Re: [tuning] Re: JI and integer ratios -- large and small

You folks puzzle me. For me, tuning by ratios
IS Just Intonation. Any other definition of
the term muddies the water.

nada brahma,
db

--
* D a v i d B e a r d s l e y
* 49/32 R a d i o "all microtonal, all the time"
* http://www.virtulink.com/immp/lookhere.htm

Joseph wrote,

>It seems then, that a system like La Monte Young's is definitely not
>just intonation. Anybody want to call him and tell him that? :)

I beg to differ. This is the one area where prime limit matters. La Monte
Young's piano tuning is 7-prime-limit, and you can get from any note to any
other note through a chain of simple, justly-tuned 7-odd-limit consonances.
That definitely qualifies it as a JI system in my book.

Joseph!
I am really sorry but I find this whole trend rather displeasing and the implication
somewhat offensive.
1) Despite what the composers who I have quoted as using the term Just Intonation in an all
inclusive sense, no one on this list is in a position to tell them they are not writing music
in Just Intonation. Personally If you are going to try to tell me that I do not write music in
Just Intonation, I can only assume, you are nuts and place you in that Category of a Stalinist
such as Breton who thinks he can decides who is a a surrealist or not.
2) The purpose of separating Medieval 5 limit Just Intonation from the traditions of Greece
and Persia functions only to satisfy a revisionist historical perspective where Just
intonation could be labeled a parthenogenic product of Europe. A rather isolationist view. I
hope this is not what you want otherwise i am out of here.
3) It has been pointed out that at a certain point JI and not be distinguished for ET. True
to the extent at looking at single intervals. This is true only if we look at the noun and not
the verb as The approach is different and we shouldn't lose sight of this. That Kirnberger
uses high ratios to determined the size of his intervals should not make us lose sight of what
he was trying to do. That is tempering and i think his tunings should be called "temperments"

>
> >
>
>

North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com

Paul!
Even his other works above 7-limit are in JI. I understand he is up in the 200+ range!
those who use ratios seem to make little or no distinctions where in the continuum they wish
to draw their palette!

"Paul H. Erlich" wrote:

>
> I beg to differ. This is the one area where prime limit matters. La Monte
> Young's piano tuning is 7-prime-limit, and you can get from any note to any
> other note through a chain of simple, justly-tuned 7-odd-limit consonances.
> That definitely qualifies it as a JI system in my book.

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com

Kraig wrote,

>those who use ratios seem to make little or no distinctions where in the
continuum they wish to draw their >palette!

Kraig, with all due respect to JI and its philosophies, those on the other
side of the argument seem to be saying that if you use really complex ratios
without these distinctions, then you might as well not be using JI, it would
make no aural difference. In the case of La Monte Young, though, there is a
very definite aural effect, involving difference tones, that he is trying to
obtain, even with his high primes, so that he certainly is making these
distinctions.

Paul!
Low integers are not the only distinctions as the likes of Navarro points out. He found
consonances in such chords where the harmonics where separated by the same number of
harmonics, thus the difference tones between adjacent intervals are the same. An example
41-47-53-59 (all separated by 6).
But there is an implication in your statements that it is the structural organization that
determines whether something is JI. As I used the Kirnberger as an example of ratios being
used to create a temperment (and not being a JI), I would say that there is some basis in this
approach. If nothing else, it is more fruitful, and doesn't attempt to cut composers off from
there source if they use intervals over 13. i have heard eikosanies of such high ratios that
the whole structure was with a tritone. I would still consider this JI and the person who did
so did also. Practically all who work in JI have there eyes pictured up the series. We cannot
ignore what composers say they are doing!

"Paul H. Erlich" wrote:

> Kraig wrote,
>
> >those who use ratios seem to make little or no distinctions where in the
> continuum they wish to draw their >palette!
>
> Kraig, with all due respect to JI and its philosophies, those on the other
> side of the argument seem to be saying that if you use really complex ratios
> without these distinctions, then you might as well not be using JI, it would
> make no aural difference. In the case of La Monte Young, though, there is a
> very definite aural effect, involving difference tones, that he is trying to
> obtain, even with his high primes, so that he certainly is making these
> distinctions.

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:

> i have heard eikosanies of such high ratios that
> the whole structure was with a tritone.

Kraig,

Did you intend to say here: "within a tritone"? How many pitches are
in this structure? Is this on your site? I would like to learn more
about this.

I would still consider this JI and the person who did
> so did also.

I'm down with that.

Practically all who work in JI have there eyes pictured up the
series. We cannot
> ignore what composers say they are doing!

I frequently find that the needs of a particular scale - or series of
scales, will require me to go quite high up the harmonic series. The
8 scale system I'm currently exploring is 29 Limit. This whole
discussion about what is JI, has been interesting. I've never
considered it anything else, no matter what the ratio limit is.
JI = Ratios of any kind.

Jacky Ligon

Jacky Ligon wrote:

> > i have heard eikosanies of such high ratios that
> > the whole structure was within tritone. (corrected as Jacky points out0
>
> How many pitches are
> in this structure? Is this on your site? I would like to learn more
> about this.

20 tones. the eikosany can be learned about http://www.anaphoria.com/dal01.html and
http://www.anaphoria.com/cps.html . It is the primary tuning I have worked with and built
instruments! the example i mention was done on a commodore 64 by Jose Garcia who i believe is
on this list somewhere. He did this but i do not have the actual ratios he used. I am sure it
could be reconstructed or something similar. I could imagine whole Scelsi like pieces taking
place within the major 2nd. possibly even smaller where you just have it reduced to a
fluctuating pitch. from there it becomes your timbre and you play in another Eikosany. Yes, i
am being Conceptual, and honestly the idea might sound better than the actual realization but
you don't know till you try!

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
>
> 20 tones. the eikosany can be learned about
http://www.anaphoria.com/dal01.html and
> http://www.anaphoria.com/cps.html . It is the primary tuning I have
worked with and built
> instruments!

I'm loading the Anaphoria pages as I type!

the example i mention was done on a commodore 64 by Jose Garcia who
i believe is
> on this list somewhere. He did this but i do not have the actual
ratios he used. I am sure it
> could be reconstructed or something similar.

It would be nice to get him to place this on MP3.com - sounds very
interesting. Did he use sine waves perhaps?

I could imagine whole Scelsi like pieces taking
> place within the major 2nd. possibly even smaller where you just
have it reduced to a
> fluctuating pitch. from there it becomes your timbre and you play
in another Eikosany. Yes, i
> am being Conceptual, and honestly the idea might sound better than
the actual realization but
> you don't know till you try!
>
This is compositional technique that appeals greatly to me. It is not
uncommon for me to tune a number of instruments to different
simultaneous scales (4-8), so that when you play across a chromatic
scale, a cluster chord (but not the Henry Cowell variety!) of near
unison pitches is played containing separate ratios on each scale
degree. It is possible to create some very lovely beating when you
perform a thematic line, and with JI, each note of the chromatic
scale can yeild a completely unique cluster chord. This is one of the
JI phenomenon I mentioned, that might not fall to gracefully on all
ears. I've heard something similar to this effect in Gamelan, when
the entire orchestra is playing a near unision theme on multiple
timbres.

Well I'm off to the Island!

Jacky Ligon

>>> [Margo Schulter]
>>>
>>> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12459
>>>
>>> In other words, the motto for JI systems of this historical
>>> kind might be: "Integer ratios only, small _and_ large."
>>> However, if there are _only_ large ratios like Kirnberger's
>>> 10935:8192 without any small ones like 3:2 and 4:3, then we
>>> are dealing with a "rational tuning" as opposed to a "JI system"
>>> in the usual sense.

>>
>> Joseph [Pehrson]
>> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12520
>>
>> It seems then, that a system like La Monte Young's is
>> definitely not just intonation. Anybody want to call him
>> and tell him that? :)

> [Paul Erlich]
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12521
>
> I beg to differ. This is the one area where prime limit matters.
> La Monte Young's piano tuning is 7-prime-limit, and you can get
> from any note to any other note through a chain of simple,
> justly-tuned 7-odd-limit consonances.
> That definitely qualifies it as a JI system in my book.

I have to agree with Paul on this one. La Monte certainly
considers himself to be a 'just-intonation composer', AFAIK.
(David Beardsley should be able to either confirm or refute
this - Dave?)

> [Paul Erlich]
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12529
>
> Kraig, with all due respect to JI and its philosophies,
> those on the other side of the argument seem to be saying
> that if you use really complex ratios without these
> distinctions, then you might as well not be using JI, it
> would make no aural difference.

I'm saying exactly that. This is where I'd used 'rational'.

> [Paul]
> In the case of La Monte Young, though, there is a very
> definite aural effect, involving difference tones, that
> he is trying to obtain, even with his high primes, so that
> he certainly is making these distinctions.

Young is definitely interested in exploring massive chords that
he considers to be subsets of the harmonic series, which I think
is another argument in favor of considering him to be a JI
composer. And Paul is correct here: difference tones play
an *extremely* important role in his compositions. When his
performers drone on with the same chord for several hours,
sometimes all you really notice are the difference tones.

> [Joseph Pehrson]
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12517
>
> And, what happens in the Margo Schulter example... when the large
> ratio actually approaches and is indistinguishable from a "tempered"
> value... or of 12-tET itself??

That's *exactly* when I prefer to use 'rational' instead of 'just'.

I wrote:

> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12468
>
> The very term 'just' refers specifically to the 'purity' of
> the *harmonious connection* between low-integer ratios and
> a high degree of consonance.

I quoted this again because I think it merits rereading.
It's a very important historical point, in connection with
the usage of 'just intonation'.

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

Monz!
You can use the term to mean what ever you want. I will use it like Partch, Harrison, La
Monte, Beardsley, Wilson ,Poole, Leedy, & .........(more to come!!!)

History is a nightmare from which we may never awaken -James Joyce

Monz wrote:

> > http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12468
> >
> > The very term 'just' refers specifically to the 'purity' of
> > the *harmonious connection* between low-integer ratios and
> > a high degree of consonance.
>
> I quoted this again because I think it merits rereading.
> It's a very important historical point, in connection with
> the usage of 'just intonation'.
>
> -monz
> http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/homepage.html
> .

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com

As this list is probably the most hostile out of all the list i am on. For now i am out of
here!

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com

Monz wrote:
>

> > [Paul Erlich]
> > http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12521
> >
> > I beg to differ. This is the one area where prime limit matters.
> > La Monte Young's piano tuning is 7-prime-limit, and you can get
> > from any note to any other note through a chain of simple,
> > justly-tuned 7-odd-limit consonances.
> > That definitely qualifies it as a JI system in my book.
>
> I have to agree with Paul on this one. La Monte certainly
> considers himself to be a 'just-intonation composer', AFAIK.
> (David Beardsley should be able to either confirm or refute
> this - Dave?)

I don't think he'd disagree with being described
as a JI composer.

--
* D a v i d B e a r d s l e y
* 49/32 R a d i o "all microtonal, all the time"
* http://www.virtulink.com/immp/lookhere.htm

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12545
>
> Monz!
> You can use the term to mean what ever you want. I will use
> it like Partch, Harrison, La Monte, Beardsley, Wilson ,Poole,
> Leedy, & .........(more to come!!!)
>
> History is a nightmare from which we may never awaken -James Joyce

Hi Kraig.

I'm the one writing the first online Tuning Dictionary, so it's
my responsibility to present and explain as many meanings for
the term as I can find.

I too will use it like all the composers you cite, and like I've
always been using it, and like it was used from 500 to 100 years
ago, which are not all necessarily the same. Look at my
definition and you'll see that I'm trying to be catholic.

The Joyce quote is good to keep in mind... but believe me, I've
certainly got the future in mind too!

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

I agree i will see you on th enew JI list

Pat Pagano, Director
South East Just Intonation Society
http://www.virtulink.com/immp/video/
----- Original Message -----
From: Kraig Grady
To: tuning@egroups.com
Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2000 12:19 AM
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: JI and integer ratios -- large and small

My Groups | tuning Main Page | Start a new group!

As this list is probably the most hostile out of all the list i am on. For now i am out of here!

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
www.anaphoria.com
You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
tuning-subscribe@egroups.com - join the tuning group.
tuning-unsubscribe@egroups.com - unsubscribe from the tuning group.
tuning-nomail@egroups.com - put your email message delivery on hold for the tuning group.
tuning-digest@egroups.com - change your subscription to daily digest mode.
tuning-normal@egroups.com - change your subscription to individual emails.

--- In tuning@egroups.com, "Paul H. Erlich" <PERLICH@A...> wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12521

La Monte Young's piano tuning is 7-prime-limit, and you can get from
any note to any
> other note through a chain of simple, justly-tuned 7-odd-limit
consonances.
> That definitely qualifies it as a JI system in my book.

Hmmm. That makes sense. Also I notice, looking at Joe Monzo's book
that Young includes ratios 9:7:4 even in his "Dream House" which uses
so many huge primes... So by the Schulter definition, since it DOES
include some smaller intervals, it would also be just intonation...

_________ _____ ___ __ __ _
Joseph Pehrson

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12527

> Joseph!
> I am really sorry but I find this whole trend rather
displeasing
and the implication somewhat offensive.
> 1) Despite what the composers who I have quoted as using the term
Just Intonation in an all inclusive sense, no one on this list is in
a
position to tell them they are not writing music
> in Just Intonation. Personally If you are going to try to tell me
that I do not write music in
> Just Intonation, I can only assume, you are nuts and place you in
that Category of a Stalinist
> such as Breton who thinks he can decides who is a a surrealist or
not.

> 2) The purpose of separating Medieval 5 limit Just Intonation from
the traditions of Greece and Persia functions only to satisfy a
revisionist historical perspective where Just intonation could be
labeled a parthenogenic product of Europe. A rather isolationist
view.
I hope this is not what you want otherwise i am out of here.

> 3) It has been pointed out that at a certain point JI and not be
distinguished for ET. True
> to the extent at looking at single intervals. This is true only if
we look at the noun and not
> the verb as The approach is different and we shouldn't lose sight
of
this. That Kirnberger
> uses high ratios to determined the size of his intervals should not
make us lose sight of what
> he was trying to do. That is tempering and i think his tunings
should be called "temperments"
>

Hello Kraig!

I am very sorry if you found some of my posts offensive. I think
there must be a misunderstanding! In the first place, I have no "ax"
to grind, instrumental or otherwise. I really don't really care
_what is_ or _what is not_ called just intonation!

I was just trying to figure out for myself if people called high
integer music just intonation... I didn't know. Obviously you do.

Like I said, I don't care one way or the other... I was just trying
to understand the concept, since I had never thought too much about
high integer rational music before, and you OBVIOUSLY have!!!

I was more trying to contrast "integer" and "high integer" music with
"irrational" values... i.e. "tempered" values that were "irrational"
numbers.

I frankly had forgotten my math... and I was a little naively
thrilled with the difference between the "rational" and "irrational."

If all "rational" music is just... perhaps there is true justice in
the world!

I was only exploring the math ideas and the music ideas... I,
unfortunately (or in this case, fortunately!) have NO point of view...

__________ ____ ___ __ _
Joseph Pehrson