Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning The Wheel (was Re: Allegory and Goodbye)

"John A. deLaubenfels" wrote:

> [Paul E:]
> >>I also did not understand Kraig's reasons for leaving
> >>and will try to get in touch with him. If it is as David B.
> >>said, that he was upset that people were reinventing
> >>the wheel, well you have to reinvent it if you lost the
> >>instruction manual . . .
>
> [David B:]
> >The Just Intonation Primer by David Doty can be purchased
> >from the Just Intonation Network at:
>
> >http://www.dnai.com/~jinetwk/
>
> >You also might want to check out Harry Partchs Genesis of a Music.
>
> David, I know you know that Paul is familiar with those works! Not
> everyone on the list is, however, and shall we forbid any postings on
> topics that could be found in those, or other, books? That seems silly
> to me.
>
> I'm a big believer in "reinventing the wheel", because it's the perfect
> preparation for pushing knowledge beyond where any "wheel" has yet gone.
> Besides, the wheel that is already invented may be a wagon wheel, with
> chrome-moly and other important refinements yet to come.

In this case the term Just Intonation is the wheel. Some people on this
list
were nit picking about what is and what is not JI. That ratios with
higher primes were not JI (as I remember it). If Paul thinks theres
been nothing written about JI, I was just providing some resources.

I'll also note that Harmonic Entropy looks suspiciously like The One
Footed Bride. Comments?

I'd quit the list too but I have a morbid facination with watching
people bang their heads against the wall.

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

🔗Paul Erlich <PERLICH@ACADIAN-ASSET.COM>

🔗David Beardsley <xouoxno@virtulink.com>

🔗Paul Erlich <PERLICH@ACADIAN-ASSET.COM>

I wrote,

> > Check the archives -- I've mentioned the one-footed
> > bride at least five times in connection with harmonic
> > entropy.

David Beardsley wrote,

> OK, so I don't read every single post you make to the list Paul.

I didn't think so. :) If you're interested in exploring this
connection further, I'd be happy to write something up
on it . . . but I get the sense you were making a "you're
re-inventing the wheel" type of point rather than a
"hmm, that's interesting, I'd like to learn more" type of
point. If I've misinterpreted your intentions, I apologize
-- the last thing I want to do is create more
unnecessary conflicts on this list.

And by the way, you can see that I always agreed with
Kraig's definition of JI, though I really don't know what
the big deal is -- a definition carries no opinions, it's
just a definition! Where's the insult? Is JI one of the
sacred names of God, not to be taken in vain? That's
neither making music nor making theories about music
-- it's just linguistic silliness (I'm going to avoid using
terms like "fetishism" that have been hurled around
here recently).

🔗David Beardsley <xouoxno@virtulink.com>

Paul Erlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@egroups.com, David Beardsley <
> xouoxno@v...> wrote:
> >
> > I'd quit the list too but I have a morbid facination with watching
> > people bang their heads against the wall.
> >
> Is that all we're doing? I suppose Partch and Doty are a
> sort of "Old Testament" and "New Testament" to you?
> The unshakable word of the JI gods? Well guess what --
> they were written by humans -- very perceptive and
> musical individuals, certainly -- but humans. They
> contain ambiguities, inconsistencies, big holes . . . I take
> nothing in these books at face value, I subject each
> claim to a full skeptical inquiry, while at the same time
> respecting the artistic judgment of the authors and
> seeking to provide a coherent theoretical underpinning
> where one is possible. If you choose to take them as
> articles of blind faith, then you are truly no better than
> the conservatory-trained musician who knows nothing
> other than 12-tET.

Hmmm...this must be the hostility that Kraig and Jacky were refering to.

I took a slightly different route: I studied the books and then
started to apply what I knew about ratios to composing my own music
and continue to discover new sounds every day.

The Partch book is pretty deep. I read it a few times but found
the Doty book more helpful. It's been ages since I looked at the
Doty book.

--
* 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

🔗Paul Erlich <PERLICH@ACADIAN-ASSET.COM>

--- In tuning@egroups.com, David Beardsley <
xouoxno@v...> wrote:
> Paul Erlich wrote:
>
> > If you choose to take them as
> > articles of blind faith, then you are truly no better than
> > the conservatory-trained musician who knows nothing
> > other than 12-tET.
>
> Hmmm...this must be the hostility that Kraig and Jacky >were
refering to.

I doubt it. Neither of these guys seemed to be mindless
devotees of the Word of Partch and Doty, and no one
accused them of that. Both of them seemed to be
creative, independent thinkers, though Jacky's last post
took me aback, and I endorse David Finnamore's reply.
>
> I took a slightly different route: I studied the books and then
> started to apply what I knew about ratios to composing my own music
> and continue to discover new sounds every day.

Excellent! The important point is to _experience_ these
sounds for yourself, and draw your own conclusions
from them and their relations (an inexorably
mathematical enterprise). If I choose to critique some
of the reasoning and conclusions of Partch and Doty, am
I a heretic? Am I commiting acts of hostility toward
those that found these books useful? I certainly hope
our society hasn't regressed to such a Medieval state.

🔗David Beardsley <xouoxno@virtulink.com>

Paul Erlich wrote:

> > > Check the archives -- I've mentioned the one-footed
> > > bride at least five times in connection with harmonic
> > > entropy.
>
> David Beardsley wrote,
>
> > OK, so I don't read every single post you make to the list Paul.
>
> I didn't think so. :) If you're interested in exploring this
> connection further, I'd be happy to write something up
> on it . . .

Well, you should do a bit of your writing on
your own and create a web page or publish.
Since the list has moved from Mills to Egroups
this month has had the most posts.

> but I get the sense you were making a "you're
> re-inventing the wheel" type of point rather than a
> "hmm, that's interesting, I'd like to learn more" type of
> point. If I've misinterpreted your intentions, I apologize
> -- the last thing I want to do is create more
> unnecessary conflicts on this list.

and then turns around and writes this:

> > > If you choose to take them as
> > > articles of blind faith, then you are truly no better than
> > > the conservatory-trained musician who knows nothing
> > > other than 12-tET.
> >
> > Hmmm...this must be the hostility that Kraig and Jacky were
> refering to.
>
> I doubt it. Neither of these guys seemed to be mindless
> devotees of the Word of Partch and Doty, and no one
> accused them of that. Both of them seemed to be
> creative, independent thinkers, though Jacky's last post
> took me aback, and I endorse David Finnamore's reply.

Just sounds like a back handed insult. Are you calling
me a "mindless devotee of the Word of Partch and Doty"?
I should be insulted but I'm not. I just got the basics
about JI and got on with my life.

A far as "reinventing the wheel", I like to think of
harmonic entropy as "beating a dead horse", I'm more interested
in being a microtonal composer/performer anyways. If I can hear the
consonance and dissonance of dyads and chords and use it in my work,
why would I want to spend hours - no - weeks that turn into months,
at the computer discussing it eternally?

> > I took a slightly different route: I studied the books and then
> > started to apply what I knew about ratios to composing my own music
> > and continue to discover new sounds every day.
>
> Excellent! The important point is to _experience_ these
> sounds for yourself, and draw your own conclusions
> from them and their relations (an inexorably
> mathematical enterprise).

Maybe part of the reason Kraig left was that
he felt insulted by someone (who? I don't know)
lecturing him about a subject he has LOTS of experience in.

> If I choose to critique some
> of the reasoning and conclusions of Partch and Doty, am
> I a heretic? Am I commiting acts of hostility toward
> those that found these books useful? I certainly hope
> our society hasn't regressed to such a Medieval state.

You're only a heretic when you spend hours on the computer
going on about your tuning concepts only to go out and play
12tet with some band at a bar. And to then brag about playing 12tet
on the list! Actually I'd call you a hypocrite but
I'm trying to be nice these days (that's a joke, I'm
really not up for flaming).

You're getting old man! Lets hear some more of that 22tet!

> And by the way, you can see that I always agreed with
> Kraig's definition of JI, though I really don't know what
> the big deal is -- a definition carries no opinions, it's
> just a definition! Where's the insult? Is JI one of the
> sacred names of God, not to be taken in vain? That's
> neither making music nor making theories about music
> -- it's just linguistic silliness (I'm going to avoid using
> terms like "fetishism" that have been hurled around
> here recently).

See above comments on Kraig.

I think he woke up one Saturday morning and decided that
he couldn't be bothered with the list anymore. Less you than
Monzo obsessing over his tuning dictionary and Joseph Pehrson
(strangely enough, he's on the board of AFMM and has plenty experience
composing) the semantics of the term Just Intonation. A discussion
about semantics that seems more like an argument tends to piss some
people off.

So there - I've blown off a few hours on the tuning list
after I said I'd rather be making music.

* 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

🔗Paul H. Erlich <PERLICH@ACADIAN-ASSET.COM>

David Beardsley wrote,

>Just sounds like a back handed insult. Are you calling
>me a "mindless devotee of the Word of Partch and Doty"?
>I should be insulted but I'm not. I just got the basics
>about JI and got on with my life.

Look, either you can respect an honest attempt to re-evaluate the writings
of these authors, or you can criticize it as "re-inventing the wheel". If
the attempt doesn't interest you, hit the delete button, or press the little
arrow pointing to the right if you're reading these posts off the website.
Again, I'd be more than happy to move these foundational discussions to a
separate list, but the overwhelming response I've gotten has been to keep it
here.

>Maybe part of the reason Kraig left was that
>he felt insulted by someone (who? I don't know)
>lecturing him about a subject he has LOTS of experience in.

Hmm . . . I learned a great deal from Kraig, and tried to engage him on many
of the ideas that _he_ found interesting (note that it almost never went the
other way), but I never felt I was lecturing him. Though if he felt that
way, perhaps I need to take the blame for the tone I expressed in my post.
Do you think it would be productive to contact him personally?

>> If I choose to critique some
>> of the reasoning and conclusions of Partch and Doty, am
>> I a heretic? Am I commiting acts of hostility toward
>> those that found these books useful? I certainly hope
>> our society hasn't regressed to such a Medieval state.

>You're only a heretic when you spend hours on the computer
>going on about your tuning concepts only to go out and play
>12tet with some band at a bar. And to then brag about playing 12tet
>on the list! Actually I'd call you a hypocrite but
>I'm trying to be nice these days (that's a joke, I'm
>really not up for flaming).

>You're getting old man! Lets hear some more of that 22tet!

David, music is a HUGE subject. I play many styles of music and think about
many aspects of music. Frankly, the vast majority of the music and styles of
music that excite me are in 12-tET or very close to it. Not because 12-tET
is superior, but because it's what our culture decided on. Now, I feel
strongly that we should explore other alternatives. But as a musician, I
can't ignore the culture around me, with the many styles that move me, and
wanting to participate in those styles, so I can learn more about how music
works and become a better musician.

Let's put it this way, David. If we lived on the planet Antares in which all
pitches came out in 12-tET, no matter what, would you still make music? I
sure would, because I _love_ music. I love listening to music, I love
playing music, and then after those, I love thinking about music. When I
play, I don't think numbers or math, I hear the sound in my head first and
then I produce it. As it happens, most of the sounds that come into my head
are in a variety of "languages" that were all around me when I was growing
up, and all these languages are pinned more or less to 12-tET. It's too late
to change that now, and though I hope to be able to express myself fully in,
say, 22-tET, I've got too much to say that can't be said in 22-tET to just
drop playing 12-tET music right now. For now, I can only hope to explore all
these different avenues concurrently. I know I'm on the right track -- I've
made people cry with my 22-tET music. But in case I never hit a moment of
inspiration like that which created that piece again, I'll be glad for all
the 12-tET abilities I've acquired, as well as having contributed toward a
movement toward exploring alternative tuning systems that may if fact lead
to some culturally significant music in future generations.

🔗David Beardsley <xouoxno@virtulink.com>

"Paul H. Erlich" wrote:

> David Beardsley wrote,
>
> >Just sounds like a back handed insult. Are you calling
> >me a "mindless devotee of the Word of Partch and Doty"?
> >I should be insulted but I'm not. I just got the basics
> >about JI and got on with my life.
>
> Look, either you can respect an honest attempt to re-evaluate the writings
> of these authors, or you can criticize it as "re-inventing the wheel". If
> the attempt doesn't interest you, hit the delete button, or press the little
> arrow pointing to the right if you're reading these posts off the website.
> Again, I'd be more than happy to move these foundational discussions to a
> separate list, but the overwhelming response I've gotten has been to keep it
> here.

I think you missed the part where I wrote:

> I just got the basics about JI and got on with my life.

>
> >Maybe part of the reason Kraig left was that
> >he felt insulted by someone (who? I don't know)
> >lecturing him about a subject he has LOTS of experience in.
>
> Hmm . . . I learned a great deal from Kraig, and tried to engage him on many
> of the ideas that _he_ found interesting (note that it almost never went the
> other way), but I never felt I was lecturing him. Though if he felt that
> way, perhaps I need to take the blame for the tone I expressed in my post.
> Do you think it would be productive to contact him personally?

Let go of it man! I don't think Kraig left the list because of
you. Daniel Wolf however....

> >You're getting old man! Lets hear some more of that 22tet!
>
> David, music is a HUGE subject. I play many styles of music and think about
> many aspects of music. Frankly, the vast majority of the music and styles of
> music that excite me are in 12-tET or very close to it. Not because 12-tET
> is superior, but because it's what our culture decided on. Now, I feel
> strongly that we should explore other alternatives. But as a musician, I
> can't ignore the culture around me, with the many styles that move me, and
> wanting to participate in those styles, so I can learn more about how music
> works and become a better musician.

You're a bit younger than me. I rarely play 12tet.
I still do it sometimes to jam with friends and
customers (the Guitar World Christas parties come to mind,
a good chance to play old rock tunes I haven't played
in years). When I got my hands on Pat Metheny book
of charts it became a magor diversion for a few weeks
until I just had to put it down. At some point it just became
more important to me to play mostly my own muisc.

If we lived on the the planet Antares and
pitches came out in 12-tET we wouldn't know
about micrtonality. Silly rabbit.

And I love music too, but the music I make is mostly
microtonal. And it has been an increasingly spiritual
one I might add (nods to Neil, his experience is similar to mine).

As for guitars, I remember holding you 22tet guitar
at AFMM 99 and thinking - this would not be easy to
play. So I got my own 62 tone/65 fret Catler designed
guitar and it's been slow going. There were a few months
where it really needed a pro set up (unplayable, bad intonation)
and there were periods of time when I was focused on other instruments
(lap steel, Rhodes elec. piano and voice). But lately
I've been feeling pretty cozy with the 62 tone...it's just a matter
of spending the time being with the instrument.

So I guess it all boils down to what what
we decide to dedicate our time to:
microtones or 12tet.

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

🔗Paul H. Erlich <PERLICH@ACADIAN-ASSET.COM>

I wrote,

>> Look, either you can respect an honest attempt to re-evaluate the
writings
>> of these authors, or you can criticize it as "re-inventing the wheel". If
>> the attempt doesn't interest you, hit the delete button, or press the
little
>> arrow pointing to the right if you're reading these posts off the
website.
>> Again, I'd be more than happy to move these foundational discussions to a
>> separate list, but the overwhelming response I've gotten has been to keep
it
>> here.

David wrote,

>I think you missed the part where I wrote:

>>I just got the basics about JI and got on with my life.

I didn't miss that -- in fact I responded "Excellent" to that. What are you
trying to say?

>So I guess it all boils down to what what
>we decide to dedicate our time to:
>microtones or 12tet.

Anyone is free to dedicate oneself to one, the other, or both, and deciding
on both should not make one a heretic.