to vary. Or
maybe it isn't triangular at all. How would I know?


Carl