Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning-math Spin Off New Group

Thanks Carl. I did just that, my main problem now is that the group
name is my email name (paulhjelmstad) and I would like to make it
musicalsettheory@yahoo.com if possible.

I invited you to join but I don't know if it reached you, because
I assumed a domain for your email:) Anyway, for anyone who wants to join it ---

paulhjelmstad

is the name right now.

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:
>
> Go to groups.yahoo.com or groups.google.com and start
> a group!
>
> -Carl
>
> At 08:50 AM 8/11/2010, you wrote:
> >Carl Lumma (et al),
> >
> >I would like to start a spinoff group to discuss musical
> >set theory. (yahoo musical-set-theory or something). Would you tell
> >me how to get started?
> >
> >For now I am going to search for yahoo musictheory etc.
> >
> >Thanks
> >
>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@lumma.org>

🔗paulhjelmstad <phjelmstad@msn.com>

Really? What about the group theory of David Lewin, etc? I guess
I don't find it that terribly different from what is done here,
it's all Abstract Algebra, you know. Even though lately it seems
that the discussion here is skewed to the Analysis (error) side of things.

I mean, I use Linear Algebra, Projective Geometry, etc. all which
are very a much a part of what is done with the Grassmanian....
Obviously, though the focus is different hence the new newsgroup.

(For example, I can discuss 31-tET from a musical set theory
perspective and mention, the 31 point projective plane, FLID's,
the Affine group action, and so forth) Projective planes have
duals, it's all really so similar...Plus Lattices....which is
very central here, or at least it was.

PGH

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately I have no interest in music set theory. :(
>
> You could also try a facebook page, perhaps.
>
> -Carl
>
> At 10:03 AM 8/11/2010, you wrote:
> >Thanks Carl. I did just that, my main problem now is that the group
> >name is my email name (paulhjelmstad) and I would like to make it
> >musicalsettheory@... if possible.
> >
> >I invited you to join but I don't know if it reached you, because
> >I assumed a domain for your email:) Anyway, for anyone who wants to join it ---
> >
> >paulhjelmstad
> >
> >is the name right now.
>

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@sbcglobal.net>

🔗Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@gmail.com>

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:30 PM, paulhjelmstad <phjelmstad@msn.com> wrote:
>
> Really? What about the group theory of David Lewin, etc? I guess
> I don't find it that terribly different from what is done here,
> it's all Abstract Algebra, you know. Even though lately it seems
> that the discussion here is skewed to the Analysis (error) side of things.
>
> I mean, I use Linear Algebra, Projective Geometry, etc. all which
> are very a much a part of what is done with the Grassmanian....
> Obviously, though the focus is different hence the new newsgroup.
>
> (For example, I can discuss 31-tET from a musical set theory
> perspective and mention, the 31 point projective plane, FLID's,
> the Affine group action, and so forth) Projective planes have
> duals, it's all really so similar...Plus Lattices....which is
> very central here, or at least it was.

What does musical set theory have to do with harmonic music? I thought
it had more to do with serialism. Am I misinformed?

-Mike

🔗hstraub64 <straub@datacomm.ch>

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "paulhjelmstad" <phjelmstad@...> wrote:
>
> Really? What about the group theory of David Lewin, etc? I guess
> I don't find it that terribly different from what is done here,
> it's all Abstract Algebra, you know. Even though lately it seems
> that the discussion here is skewed to the Analysis (error) side of
> things.
>
> I mean, I use Linear Algebra, Projective Geometry, etc. all which
> are very a much a part of what is done with the Grassmanian....
> Obviously, though the focus is different hence the new newsgroup.
>
> (For example, I can discuss 31-tET from a musical set theory
> perspective and mention, the 31 point projective plane, FLID's,
> the Affine group action, and so forth) Projective planes have
> duals, it's all really so similar...Plus Lattices....which is
> very central here, or at least it was.
>

I am basically interested in all those things, also in the context of 12EDO and serialism. (Unfortunately, I usually do not have enough time to look deeper into it, but that's another question...)

So there is a new group for this now? Where is it?
--
Hans Straub

🔗paulhjelmstad <phjelmstad@msn.com>

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "paulhjelmstad" <phjelmstad@> wrote:
>
> > (For example, I can discuss 31-tET from a musical set theory
> > perspective and mention, the 31 point projective plane, FLID's,
> > the Affine group action, and so forth) Projective planes have
> > duals, it's all really so similar...Plus Lattices....which is
> > very central here, or at least it was.
>
> You would probably generate more interest if you dropped your focus on 12et and formulated questions in general terms. It's also likely that getting rid of any focus on serialism would help; I don't see much interest here on that.

Thanks, good advice. I am more interested in Scriabin's harmonic
rhythm / hexachord theory than Schoenberg, which is so outmoded
now...I am also interested in 31-tET and 24-tET, so that's a start I guess. I've crunched numbers for interval vectors up to 31-tET,
which actually has millions of sets.

PGH

🔗paulhjelmstad <phjelmstad@msn.com>

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "hstraub64" <straub@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "paulhjelmstad" <phjelmstad@> wrote:
> >
> > Really? What about the group theory of David Lewin, etc? I guess
> > I don't find it that terribly different from what is done here,
> > it's all Abstract Algebra, you know. Even though lately it seems
> > that the discussion here is skewed to the Analysis (error) side of
> > things.
> >
> > I mean, I use Linear Algebra, Projective Geometry, etc. all which
> > are very a much a part of what is done with the Grassmanian....
> > Obviously, though the focus is different hence the new newsgroup.
> >
> > (For example, I can discuss 31-tET from a musical set theory
> > perspective and mention, the 31 point projective plane, FLID's,
> > the Affine group action, and so forth) Projective planes have
> > duals, it's all really so similar...Plus Lattices....which is
> > very central here, or at least it was.
> >
>
> I am basically interested in all those things, also in the context of 12EDO and serialism. (Unfortunately, I usually do not have enough time to look deeper into it, but that's another question...)
>
> So there is a new group for this now? Where is it?
> --
> Hans Straub

Right now it's called paulhjelmstad (my name, yahoo email) because I do not know how to set up an email musicalsettheory@yahoo.com. But the description is right.

PGH

🔗paulhjelmstad <phjelmstad@msn.com>

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:30 PM, paulhjelmstad <phjelmstad@...> wrote:
> >
> > Really? What about the group theory of David Lewin, etc? I guess
> > I don't find it that terribly different from what is done here,
> > it's all Abstract Algebra, you know. Even though lately it seems
> > that the discussion here is skewed to the Analysis (error) side of things.
> >
> > I mean, I use Linear Algebra, Projective Geometry, etc. all which
> > are very a much a part of what is done with the Grassmanian....
> > Obviously, though the focus is different hence the new newsgroup.
> >
> > (For example, I can discuss 31-tET from a musical set theory
> > perspective and mention, the 31 point projective plane, FLID's,
> > the Affine group action, and so forth) Projective planes have
> > duals, it's all really so similar...Plus Lattices....which is
> > very central here, or at least it was.
>
> What does musical set theory have to do with harmonic music? I thought
> it had more to do with serialism. Am I misinformed?
>
> -Mike

Well, that's my experiment. I am not just permuting tone rows,
but permuting harmonies in terms of voice leading, etc. Most of my
stuff with hexachords would probably be classified as bitonality, or the idea of overlapping harmonies (or dissonances, al a Rite of Spring, etc.) For example, finding the most fundamental six pitch classes used in a change from one harmony to another (harmonic rhythm)

(A lot is from Jazz theory to, Frank Mantooth and others, 9th, 11th, 13th chords, etc, which actually rolls right out of Scriabin, and Gershwin...)

My inspiration is largely due to the work of David Lewin, and I have
corresponded also some with Dr. Jon Wild, who was a student of his.
I've also corresponded some with Dr. Noam Elkies (on M12 and M24).
And of course, learned much from tuning-math which I want to shuttle
over to the new group.

PGH

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@gmail.com>

🔗paulhjelmstad <phjelmstad@msn.com>

🔗caleb morgan <calebmrgn@yahoo.com>

I'd be quite interested in any and all applied theory, including theory in good ol' 12-tone tuning, and serialism.

I've not posted much about those subjects because it doesn't seem appropriate for this list. It's not for lack of interest, however.

It would be great to have another list to discuss those topics relevant for composition that are not in the spirit of the tuning list (and the tuning-math list).

I have Lewin's book, and would appreciate having it explained in terms I can understand.

Some serial composers I like: Berg, Dallapiccola, Peter Lieberson, Stravinsky (late), Ben Johnston.

Of course, 'serialism' doesn't necessarily mean '12-tone', and vice-versa.

Being able to have a name for a group of pitches such as Db,D,E,F (0134) is quite useful, as are the concepts of complementation, inversion, 5m. Calling this level of application "set theory" really seems unnecessarily abstract and solemn. It's really more of a way of talking--a nomenclature and a taxonomy.

Frankly, I never understand what you (Paul) post--because I lack the math background. I might be very interested if I could understand it and if it were something I'd want to apply to my own composition.

Two little riffs on theory and accessibility for musicians:

1) At New England Conservatory, The Lewin Generalized Intervals etc. book was never checked out once (except by me) in the entire time it rested on the dusty shelves.

2) Gershwin, whose music I don't really like, studied with Schillinger among others. (Schillinger really is outdated, but easy for a musician to understand, so musicians still read him, it seems.)

My point: Lewin: Brilliant but inaccessible. Schillinger: Outdated but accessible.

If the theory can be 'dumbed down' so that I could understand how or whether to apply it to my own composition, I'd be very interested.

Past grad school, in the middle of life's passage, it can be hard to learn new theory and hard to discern what might actually be useful.

The key word here is "applied".

I'm not trying to start some kind of debate, just describing what I'd be interested in.

Caleb

On Aug 13, 2010, at 11:32 AM, paulhjelmstad wrote:

>
>
> --- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:30 PM, paulhjelmstad <phjelmstad@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Really? What about the group theory of David Lewin, etc? I guess
> > > I don't find it that terribly different from what is done here,
> > > it's all Abstract Algebra, you know. Even though lately it seems
> > > that the discussion here is skewed to the Analysis (error) side of things.
> > >
> > > I mean, I use Linear Algebra, Projective Geometry, etc. all which
> > > are very a much a part of what is done with the Grassmanian....
> > > Obviously, though the focus is different hence the new newsgroup.
> > >
> > > (For example, I can discuss 31-tET from a musical set theory
> > > perspective and mention, the 31 point projective plane, FLID's,
> > > the Affine group action, and so forth) Projective planes have
> > > duals, it's all really so similar...Plus Lattices....which is
> > > very central here, or at least it was.
> >
> > What does musical set theory have to do with harmonic music? I thought
> > it had more to do with serialism. Am I misinformed?
> >
> > -Mike
>
> Well, that's my experiment. I am not just permuting tone rows,
> but permuting harmonies in terms of voice leading, etc. Most of my
> stuff with hexachords would probably be classified as bitonality, or the idea of overlapping harmonies (or dissonances, al a Rite of Spring, etc.) For example, finding the most fundamental six pitch classes used in a change from one harmony to another (harmonic rhythm)
>
> (A lot is from Jazz theory to, Frank Mantooth and others, 9th, 11th, 13th chords, etc, which actually rolls right out of Scriabin, and Gershwin...)
>
> My inspiration is largely due to the work of David Lewin, and I have
> corresponded also some with Dr. Jon Wild, who was a student of his.
> I've also corresponded some with Dr. Noam Elkies (on M12 and M24).
> And of course, learned much from tuning-math which I want to shuttle
> over to the new group.
>
> PGH
>
>

🔗paulhjelmstad <phjelmstad@msn.com>

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, caleb morgan <calebmrgn@...> wrote:
>
> I'd be quite interested in any and all applied theory, including theory in good ol' 12-tone tuning, and serialism.
>
> I've not posted much about those subjects because it doesn't seem appropriate for this list. It's not for lack of interest, however.
>
> It would be great to have another list to discuss those topics relevant for composition that are not in the spirit of the tuning list (and the tuning-math list).
>
> I have Lewin's book, and would appreciate having it explained in terms I can understand.
>
> Some serial composers I like: Berg, Dallapiccola, Peter Lieberson, Stravinsky (late), Ben Johnston.
>
> Of course, 'serialism' doesn't necessarily mean '12-tone', and vice-versa.
>
> Being able to have a name for a group of pitches such as Db,D,E,F (0134) is quite useful, as are the concepts of complementation, inversion, 5m. Calling this level of application "set theory" really seems unnecessarily abstract and solemn. It's really more of a way of talking--a nomenclature and a taxonomy.
>
> Frankly, I never understand what you (Paul) post--because I lack the math background. I might be very interested if I could understand it and if it were something I'd want to apply to my own composition.
>
> Two little riffs on theory and accessibility for musicians:
>
> 1) At New England Conservatory, The Lewin Generalized Intervals etc. book was never checked out once (except by me) in the entire time it rested on the dusty shelves.
>
> 2) Gershwin, whose music I don't really like, studied with Schillinger among others. (Schillinger really is outdated, but easy for a musician to understand, so musicians still read him, it seems.)
>
> My point: Lewin: Brilliant but inaccessible. Schillinger: Outdated but accessible.
>
> If the theory can be 'dumbed down' so that I could understand how or whether to apply it to my own composition, I'd be very interested.
>
> Past grad school, in the middle of life's passage, it can be hard to learn new theory and hard to discern what might actually be useful.
>
> The key word here is "applied".
>
> I'm not trying to start some kind of debate, just describing what I'd be interested in.
>
> Caleb

Thanks for your post. If you would like, join musicalsettheory group and let's discuss these matters over there. I own Lewin's book, although have not read much of it yet. I think I can simplify the symmetries I have been discussing and make the use of them really practical.

I am a piano player so even black-white color combinations of keys are worth discussing, IMHO, which is an easy place to start, and a comparison of "what's diatonic" vs. "what's chromatic" --- in C!

PGH

> On Aug 13, 2010, at 11:32 AM, paulhjelmstad wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > --- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:30 PM, paulhjelmstad <phjelmstad@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Really? What about the group theory of David Lewin, etc? I guess
> > > > I don't find it that terribly different from what is done here,
> > > > it's all Abstract Algebra, you know. Even though lately it seems
> > > > that the discussion here is skewed to the Analysis (error) side of things.
> > > >
> > > > I mean, I use Linear Algebra, Projective Geometry, etc. all which
> > > > are very a much a part of what is done with the Grassmanian....
> > > > Obviously, though the focus is different hence the new newsgroup.
> > > >
> > > > (For example, I can discuss 31-tET from a musical set theory
> > > > perspective and mention, the 31 point projective plane, FLID's,
> > > > the Affine group action, and so forth) Projective planes have
> > > > duals, it's all really so similar...Plus Lattices....which is
> > > > very central here, or at least it was.
> > >
> > > What does musical set theory have to do with harmonic music? I thought
> > > it had more to do with serialism. Am I misinformed?
> > >
> > > -Mike
> >
> > Well, that's my experiment. I am not just permuting tone rows,
> > but permuting harmonies in terms of voice leading, etc. Most of my
> > stuff with hexachords would probably be classified as bitonality, or the idea of overlapping harmonies (or dissonances, al a Rite of Spring, etc.) For example, finding the most fundamental six pitch classes used in a change from one harmony to another (harmonic rhythm)
> >
> > (A lot is from Jazz theory to, Frank Mantooth and others, 9th, 11th, 13th chords, etc, which actually rolls right out of Scriabin, and Gershwin...)
> >
> > My inspiration is largely due to the work of David Lewin, and I have
> > corresponded also some with Dr. Jon Wild, who was a student of his.
> > I've also corresponded some with Dr. Noam Elkies (on M12 and M24).
> > And of course, learned much from tuning-math which I want to shuttle
> > over to the new group.
> >
> > PGH
> >
> >
>