the $64,000 question

Margo Schulter,

> Thus while I might describe a tuning such as 1/4-comma meantone as
not in any usual sense "painful" for Renaissance music, I would
nevertheless recognize that the tempering of the fifths, for example,
involves a degree of "stress" -- some stress possibly being a usual
norm in music as in life.

John A. deLaubenfels,

> That's the $64,000 question. For me, music is a place where the
greatest possible release from "stress" is paramount. There, it is a
joy for intervals (including 7:4) to be close to true in the midst of
frenetic 19th century (etc.) music. But I would not discount the
opposite experience, especially given how different our ears are (I
use the word "ears", of course, to refer to the ear/brain combination,
and, as for the brain, its subdivisions are endless...).

While I don't think this answer's going to get me the sixty-four
grand, I'll roll it out there anyway for whatever it's worth... From
an ideological or artistic standpoint, I for one am totally opposed to
the _idea (the retuned music I'd hope to take a listen at a time; each
on its own merits as I understand or see them, etc.) of an across the
board aesthetic that would retune all intervals in all music to a
given optimal... 110% TOTALLY OPPOSED. However, that's just my view,
and I wouldn't expect everyone to agree with it!

Dan

[Margo Schulter wrote:]
>>>Thus while I might describe a tuning such as 1/4-comma meantone as
>>>not in any usual sense "painful" for Renaissance music, I would
>>>nevertheless recognize that the tempering of the fifths, for example,
>>>involves a degree of "stress" -- some stress possibly being a usual
>>>norm in music as in life.

[I responded:]
>>That's the $64,000 question. For me, music is a place where the
>>greatest possible release from "stress" is paramount. There, it is a
>>joy for intervals (including 7:4) to be close to true in the midst of
>>frenetic 19th century (etc.) music. But I would not discount the
>>opposite experience, especially given how different our ears are (I
>>use the word "ears", of course, to refer to the ear/brain combination,
>>and, as for the brain, its subdivisions are endless...).

[Dan Stearns wrote:]
>While I don't think this answer's going to get me the sixty-four
>grand, I'll roll it out there anyway for whatever it's worth... From
>an ideological or artistic standpoint, I for one am totally opposed to
>the _idea (the retuned music I'd hope to take a listen at a time; each
>on its own merits as I understand or see them, etc.) of an across the
>board aesthetic that would retune all intervals in all music to a
>given optimal... 110% TOTALLY OPPOSED. However, that's just my view,
>and I wouldn't expect everyone to agree with it!

Could you clarify what you're opposed to? Is it a new option applied
across a wide band of music you oppose? Or is it the idea that a
"revisionist" movement might arise and trample everything historic,
"authentic" in its sight? The latter idea I would consider an
unnecessary fear; nothing is going to kill 12-tET (and other tunings) in
the near future! The former idea I would heartily endorse; can
additional choices ever be bad?

Again, I do not dispute that dissonance is an integral part of some
music. Sometimes it should not be diminished at all. (Interestingly,
the application of adaptive techniques to very dissonant music such
as Stravinski's "Rite of Spring" can substantially SHARPEN the
dissonance at certain points, though not, one could argue, at the points
necessarily chosen by the composer!)

But there's a LOT of music that is, IMHO, made more sweet and more
powerful by the application of dynamic tuning. To some ears, at least,
certainly including mine! Anyone who prefers Mozart (say) in 12-tET
or in some other tuning has my blessing. We were not born the same.

[Kraig Grady wrote:]
>D.Stearns and co.!
> Yes as Carl Jung pointed out, there is no life without tension.
>without it in music the experience of cadence would not be possible or
>necessary!
> It seems the greek notion of Orpheus was to get us into the
>underworld and get us out, even if he didn't necessarily make it
>himself. On the otherhand the notion and possibility of music acting
>upon the individual in a "healing " fashion is not new and one would
>expect to continue to function in this way in our society. The release
>of stress may not be the best way, in my own case I find that happy
>music makes me depressed and sad minor upon minor has an uncanny
>effect of lifting my spirits. I am not sure if the latter is just a
>release of the stress of sadness that its expression alleviates or not!

Do you prefer the Bach in 12-tET than in 5-limit adaptive grounded to
COFT? How about the Mozart? Certainly in the music itself the process
of stress and resolution from stress is played out many times; it is in
the bones of the notes themselves. Are you saying that a more
dissonant tuning helps you enjoy the music?

JdL

>I have no real interest in 5 limit tunings under 17 tones

Kraig!

You should try John's midi files out...

http://www.idcomm.com/personal/jadl/

...he's rendering Mozart, Brahms, Bach, Schubert, etc, in 5- and 7-limit
tunings with literally hundreds of notes each. Definitely try the
Mozart file (at the top of the page) first.

>I can't judge any tuning in a one off midi translation. I can't
>comment on acoustic instrument translated to electronic version.
>Would have to hear it on a real acoustic instrument and then i
>feel i might be able to judge.

I applaud your reticence on comparing acoustic and synthesized tunings,
but certainly you can view the synthesized version in its own right!
Compare the 12-tone version to the 5- and 7-limit ones, without worrying
what they sound like on a fortepiano.

-Carl