"never been tried," patented way of working!!

"Never been tried," patented way of working, and I INVENTED IT!

In response to my comments:

> > In other words, in order to minimize the "extra baggage" that would go
> > with trying to figure out how to notate microtonality... let's say a
> > scale in 19 tones per octave, for example, I simply notate literally on
> > the staff what I am playing on the MIDI keyboard.
>

Graham Breed wrote in TD 655:

As you may have guessed, this is such an old idea that there is a body
of
> literature arguing against it. Harry Partch, who generally used tablatures of
> his own devising, did notate modified keyboard instruments this way for
> performance.

Thanks, Graham for your commentary. Yes, of course, I figured many
people had tried this approach. It seems sensible to me.

Me:
> > LATER, I will do the "translation" process of figuring out what the
> > 12-tET notes really are. Why do I have to do this?? Well, the answer is
> > obvious, unless one is strictly writing electronic music which, I
> > personally believe, should never be notated unless it is accompanying
> > other live instruments.

Graham B.:
> Translate to 12-tET? The very thought of it! And electronic music should
> never be notated? I disagree there as well. Partly because somebody else may
> need to understand it one day. Or you might even need to convert it to use a
> different synthesizer. Or live, electronic instruments may be accompanying
> each other.

Well... I know for the xenharmonic set I have committed a sacrilege.
However, most of our "traditional" instrumentalists who aren't
"xenharmonic cultists" as we are, still use 12-tET as a reference. My
god, they still complain about 1/4 tones... I'm not joking!

Your case for notation of electronic music is well taken. I guess it
depends what one is trying to do in that genre. I can certainly see its
significance in your own approach.

JP:
> > All we need to do is find the 1/1, which is Scala is always "middle C"
> > or 261.63HZ.
GB:
> I think you'll find that Scala chooses the 1/1 at "middle C" such that A is 440
> Hz. Unless you tell it otherwise.
>
Thanks for that tip. I just also read the note from Manuel Op de Coul
which helps a lot...

GB:
> I think there
> is some evidence that performers do find the 12-tET with cent deviations
> easier,

I will stick my neck out here and say that I would believe it would be
unequivocably easier for traditional, professional performers, and they
are the cattle that I am particularly interested in, at the moment.
I've enjoyed all the other xenharmonic notation I have been reading
about... notation by commas, etc., but I really feel this is for
xenharmonic specialists...

> There's stuff on my website about this. Try
> http://x31eq.com/schismic.htm

Yes... your website is one of the best around... and you really are
interested in "educating" people, not obfuscating...

> Anything that gets you away from 12-thinking would be good. 1/8-tones sound
> like a generally bad idea for this.

Johnny Reinhard specifically REQUESTED 1/8 tone tuning for his piece and
he's a MICROTONAL SPECIALIST!! That just shows us how far we have to go
in order to get traditional perfomers to do this stuff. Johnny and I
don't even have a completed set of woodwind fingerings for 1/8 tones,
much less anything extremely exotic. My presumption is that the
woodwinds are going to be about the hardest of all to "convert" just
because of all the fingering problems...

Thanks, Graham for all your comments. They are greatly appreciated!

___________ ______ ___ __ _
Joseph Pehrson