"inborn" scale

Sanford Forte wrote:

> My question has to do with the human voice. Is it possible
> that individuals who attempt to sing within the constraints
> of a given scale or temperment, and find themselves unable
> to do it, are just singing to a different scale or temperment
> that they don't recognize? A kind of "inborn" scale that
> they personally "resonate" with.

This is treading on interesting but dangerous ground.
Many of the postings to this Forum a couple of weeks ago
regarding the question of a mathematical definition of
consonance would apply to this kind of question as well.
The intensely subjective nature of one's perception of
musical intervals and their sonance has been proven by
modern psychoacoustical research, but is as yet so little
understood that there isn't much definite that can be
said about it quantitatively, other than a handful of
mathematical formulas that explain certain discrete aspects.

Harry Partch certainly wrote a lot [see "Genesis of a
Music"] about how inhumane it was to try to force singers
into the 12-EQ scale, then complain that they sing "out of
tune".

It's interesting that you use "resonate" in your question:
One of the most intriguing ideas I've seen that would be
related to this question is W. A. Mathieu's notion that
small-integer ratio intervals are relatively easy to
find _by singing_ because our bodies have cavities
that resonate to these harmonic frequencies. [See his
recently published book "Harmonic Experience"]. He
gives lessons on how to find these ratios and then
build scalar patterns with them while playing a drone.
This could certainly be one avenue thru which to approach
this subject.

My own viewpoint is that the series of prime numbers
acts as some kind of cognitive template into which we
try to fit the patterns of frequency relationships we
are hearing as we listen to music. It's my belief
(disputed by some folks on this list) that individual
prime numbers have "affects" associated with them.
I'm not going to try to define or describe them --
suffice to say that each prime is unique in sound
and feeling.

Following this line of reasoning, perhaps people
have some kind of innate feeling for or affinity to
particular prime numbers? It would be interesting
to get feedback on this from others on the list.
For example, does Gary Morrison have a special
liking only for 7:4, or does it extend to other
7-limit ratios as well? I personally really love
using 13:8 and 11:6 (separately) in chords, but
haven't really done enough listening experiments
to know how much I like particular primes as a set.

I think Gary's other comment, about how a particular
interval can pick up associations from tunes in
which it's used, is also a very valid point.

- Joe Monzo
monz@juno.com
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/homepage.html

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Kraig Grady wrote,

>There is also a problem with the word limit because if we talked of 11
>limit it could be thought of as not being allowed.

I don't think we need to worry about that. The limit of what is allowed
is normally thought of as allowed. Limit is already very widespread in
the literature.

I agree, though, that many people automatically think of prime limit in
many cases where odd limit would be more appropriate. I was thinking
about putting together a (Web) document on this and one or two people
agreed with me but it went no further. Any interest, Kraig?