Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Re: [tuning] Microtonal Analog Synthesizers

> [Kraig Grady, or was it Banaphshu?]
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/11929
>
> Monz and Paul!
>
> I find this type of logic rather so all inclusive as to
> not be meaningful. It is too easy to run down simple ratios
> until you fine one that worked. In fact if you took random
> numbers the results would be the same. As I stated before,
> the relationships between the planets are not simple ratios.
> If they were, a resonance would build up and destroy the orbit.
> golden/noble relationships seem to be a necessity.
> The problem will be as there are a infinite of whole number
> relationships, there are a infinite series of noble numbers;
> both can express the continuum.

I'm not going to argue against the possibility of describing
the relationships between the planetary orbital periods in myriad
different ways other than low-integer ratios. My piece and the
post that explained it was simply an excercise exploring the
ancient concept of 'music of the spheres', which was based
primarily on low-integer ratios.

But you have to be careful to make sure that your ideas are
reconciled with the physical facts. Astronomers are certain
that the Venus/Earth 13:8 ratio (actually, they seem to recognize
it more as 8:5, but 13:8 is much more precise), the Jupiter/Saturn
5:2, and especially the Neptune/Pluto 3:2 ratio exist, and in
fact the word that they use to describe these synchronicities
is precisely the one you see as a problem: resonance.

If the resonance were manifest thru the *overall* relationships
of all 9 planets, then yes, perhaps it would destroy the orbits.
But what I examined in detail in my post was the individual
ratios between any two planets. There *are* resonances in some
of these cases, and they bring no apparent harm to the planets
involved; I believe that the effect is small and subtle, probably
similar to the tidal forces exerted by the Moon, but not as strong.

Please note that while I explored many possible rational
interpretations of these orbits in my post, I did *not* use
low-integer ratios in my MIDI-file. The sound you are hearing
is a very precise mapping of the actual orbital frequency ratios,
which are *not* (except for the 3 cases noted above) very close
to low-integer ratios. It sounds like what it is:

http://www.egroups.com/files/tuning/monz/solarsystem/Solar.mid

The only way I could have made it more accurate would have been
to vary the pitches slightly over time - since the orbits of
the planets are not circular but elliptical, their orbital
velocities do vary somewhat (quite a bit in the case of Pluto).
I used a constant mean velocity based on the orbital *period*.

> [Dan Stearns]
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/11930
>
> I still just get a Windows Media Player "cannot open" error
> message with this address as well... anyone else having this
> problem?

Hmmm... I clicked on the link as you quoted it in your post, Dan,
and it worked fine... don't know what the problem is.

> BTW, it's real nice to see a big ol' up-all-night Monz post
> again...

I'm *so* glad to hear that! I know that you're a big fan of my
work, and I was expecting something positive from you. ...Thanks!

> however, should I somehow find myself bathed in the subliminal
> cosmic hum of a major chord, I'm afraid me and my bag of atoms
> are going to have to seek asylum in some alternate reality!

Well, first of all, please note that the 9-note chord, of which
I'm only really hearing 6 notes anyway (Venus thru Uranus) sounds
a lot like a major chord, but it's much more complicated than
that. There are lots of shimmering beats because of the slight
mistuning of orbits that are *almost*, but not quite, an '8ve'
apart.

And also remember that it wasn't *me* who put the planets into
these orbits! I'm just analyzing the data that's out there.

> [Joseph Pehrson]
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/11933
>
> Joe Monzo's new hum is really incredible. It's Beethoven meets
> La Monte Young! There is now no reason in the universe for any
> other music but this!

Wow, Joe, thanks... I can see that you were especially impressed!

-monz
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/homepage.html

🔗Monz <MONZ@JUNO.COM>

> [me, monz]
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/11937
>
> ... The sound you are hearing is a very precise mapping of
> the actual orbital frequency ratios, which are *not* (except
> for the 3 cases noted above) very close to low-integer ratios.
> It sounds like what it is:
>
> http://www.egroups.com/files/tuning/monz/solarsystem/Solar.mid
>
>
> The only way I could have made it more accurate would have been
> to vary the pitches slightly over time - since the orbits of
> the planets are not circular but elliptical, their orbital
> velocities do vary somewhat (quite a bit in the case of Pluto).
> I used a constant mean velocity based on the orbital *period*.

> [Kraig Grady]
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/11941
>
> Monz!
> It is interesting that Kepler (who is the one we look
> upon as the most vocal and precise of those talking about
> the music of the spheres) rejected the idea of the orbital
> duration as being expressible in whole number ratios and
> went to the distance as the clue. As the orbits are ellipses,
> He considered the planets moving in and out of these relation
> ships , like suspensions found in music.

Kraig,

Yes, this is interesting! I would very much like to map the
actual distances/velocities over time, as musical frequencies,
and actually hear the movement.

I have formulae that will calculate all the momentary orbital
data, but I'd really have to spend some time trying to understand
it. Collaboration from any mathematicians out there would be
appreciated.

Here are some resources:

How to compute planetary positions
http://hotel04.ausys.se/pausch/comp/ppcomp.html

SLALIB -- Positional Astronomy Library [software library]
http://star-www.rl.ac.uk/star/docs/sun67.htx/sun67.html

International Earth Rotation Service - Sub-bureau for Rapid
Service and Predictions of Earth Orientation Parameters
http://maia.usno.navy.mil/

> [Kraig]
>
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/11941
>
> I forgot to mentioned , I enjoyed the chord.

Whew!... I'm glad to know that you liked it, because I had a
feeling you would. The intervals I hear in it are not all
that different from the sonic structures I've perceived in
your own compositions.

-monz
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/homepage.html

🔗Joseph Pehrson <josephpehrson@compuserve.com>

--- In tuning@egroups.com, " Monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:
>
> The only way I could have made it more accurate would have been
> to vary the pitches slightly over time - since the orbits of
> the planets are not circular but elliptical, their orbital
> velocities do vary somewhat (quite a bit in the case of Pluto).
> I used a constant mean velocity based on the orbital *period*.

http://www.egroups.com/files/tuning/monz/solarsystem/Solar.mid

Of course... there is obviously quite a bit more work to do on this
project. How long would you envision this slowly evolving piece??
Would it go on for years, or could we get a "speedy" solar system on
a nice 70 minute CD?? (Practicality would opt for the latter).

For me, the "harmonicity" of the piece is not a problem... it adds to
the "classical-historical" nature of it. I never, personally, liked
the idea of leaving out the 5th partial from a cosmic "buzz"...

___________
P.S. Oh... Monz. While we're on the topic of files, would you please
mind adding your page with the I-IV-V-7-I with various "adaptive"
Just Intonations to the www.egroups.com Monzo directory??... I think
it belongs there... I would enjoy referencing it from time to time...

Tx... Joe2
__________ ____ __ __ _
Joseph Pehrson

🔗Monz <MONZ@JUNO.COM>

> [Joseph Pehrson]
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/11984
>
> --- In tuning@egroups.com, " Monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:
> >
> > The only way I could have made it more accurate would have been
> > to vary the pitches slightly over time - since the orbits of
> > the planets are not circular but elliptical, their orbital
> > velocities do vary somewhat (quite a bit in the case of Pluto).
> > I used a constant mean velocity based on the orbital *period*.
>
> http://www.egroups.com/files/tuning/monz/solarsystem/Solar.mid
>
> Of course... there is obviously quite a bit more work to do on
> this project. How long would you envision this slowly evolving
> piece?? Would it go on for years, or could we get a "speedy"
> solar system on a nice 70 minute CD?? (Practicality would opt
> for the latter).

As I suggested in several postings about this piece, there are so
many different types of planetary data that could be mapped into
sound, and the relationships as they vary thru time are so
complex (in most cases), that as you say, this is only a beginning.

There's no reason why the mapping couldn't be done so as to
occur over numerous different time-spans: sure, one version
could be made to fit on a CD, another version could be a Young-
type 'installation' that drones on for years...

>
> For me, the "harmonicity" of the piece is not a problem...
> it adds to the "classical-historical" nature of it. I never,
> personally, liked the idea of leaving out the 5th partial from
> a cosmic "buzz"...

Your allusion to La Monte Young's indisposition towards using
the 5/4 is interesting, because I was going to say something
about it earlier but didn't.

This piece reminds me very much of La Monte's long droning pieces,
and I too was struck by how strongly Jupiter sounded out the '8ve'
of that 5th harmonic, which gives this chord an entirely different
sound from anything Young has done.

Also, note that Jupiter is the only planet whose ratio gives
the 5th harmonic - all the others are near-'8ves' of the 'root'
or 3rd harmonic.

>
> ___________
> P.S. Oh... Monz. While we're on the topic of files, would you
> please mind adding your page with the I-IV-V-7-I with various
> "adaptive" Just Intonations to the www.egroups.com Monzo
> directory??... I think it belongs there... I would enjoy
> referencing it from time to time...

Ask and ye shall receive...

http://www.egroups.com/files/tuning/monz/I-IV-V7-I+progression/

has all the MIDI files, and

http://www.egroups.com/files/tuning/monz/I-IV-V7-I+progression/I-IV-V-
I.htm

is the webpage that puts it all together. (Delete the line break
that probably got put into that link, or just access the webpage
directly from my 'files' folder link above.)

>
> Tx... Joe2

Does this mean I'm Joe1? :) (that's 'Joe-one', not 'Joel')
I could accept the implications that carries... :) :)

-monz
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/homepage.html

🔗Joseph Pehrson <pehrson@pubmedia.com>

--- In tuning@egroups.com, " Monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:
http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/11991

...I too was struck by how strongly Jupiter sounded out the '8ve'
> of that 5th harmonic, which gives this chord an entirely different
> sound ...
>
I like it!!!
>
>
> Ask and ye shall receive...
>
> http://www.egroups.com/files/tuning/monz/I-IV-V7-I+progression/
>
> has all the MIDI files, and

> is the webpage that puts it all together.

Monz... that was really fast... you must have done another
"overnighter..." Thanks so much... I always loved that page... it's
liked "warped" ear training, music school revenge...

> > Tx... Joe2
>
> Does this mean I'm Joe1?
>
Well, I was actually thinking more of "Joe-too." However, surely in
the microtonal theory dept. you would be "Joe1." On the overall
composing front?? Hard to say, especially with your grand review by
Kyle Gann in the Village Voice last year... Well, probably listers
should read my CV and judge for themselves... :) :) :)
http://www.composersconcordance.org/

THANKS AGAIN!!!
_________ ____ ___ __ __ __
Joseph Pehrson

Re: [tuning] Microtonal Analog Synthesizers

🔗Alexandros Papadopoulos <alexmoog@hotmail.com>

🔗Alexandros Papadopoulos <alexmoog@hotmail.com>

🔗Monz <MONZ@JUNO.COM>

🔗Monz <MONZ@JUNO.COM>

🔗Joseph Pehrson <josephpehrson@compuserve.com>

🔗Monz <MONZ@JUNO.COM>

🔗Joseph Pehrson <pehrson@pubmedia.com>

🔗Alexandros Papadopoulos <alexmoog@hotmail.com>