theory

You guys know I love you all, but it's real obvious that the list is
very heavily theoretically oriented lately...it would be wunderbar if
you lattice/math folks were putting out CD's of killer music which put
your monster ideas to work creating beautiful and profound music. People
are into tunings for different reasons, obviously...I approached this
realm as a musician looking for new ways to create and compose...the
theory, for me, often follows what I hear in my mind, instead of the
other way around. Music is sound, much of the list is theories ABOUT
sound...I want to hear what you guys are talking about...hopefully, that
will happen someday...Hstick

> it's real obvious that the list is
> very heavily theoretically oriented lately...it would be wunderbar if
> you lattice/math folks were putting out CD's of killer music which put
> your monster ideas to work creating beautiful and profound music.

As always I agree with Neil on this. I think though that it's also
desirable to use the list also for conveying and debating auditory
impressions/emotions/etc. of various intervals, melodic effects, entire
compositions, and such.

Clearly there has to be a balance of topic matter though. Theory gives
performers and composers new concepts to build new music from, so it's
certainly important. But theory to the point of it becoming not much more
than theorizing for theory's sake, should be viewed as a questionable use
of our time.

I think that the list tends to have more theoretical traffic than
musical for two main reasons:
1. It's still basically a boring ol' text medium, and as such it's
it's much easier to discuss theoretical constructs than audi-
tory ones.
2. Tools generating and transmitting auditory and visual infor-
mation over the net are still in limited supply to most list
members. They are also still somewhat crude compared to
tools for generating words, words, and more words.

So what I'm getting at is two-fold. The fact that we don't have more
music going on over the list is partly - maybe even largely - due to the
inherent nature of the list, and we need to do whatever we can to acquire
and develop whatever tools we can to make purely musical interchange more
feasible.

Gary Morrison wrote:

> But theory to the point of it becoming not much more
> than theorizing for theory's sake, should be viewed as a questionable use
> of our time.
> Gary I could not agree more. I find some of the posts very informative and I
> must admit some folks' ideas and exploration--In my case, involving Scala
> etc..midi dumps...the tuning list was essential. But some folks seem a wee
> bit stern and sober and spend plenty of time "smacking your nose with the
> newspaper" but little on actual exchange of ideas. Don't get me wrong I
> think the lattices are very pretty and nice to look at and are probably a
> nice way to teach harmonic relationships--though I must say some posts seem
> more along the lines of Sacred Geometry or Medieval Music History w/ minor
> tuning features.

But yet again I am a newcomer and I must honestly congratulate such a tireless
effort(if only in typing) to have such an active forum...of the three I'm on
this one fills mails almost everyday.
Pat

>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ta Da! Come see our new web site!
> http://www.onelist.com
> Onelist: A free email community service
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
> email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@onelist.com - subscribe to the tuning list.
> tuning-unsubscribe@onelist.com - unsubscribe from the tuning list.
> tuning-digest@onelist.com - switch your subscription to digest mode.
> tuning-normal@onelist.com - switch your subscription to normal mode.

[Haverstick:]
> it's real obvious that the list is
> very heavily theoretically oriented
> lately...it would be wunderbar if
> you lattice/math folks . . . <snip>
> . . . People are into tunings for
> different reasons, obviously...

Niel, I certainly consider myself a
composer above anything else, but I am
also an artist, and one of my main
creative outlets is drawing lattice
diagrams. I get an aesthetic pleasure
just from looking at them. I'm glad
others are interested enough that I can
have a forum for it here.

As I've said before, I enjoy this List
for all the different aspects of tuning
that people talk about. Non-theoretical
discussion is most welcome. Theory just
happens to be my *favorite* aspect! :)

[Gary Morrison:]
> theory to the point of it becoming not
> much more than theorizing for theory's
> sake, should be viewed as a questionable
> use of our time.

I, for one, hope to make use of all the
theoretical knowledge I gain, in music
I write. No one has to waste his valuable
time slogging thru unwanted theory - just
skip it and go to the next posting. That's
one of the great things about (printed)
words, words, words - you don't have to
sit thru them like you do on the TV or
radio.

I get excited when Tuning Digests come
pouring thru my email box thick and fast
loaded with tons of theorizing, as they
have been lately. I like it.

[Morrison:]
> The fact that we don't have more
> music going on over the list is
> partly - maybe even largely - due
> to the inherent nature of the list,
> and we need to do whatever we can
> to acquire and develop whatever tools
> we can to make purely musical
> interchange more feasible.

I just sent a post asking for visual
aids for the TD archives on my website.
Shows you where my head is. I certainly
would also like to receive MUSIC files,
MIDI, .wav, whatever, to illustrate whatever's
in a post, theory or otherwise. That way
anyone who visits the old Tuning Digests
can *hear* what we're *writing* about.

- Monzo
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

[Pat Pagano:]
> some folks seem a wee bit stern
> and sober

Ah, Pat, if you had me in mind with
that comment, it's only because you
haven't met me yet. I'm not exactly
what you would call stern, and I'm
hardly *ever* sober . . . (I try hard
not to be!)

- Joe "Lattice" Monzo

PS - OK, I admit guilt for the "sacred
geometry" charge . . . well, for the
medieval theory bit too . . . but SOBER ?!!
ME?
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Neil Haverstick:

You seem to post the same complaint every couple of months or so. I happen
not to do cds, but my scores are available and get performed and broadcast
with enough regularity that I can depend on the income from commissions and
royalties. (I'm not especially fond of recorded music, and I can't figure
out a way to make any income out of a recording given the saturation of the
market at this point.) Like most composers, I do theory on a hit and run
basis, and it is pretty hard to say whether composing or theory-making come
first in time, as they are pretty tightly bound up with one another in the
way I work.

A forum like this is almost the perfect place for music theory, and gives
one a chance to go beyond the "gee, improvising in 47-tet is really cool"
or "7 has microwaveoven-ness while 11 has toaster-oven-ness" modes. I
happen to like the fact that I can discuss one aspect of music outside of
the narrow bounds of a single musical genre or style. My own music is out
of an experimental tradition that often has little point of contact with
those who want to make music in a more traditional tonal environment. Yet
here is an arena where we can have a civil discussion, without this
becoming an obstacle.

You say that

"...the theory, for me, often follows what I hear in my mind..."

Well, then, tell us a bit more about that theory.

Daniel Wolf

I agree with you Mr. Wolf and I have never heard any of your music but I feel
that it might be ---only judging from some of your posts similar to mine but
what I seem to get is an annoyed dismisal every time I try to engage you in
anything but your own notions.
sincerely
pat pagano

Daniel Wolf wrote:

> From: Daniel Wolf <DJWOLF_MATERIAL@compuserve.com>
>
> . I
> happen to like the fact that I can discuss one aspect of music outside of
> the narrow bounds of a single musical genre or style. My own music is out
> of an experimental tradition that often has little point of contact with
> those who want to make music in a more traditional tonal environment. Yet
> here is an arena where we can have a civil discussion, without this
> becoming an obstacle.
>

In csound, you can use pretty much any type of synthesis you want,
including sampling. I often chose just a nice sawtooth oscillator and a
lp-filter, just to keep everything really simple and understandable.

-Pete

You know, I am not down on theory, not by a long shot...I studied
with a master bebop alto sax player for years, and he had me analyzing
Parker and Bach, and anything else I ran into. I have done my share of
theory work, and there's lots more to learn...it never stops, to be
sure. And, I think you theory guys are great and smart and I can/will
learn a lot over the years by hanging out on this forum. I guess what I
REALLY mean about the forum being so theory oriented is that I wish
there was more of a balance between the theory and the music...it seems
that theory is much more prominent these days. Is that a bad thing? Of
course not, and I hope I didn't give the impression that I thought it
was.My own personal interests are not as theory oriented as a lot of the
microtonalists I have met since getting into this 10 years ago, but
that's life (and, since I am not a mathematician, I don't follow a lot
of the technical stuff so well). I would like to see more talk about
issues that are a little harder to pin down, such as the connections
between music, tunings, and spiritual issues...which is one of the
reasons I like Danielou's work so much. I believe the deeper meanings of
music are very profound, and involve much more than just the math part
of it. I am fascinated, for example, with using music for healing, or
how the Indians have ragas for different times of the day, or what folks
in other galaxies might be playing/listening to. For whatever reason,
these subjects rarely pop up on this list. Again, no big deal...that's
the way it is.On a practical level, one of my goals in getting into
other tunings is to reach large numbers of people with non 12 music, and
I am going to do my best to do that. I have come to realize that not
everybody cares about that, and that is not an issue for me. Of course,
my primary reason for playing in other tunings is because it is a
profound and fascinating path...I love to learn, and there's no end to
tunings, their theory, and applications. So Monzo, you don't have to
keep posting warnings...the point is taken. Have at it, and I will
continue to learn what I can from you guys...at the same time, I will
keep hoping that I will get to hear your theories put into marvelous
compositions which will amaze the world at large. Nothing wrong with
that...
And yes, I think Dan Stearns is perhaps the future of rock
guitar...what he's doing is state of the art, technically and
compositionally...order his tape, and see what you think...Hstick

> I would like to see more talk about
> issues that are a little harder to pin
> down, such as the connections between
> music, tunings, and spiritual issues...
> which is one of the reasons I like
> Danielou's work so much. I believe the
> deeper meanings of music are very profound,
> and involve much more than just the math part
> of it.

Niel, these are exactly some of the things
I'm interested in. But I believe that studying
the numerical properties of sound in music is
the key to finding out how it does all this stuff.

I'm no good at the math, either. That's why
I like pictures so much - they help me see the
*patterns* that the numbers describe (to those
who speak the language). Music is all about
patterns and periodicity, in all sorts of ways.
And math is eminently suited for describing things
that embody patterns.

I think what a lot of us theory-inclined folks
on this list are driving at is to uncover some
of the more sophisticated types of pattern
recognition that are going on in our brains as
we listen to music, the stuff that's always
made music so magical but we never knew why.
Once we get a handle on how *we* understand
music, we can start trying to figure out how
the magic happens.

> So Monzo, you don't have to keep posting warnings...

Hey, didn't mean for it to come across as
personal, Niel. I was just going for the
cheap laugh, and having fun doing it. I think
I got my fill too, with the last one (explicit
theory and all that...)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

I understand your fascination, I share the same. I'm studiing at the music
conservatory of Quebec City in composition, and none there encourages me or
help me really with that kind of music. In fact, I would like to write
alternative music parts, but each time I tried on, it hasn't been working
very well... unpracticable, or too complexe, or... whatever...

So, I'm searching for someone who could really help me (maybe some people,
like you all) in learning who I could work so a complexe world and tune it
efficiently. If someone is speaking french, I can correspond either in
french or in english (doesn't matter)... Resources in here are very poor.
Of course, I read all the books of Alain Danielou, and some others. What I
know now is that I'm not interested in the quater-tone which is too much
aggressive. I want to use micro-tunning to do much more expressive music,
because when I sing (eheheh) I like to use micro-intervals, because I feel
it to be more expressive (note that I can hardly try to sing just eheheh).

Also, I would like to have a way to make my parts played... computers are
fine, but I don't want to be played by it all my life. I know for the
hapiscord, the harp are easy tunned. Do you know more instruments.

For now, to test my tunning, I have a Roland JV-2080... which enables me to
do fine tunning. I have a program to calculate every intervals. I don't
have any program to play intervals, though, does it exist? Could someone
share a copy with me? Or any other program that could be of great use.

Just a note, before I send that mail... I'm welll, usually in theory, but I
not a mathematician... so I can well understand that 3/2 = just fifth, but I
won't for the log(of whaterver)... so please keep being precise and clear.

THANKS!!!

Vincent-Olivier Gagnon.

Neil Haverstick wrote:

> From: Neil Haverstick <stick@uswest.net>
>
> You know, I am not down on theory, not by a long shot...I studied
> with a master bebop alto sax player for years, and he had me analyzing
> Parker and Bach, and anything else I ran into. I have done my share of
> theory work, and there's lots more to learn...it never stops, to be
> sure. And, I think you theory guys are great and smart and I can/will
> learn a lot over the years by hanging out on this forum. I guess what I
> REALLY mean about the forum being so theory oriented is that I wish
> there was more of a balance between the theory and the music...it seems
> that theory is much more prominent these days. Is that a bad thing? Of
> course not, and I hope I didn't give the impression that I thought it
> was.My own personal interests are not as theory oriented as a lot of the
> microtonalists I have met since getting into this 10 years ago, but
> that's life (and, since I am not a mathematician, I don't follow a lot
> of the technical stuff so well). I would like to see more talk about
> issues that are a little harder to pin down, such as the connections
> between music, tunings, and spiritual issues...which is one of the
> reasons I like Danielou's work so much. I believe the deeper meanings of
> music are very profound, and involve much more than just the math part
> of it. I am fascinated, for example, with using music for healing, or
> how the Indians have ragas for different times of the day, or what folks
> in other galaxies might be playing/listening to. For whatever reason,
> these subjects rarely pop up on this list. Again, no big deal...that's
> the way it is.On a practical level, one of my goals in getting into
> other tunings is to reach large numbers of people with non 12 music, and
> I am going to do my best to do that. I have come to realize that not
> everybody cares about that, and that is not an issue for me. Of course,
> my primary reason for playing in other tunings is because it is a
> profound and fascinating path...I love to learn, and there's no end to
> tunings, their theory, and applications. So Monzo, you don't have to
> keep posting warnings...the point is taken. Have at it, and I will
> continue to learn what I can from you guys...at the same time, I will
> keep hoping that I will get to hear your theories put into marvelous
> compositions which will amaze the world at large. Nothing wrong with
> that...
> And yes, I think Dan Stearns is perhaps the future of rock
> guitar...what he's doing is state of the art, technically and
> compositionally...order his tape, and see what you think...Hstick
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> We are proud as punch of our new web site!
> http://www.onelist.com
> Onelist: The leading provider of free email community services
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
> email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@onelist.com - subscribe to the tuning list.
> tuning-unsubscribe@onelist.com - unsubscribe from the tuning list.
> tuning-digest@onelist.com - switch your subscription to digest mode.
> tuning-normal@onelist.com - switch your subscription to normal mode.