two suggestions for the promotion of tuning

I have two suggestions for the promotion of tuning to broader musical
communities. =


The first is that the continuous invention and proliferation of new
terminology (and the ensuing conflicts over definitions) is self-defeatin=
g.
Most of the ideas we are engaged in can be discussed without inventing ne=
w
terms and most ordinary musicians are turned aback by the mass of
terminology we tend to throw to them. =


The second idea is that we should be more relaxed about notations. To ru=
n
a riff on Korzybski, notations are not the sounds themselves, and no matt=
er
how convenient a particular notation may be, no single notation is
neccessary. For example, attempts to standardize Just intonation with
Johnston's or my own or some other notation should be discouraged in favo=
r
of getting players to think flexibly about pitch in general. Flexible
notational will only follow from such a precondition. As another example,=

the continuous claims for priority in graphing techniques on this list
don't lead anywhere (or at least anywhere previously unvisited by Riemann=

or Tanaka or Wilson...). As some one has recently pointed out,
triangulating a lattice is an obvious idea (as it was to Tanaka a century=

ago).

All-
I'm finally back on line after a two week hiatus. A hacker broke
into the math departments main server "math" and wreaked some havoc. Our
systems administrator has her back up, for good I hope.
For those dissatisfid with the forum CD cover, there are several CD art
programs for making color inserts on your home computer. For those occasions
when you must have color on your CDs, it costs just pennies per copy, plus,
you can plug yourself! How about "The Microtonal Masterpieces of John
Starrett, plus samplings of several other artists";-)
I recall some mention of my "no 12th root of 2" logo. I forgot
the context, but if anyone wants to use it it's fine with me.

John Starrett
http://www-math.cudenver.edu/~jstarret

Carl Lumma wrote:

"Say... what's a ch'in?"

This ancient board zither is the 'scholars' instrument' of Chinese
civilization, often badly mistranslated as 'lute' (in an attempt to captu=
re
the milleau of the instrument). It combines the scholarly aspects of the
western monochord with a sensitivity to the aesthetics of the pitch-timbr=
e
continuum that remains largely unsurpassed in music history. The instrume=
nt
itself is an object of great reverence and respect, played with a minimum=

of physical contact by the player (contrasting, for example, with the way=
a
guitarist or veena player embraces the instrument). The instrument is
extremely quiet, played upon a tabletop for an audience consisting of onl=
y
the player himself (traditionally women were not allowed to play). If you=

have the opportunity to hear a ch'in played in public, please try to have=

the player play without amplification. Although the osund will only bbe o=
n
the threshold of perception, it has an unmistakeable presence.

There are several good web pages about the ch'in (also look for 'chin' an=
d
'qin'). There are many excellent recordings, but stick generally to those=

with silk strings (i.e. don't bother with most recordings from the PRC,
excepting perhaps the CD by Wu Wen Guang -- a former colleague -- who pla=
ys
beautifully despite his steel strings).