Make check payable to Carl Lumma

>Not only *not* an exact quote, but a bit of a mixed metaphor. If Harry
>was pictured in front of an Arp setup, I'd be my bottom dollar it was the
>one installed in the Electronic Music Lab at San Diego State, where he
>would occasionally go to listen to a tape, courtesy of David Dunn. The
>only other possibility would have been UCSD, but his time spent there was
>short and he hated the place with a passion.

Harry was shown the ARP 2500 in Honolulu in 1974 by Peter Corragio. Denny
taught me the basics of synthesis on it.

Carl

Carl,

>Harry was shown the ARP 2500 in Honolulu in 1974 by Peter Corragio. Denny
>taught me the basics of synthesis on it.

The "bottom dollar" will be on your way, just as soon as I have a street
address. Be aware that the "bottom dollar" has shoe prints on it... :)

But on the quote, I stand firm. At least as far as unmangling it. With
regard to the Scalatron. You know.

Did you get the VAIO?

Cheers,
Jon
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jonathan M. Szanto | Corporeal Meadows: Harry Partch, online. . .
jszanto@adnc.com | http://www.corporeal.com/

A copy of the photo of Mr. Partch with the Hawai'ian Arp was published in
Interval. I would not give the photo too much importance, however: his
contemporary statements in _Genesis_ about harmoniums are much more
convincing. He was well aware of the activities at the San Francisco Tape
Center, and at the electronic studios at UCSD and San Diego State. Had he
been really more serious about the development of electronic instruments he
would have certainly pursued the matter more seriously.

If anyonw is in doubt about the musicality of the harmonium, they should
really listen to some of the original ensemble repertoire with harmonium --
the Petite Messe Solemnele of Rossini, the J.Strauss and Mahler
arrangements of the Schoenberg School, Schoenberg's own _Herzgewa"chse_,
etc.. Rainer Riehn's recent chamber arrangement of Mahler's _Das Lied von
der Erde_ is absolutely stunning.

A statement to the effect that Partch would have approved of or used a DX7
is an unprovable conjecture and strikes me as implausible. Beyond the fact
-- to paraphrase Stravinsy -- that the 'damned things don't breath' I think
Partch would have rejected the DX7 out of hand solely on the basis of the
impossibility of fine-tuning the instrument by removing beats. Partch's
instrumentation, for all the faults, became an essential aspect of his
work, and a performance on instruments other than his own had better be a
convincing one. The instruments built by Cris Forster were a step in the
right direction, being very well crafted instruments usable in the Partch
repertoire, but the arrangements I have heard for other instruments (i.e.
Kronos, Newband) fail to make musically convincing cases for such
substitutions.

I take the same position with regard to other historical musics -- if the
original instrumentation, or something close to it, is available, any
substitution had better deliver a convincing rationale. For example, Glenn
Gould made a singular case for use of a modern -- albeit drastically
revoiced -- piano for Byrd or Bach, but did so with a considerable
innovation in style that depended upon his equally singular technique.
However, in general, a Viennese _Liederabend_ with anything other than a
Bo"sendorfer or an older Beckstein is hard to take and with a big Steinway,
a good reason to walk out well before the fat person begins to sing.

Daniel is right about the DX7 and the beats. That's why the AFMM has
never used the DX7 in its performance, but rather a Proteus synthesizer.
This resolves that problem.

The fact that Partch didn't like the scalatron should not weigh heavily
when practically _no_ composers liked its sound enough to compose for it.

As for playing instruments that grunt and squeal, gee, I guess the bassoon
and the harmonium are similar in this respect. You certainly can hear the
keys on the bassoon when playing. It is rare that a composer really
understands how to write for the instrument. Luckily some of the great
composers were able to do it justice (e.g. Tchaikovsky, Mozart,
Beethoven, Stravinsky).

Somehow, the replacement of the chromelodeon with an electronic tone -- a
beautiful electronic tone -- works well with both Partch's historical
comments and with performance practice. I've mentioned earlier about how
the chromelodeon lacked the dexterity to play fast notes (like in Y.D.
Fantasy) and might benefit from the technical freedoms that the
synthesizers allow.

Much more egregious to my sensibilities is the vocalizing of Partch's
music with wide vibrati. I had thought Partch very
clear on the kind of voice he sought, and yet the Partch choir resonates
with support for the opera standard.

Fact: I don't care for Bach on piano, much preferring various other
keyboards. Fact: it is not the same case for
Bach as for Partch in terms of why the concerts are performed in the
first place. Fact: Partch must be seen in historical context, like
any composer. Fact: it has only recently been unearthed by Bob Gilmore
that in 1950 Partch wrote that the chromelodeon was
unmusical for him and he succeeeded in acquiring funds to research and
hopefully build an acceptable electronic tone instrument. Fact: he was
too early in history to succeed in using an electronic instrument for his
purposes. Fact, Partch amplified his guitars and his Kithara.

Johnny Reinhard
Director
American Festival of Microtonal Music
318 East 70th Street, Suite 5FW
New York, New York 10021 USA
(212)517-3550/fax (212) 517-5495
reinhard@idt.net
http://www.echonyc.com/~jhhl/AFMM