RE: [tuning] Pythagorean male voices (was: Re: Question on chords )

Johnny wrote,

>First off, the middle ages were a melodic period and there were few 81/64
>interval heard as a relationship with any particular prominence. It is a
>melodic construct in its divination, from two 9/8 whole tones. Now the
large
>204 cent whole tone is probably etched in everyone's mind after some
hundreds
>of years. It is this stretch upwards (distinguishing it from either an 8/9

>or a meantone whole tone is especially easy to reproduce. It is after all
>the full step. Reproducing it a second time is simple enough, no?

Absolutely.

But we were talking about beating, which occurs in harmonic, not melodic,
intervals.

>Also, I bet most of the usage of 81/64 is in the upper ranges, based on
>Paul's input. The higher range always moved the fastest, and through the
>most melisma. But really now this historic info may not alter at all what
a
>modern will make of it. I was passing on what I had learned, that the
81/64
>beat enough times as to mask its egregiousness.

Interesting. Now if there is a rate of beating that best helps mask
egregiousness, then every just interval will have both an upper and a lower
version which beats at that rate, and the separation of these versions will
depend on register. There's an idea for a new tuning system!