George Kahrimanis experiment [progressions]

Hello, George!

I listened carefully to your tuning experiment, which was very
interesting. It certainly brings into question the whole subject of
"progression" in alternate tuning, a subject that has been explored in
detail on this list before. I note, also, that Mr. Lemothe is also
asking questions and commenting on this aspect.

Curiously, though, it seemed as many of your progressions had more than
only the "penultimate" chord retuned. For me, many of them seemed to be
entirely in just intonation-type chords. I only say that since the
"beating" seemed appreciatably reduced in almost all the chords.

The question is... if these progressions are indeed in just intonation,
than why don't we have some kind of drift?? Why can we come so
gracefully through the progressions? Paul, I'm not getting this.

A few months ago, Joe Monzo did an interesting experiment regarding
"adaptive" just intonation. I don't have the URL since I don't believe
it was ever on his main page. He compared various ratios for just chords
and, also, various "adjustments" to compensate for drift in the
progressions. It was fascinating. Also, if you go back through the
archive, you will see the extensive postings by John DeLaubenfels and
Paul Erlich regarding John's significant work in adaptive just
intonation.

I dunno. Given that fact that it seems that listeners are significantly
impacted by their "expectations" it would certainly seem that harmonic
progressions, particularly common ones, would affect peoples'
perceptions of any single chord. Paul??

Regarding your interest in the 11th partial: It was interesting that
the subject of Arabic scales and Zalzal should come up at the same time
as your inquiry concerning the 11th partial! Either this was
coincidence, or the discussion reminded you of your interest in this...
(??)

In any case, Joel Mandelbaum has a short discussion about it in his
dissertation. Most probably you know all of this, but I will quote it
for you anyway:

Mandelbaum:

"According to Partch, the Arabian lute-player Zalzal recognized the 11th
partial as an element in his music, and the Renaissance theorist
Vicentino accepted the 11th partial in theory if not in practice. A
number of writers have cited the 11th partial as the basis for
quarter-tone music (24-tone equal temperament) owing to the close
relationship between the intervals 12:11 (150.6 cents), 11:9 (347.4
cents) and 11:8 (551.3 cents) and the corresponding intervals in 24-tone
temperament (150, 350, and 550 cents respectively). Partch and Eggen
point out this relationship, but perhaps more significant is the
affirmation of the role of the 11th partial in quarter-tone music by
Ivan Wyschnegradsky, on of the most ardent of the quarter-tonists. In
his MANUEL D'HARMONIE A QUARTS DE TON, 1933, Wyschnegradsky cites the
11th partial as the best basis for 24-tone temperament... Lindsay
Norden spectulates that the 11th partial may well be the next to be
brought into the body of music, although he does not consider it to have
been of any importance in the art of harmony up till now..."

__________ ______ ___ _
Joseph Pehrson

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Joseph Pehrson <josephpehrson@c...> wrote:

> The question is... if these progressions are indeed in just
intonation,
> than why don't we have some kind of drift?? Why can we come so
> gracefully through the progressions? Paul, I'm not getting this.

Joseph, although I suspect George is using 31-tET or a similar
meantone temperament, just intonation does not make _every_
progression drift. A progression in JI will drift _if_ all common
tones are observed, _and if_ the progression does not return to the
same point in the just lattice from where it began. I happen to know
that George's theory does not place too much importance on common
tones, so if faced with a progression that might drift in JI, he
would
probably be inclined to "break" one of the common tones instead of
letting the drift take place.
>
> A few months ago, Joe Monzo did an interesting experiment regarding
> "adaptive" just intonation. I don't have the URL since I don't
believe
> it was ever on his main page. He compared various ratios for just
chords
> and, also, various "adjustments" to compensate for drift in the
> progressions. It was fascinating.

This was a I-IV-V7-I progression. I recall the URL containing "I-IV-
V7-I" in it -- a search through the archives should locate this.
>
> I dunno. Given that fact that it seems that listeners are
significantly
> impacted by their "expectations" it would certainly seem that
harmonic
> progressions, particularly common ones, would affect peoples'
> perceptions of any single chord. Paul??

Absolutely!
>
> Regarding your interest in the 11th partial: It was interesting
that
> the subject of Arabic scales and Zalzal should come up at the same
time
> as your inquiry concerning the 11th partial! Either this was
> coincidence, or the discussion reminded you of your interest in
this...
> (??)

It's also quite a coincidence that Pierre is throwing out questions
about dualism at the same time as George Kahrimanis, perhaps the most
avid dualism researcher speaking English today, appeared on the list.