Re: [tuning] horsing around or making cents (??)

In a message dated 9/9/00 7:00:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
josephpehrson@compuserve.com writes:

> I'm not understanding this... When has anybody advocated using 1201
> units?? I must be missing something... Which post number was that??

What you are missing is the fact that only 1200 is based on 12 and that is
the training that makes music sound great. 1201 was a lark and you bit.

> But I thought many of us felt that the "quartertone +" notation WAS
> the easiest way for the professional musician! The QUESTION was
> whether it should be "quartertone +/- <51" or "quartertone +/- <26."

Since I still feel a C# sometimes distinct from a Db I'd rather keep the >
50. Please desist from trying to represent me on this. Players acknowledge
both the identity and the differences, many composers do, too.

> Yes, so you are saying that they mean something SPECIFIC... They are
> not interchangeable. That's been my point, and Monzo's all along...
> So there should be no reason to have two different notations for the
> SAME pitch... two notations should only "prescribe" two DIFFERENT
> pitches...

I disagree with you most confidently. It must be the tonality in my
microtonality.

> But, more easily than the 72-tET school?? Have you TRIED 72-tET with
> your players? I would hesitate to think that they would be teaching
> this system at the New England Conservatory if it were entirely
> without merit.

1200 is more accurate than 72. What don't you understand about this, Joe?

Johnny Reinhard

On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Johnny Reinhard wrote:

> In a message dated 9/9/00 7:00:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> josephpehrson@compuserve.com writes:
>
> > But I thought many of us felt that the "quartertone +" notation WAS
> > the easiest way for the professional musician! The QUESTION was
> > whether it should be "quartertone +/- <51" or "quartertone +/- <26."
>
> Since I still feel a C# sometimes distinct from a Db I'd rather keep the >
> 50. Please desist from trying to represent me on this. Players acknowledge
> both the identity and the differences, many composers do, too.

Lest you be misrepresented again, can we have a summary of exactly what you
*are* advocating? I'm getting lost amongst all this +/- <> stuff.

Graham

"I toss therefore I am" -- Sartre

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Afmmjr@a... wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/12576

This is fine. My feeling is that perhaps you just need to have a
different notational system for your music than I do for mine. That
is no problem. It is fortunate we are still in an "exploratory"stage
for this kind of stuff and are not "locked" into a system of notation
as it has been for probably 100 years with 12-tET!

Best

_________ _____ __ __ __
Joseph Pehrson