an idea

I'm presently in the middle of working on a one tune mail
collaboration with percussionist all around sonic provocateur Joseph
Benzola... Mail collaborations are a strange and compromised thing
(especially if none of your recording formats etc. remotely line up!),
but they're also interesting and quite challenging in their own
right...

Like everyone here at the tuning list, I've never actually met Joe in
person (we hooked up through mp3.com), and this got me wondering if
there has ever been a tuning list microtonal mail type
collaboration... ?

Could be interesting, or problematic depending upon your view...
anyway, just an idea I thought I'd float out while it was there.

--Dan Stearns

Jay here,
I'm not familiar with the sort of collaboration you're proposing. Please
elaborate on its possible workings. Thanks.
At 07:56 PM 2/14/01 -0800, you wrote:
>I'm presently in the middle of working on a one tune mail
>collaboration with percussionist all around sonic provocateur Joseph
>Benzola... Mail collaborations are a strange and compromised thing
>(especially if none of your recording formats etc. remotely line up!),
>but they're also interesting and quite challenging in their own
>right...
>
>Like everyone here at the tuning list, I've never actually met Joe in
>person (we hooked up through mp3.com), and this got me wondering if
>there has ever been a tuning list microtonal mail type
>collaboration... ?
>
>Could be interesting, or problematic depending upon your view...
>anyway, just an idea I thought I'd float out while it was there.
>
>--Dan Stearns
>
>
>
>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.
>
>
>

Hopefully this won't come through twice - had a failure on 1st
attempt.

--- In tuning@y..., "D.Stearns" <STEARNS@C...> wrote:
> I'm presently in the middle of working on a one tune mail
> collaboration with percussionist all around sonic provocateur Joseph
> Benzola... Mail collaborations are a strange and compromised thing
> (especially if none of your recording formats etc. remotely line
up!),
> but they're also interesting and quite challenging in their own
> right...

I will make an effort to check out his music too.

>
> Like everyone here at the tuning list, I've never actually met Joe
in
> person (we hooked up through mp3.com), and this got me wondering if
> there has ever been a tuning list microtonal mail type
> collaboration... ?

I have thought about inviting some of the folk that I know who can
overtone sing to do something, but the challenge is to get folks to
agree on tunings and such. I think my approach would be modeled after
the electronica project I've did with others, where we would use an
internet server to upload loops, and then construct the tunes with SF
Acid. It really works out best for me, when the collaborators can
create a ready to use loop, so that all I have to do is drop it in
the groove, so to speak.

I've wondered if an agreement on a tuning system would be a block to
such efforts though.

Hey - you remember Brian Baker? These guys have a project they are
doing like I describe above; called "Tape-Germ" (not microtonal stuff
though). Supposedly, it has gotten lots-o-plays on MP3.com. It's
seems to be a vibrant collaborative effort with a large number of
folks involved. But you know how finicky microtonalists can be about
things - we agree on little except music we like.

> Could be interesting, or problematic depending upon your view...
> anyway, just an idea I thought I'd float out while it was there.

I agree it could be interesting, especially where a consensus on
tuning could be found. Success would likely be dependent upon finding
those with common working methods. For example, I would be worthless
to someone wanting to collaborate with Csound, but with
sampling/synthesis and recording of live parts - especially throat
singing, would probably work out.

For me a good method is to provide a basic track, from which folks
would build their performance from, which might be a rhythmic
track/single thematic part, which would give one the pitches being
used (like Kraig and I were discussing yesterday).

I really believe that just because it would be a microtonal
collaboration, it would likely be ten times more difficult to realize
though, because of personal tuning tastes varying so widely.

Thanks,

Jacky Ligon

>Like everyone here at the tuning list, I've never actually met Joe in
>person (we hooked up through mp3.com), and this got me wondering if
>there has ever been a tuning list microtonal mail type
>collaboration... ?

I�m open for it.Just need a few suggestions and...

-=-=-=-=-=-=-
MATS �LJARE
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/oljare
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Jay Williams wrote,

<<I'm not familiar with the sort of collaboration you're proposing.
Please elaborate on its possible workings. Thanks.>>

Hi Jay,

I just mean a simple very pliable scenario where one person laying
down some tracks on their recording gear (supposing it's you, we'll
say some trombone and tape treatments or some such), and then sending
their end off to another tuning lister who in turn adds their own
tracks to that... so I just mean a microtonal recording collaboration
of some sorts done long distance -- i.e., through the mail.

--Dan Stearns

Jacky Ligon wrote,

<<I've wondered if an agreement on a tuning system would be a block to
such efforts though.>>

As you know I'm personally very fond of, and see no problem with,
combining tunings. And, well theoretically anyway, this type of a
collaboration would truly be a *tuning collaboration* if two different
worlds were made to meet in this way. Hmm, come to think of it I
really do think makes a beautiful little microcosm from which to view
this sort of a collaboration; each collaborator further defined and
personalized by their choice of tunings... oh the many hued
possibilities for a triumphant democratic, cooperative effort!

<<Success would likely be dependent upon finding those with common
working methods.>>

Yes, I think that would be the difficult part too... and to be
perfectly truthful it has been my experience that mail collaborations
are ALWAYS awkward and somewhat compromised by their very means, even
the best of 'em... but it certainly is a unique challenge.

<<I really believe that just because it would be a microtonal
collaboration, it would likely be ten times more difficult to realize
though, because of personal tuning tastes varying so widely.>>

"In heaven
everything is fine

In heaven
everything is fine

In heaven
everything is fine
you got your good thing
and I've got mine"

<!>,

--Dan Stearns

Dan Stearns wrote:

> As you know I'm personally very fond of, and see no problem with,
> combining tunings. And, well theoretically anyway, this type of a
> collaboration would truly be a *tuning collaboration* if two
different
> worlds were made to meet in this way. Hmm, come to think of it I
> really do think makes a beautiful little microcosm from which to
view
> this sort of a collaboration; each collaborator further defined and
> personalized by their choice of tunings... oh the many hued
> possibilities for a triumphant democratic, cooperative effort!

Getting a collaborative piece to work with multiple tunings would
likely be harder than agreeing on one. You'd need strong coordination
to make sure the harmonies didn't clash.

How about something simple like 5-equal? Or a boring diatonic
meantone?

> <<Success would likely be dependent upon finding those with common
> working methods.>>
>
> Yes, I think that would be the difficult part too... and to be
> perfectly truthful it has been my experience that mail
collaborations
> are ALWAYS awkward and somewhat compromised by their very means,
even
> the best of 'em... but it certainly is a unique challenge.

I'd be happy with a loop-based approach. Even if it isn't successful,
it might be good fun.

> "In heaven
> everything is fine
>
> In heaven
> everything is fine
>
> In heaven
> everything is fine
> you got your good thing
> and I've got mine"

Ah, that brings back some memories. I probably still have the Pixies
version I taped off the radio. It's on the Gigantic EP, which had
already been deleted by the time I tried to get it. But maybe you're
thinking of a different one ...

Graham

--- In tuning@y..., graham@m... wrote:

> How about something simple like 5-equal?

Sounds interesting. I enjoyed Herman Miller's "Slendro Mountain".

> Or a boring diatonic
> meantone?

Which might you suggest? I would not find meantone boring.

> I'd be happy with a loop-based approach. Even if it isn't
successful,
> it might be good fun.

I would agree! Now here's the clincher: What about the style?

How do you feel about "Drums & Bass"? I'm a Recycling fool!

>
> > "In heaven
> > everything is fine
> >
> > In heaven
> > everything is fine
> >
> > In heaven
> > everything is fine
> > you got your good thing
> > and I've got mine"
>
> Ah, that brings back some memories.

Boy me too! I hadn't thought of Eraserhead in ages!

> I probably still have the Pixies
> version I taped off the radio. It's on the Gigantic EP, which had
> already been deleted by the time I tried to get it. But maybe
you're
> thinking of a different one ...

The Pixies!!! "Graham is a Punk Rocker". One of my most guarded
secrets, which I will reveal for fun, is that I used to play in a
hardcore band for years back in the early 80s. Yes, with the Mosh
Pits and all that rot! The pits are too cruel these days for this old
guy. Folks have gotten really mean spirited and hyper-violent.

Jacky Ligon

Jacky Ligon wrote:

> > How about something simple like 5-equal?
>
> Sounds interesting. I enjoyed Herman Miller's "Slendro Mountain".

I find you can play whatever you like with out having to worry about
"wrong notes". But that may not be so important if we agree on the
chord sequence in advance.

> > Or a boring diatonic
> > meantone?
>
> Which might you suggest? I would not find meantone boring.

31-equal. It's close enough to 11-limit harmony that it should keep
the JI crowd happy.

The danger would be that we stick to a simple diatonic scale, and so
it doesn't sound much different to 12-equal.

> > I'd be happy with a loop-based approach. Even if it isn't
> successful,
> > it might be good fun.
>
> I would agree! Now here's the clincher: What about the style?
>
> How do you feel about "Drums & Bass"? I'm a Recycling fool!

That'd be great! I've made abortive starts at that before, with an
Amen-like drum loop and a simple meantone bass line. So I can
probably get some MIDI files together this evening for whoever
expresses interest, and we can take it off-list.

Graham

on 2/15/01 5:53 PM, tuning@yahoogroups.com at tuning@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> I have thought about inviting some of the folk that I know who can
> overtone sing to do something, but the challenge is to get folks to
> agree on tunings and such.
>
> Hey - you remember Brian Baker? These guys have a project they are
> doing like I describe above; called "Tape-Germ" (not microtonal stuff
> though). Supposedly, it has gotten lots-o-plays on MP3.com. It's
> seems to be a vibrant collaborative effort with a large number of
> folks involved. But you know how finicky microtonalists can be about
> things - we agree on little except music we like.
>
> I agree it could be interesting, especially where a consensus on
> tuning could be found. Success would likely be dependent upon finding
> those with common working methods. For example, I would be worthless
> to someone wanting to collaborate with Csound, but with
> sampling/synthesis and recording of live parts - especially throat
> singing, would probably work out.
>
> For me a good method is to provide a basic track, from which folks
> would build their performance from, which might be a rhythmic
> track/single thematic part, which would give one the pitches being
> used (like Kraig and I were discussing yesterday).

Jacky,

This sounds like a really interesting project, I'd certainly be happy to add
a track or two (some of my possibilities include lap steel guitar, fiddle
overtone singing, didj, overtone flute, frame drumming).

The one tricky hurdle I can imagine dealing with, besides agreeing on
tunings, would be deciding on compatible recording formats. I am sure that
on this list, we have, in addition to the Mac vs PC computers, also an
assortment of ADATs and Tascam DA88 type tapes, Roland VS and other
standalone workstations, various direct to hard drive systems, both
standalone and computer driven, 44.1 or 48k, at 16 bit, 24/96, etc.

I remember hearing some music a few years ago, I think it was by Laurie
Anderson, that had a number of people improvise and record a track to a
basic guide track/loop that she composed. None of the other people involved
heard any of the parts that any one else involved recorded, except for the
guide track, and the whole thing was later assembled and mixed without the
original source. It sounded good, as I recall, and I've always thought it
would be fun to be involved in anything similar.

Seth
--
Seth Austen

http://www.sethausten.com
emails: seth@sethausten.com
klezmusic@earthlink.net

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause
and reflect."
-Mark Twain

--- In tuning@y..., Seth Austen <klezmusic@e...> wrote:
> Jacky,
>
> This sounds like a really interesting project, I'd certainly be
happy to add
> a track or two (some of my possibilities include lap steel guitar,
fiddle
> overtone singing, didj, overtone flute, frame drumming).

Sounds like we may have something here! I think it would be great fun
too!

Hey Seth, I've been meaning to ask you if you have been able to get
your hands on some plans for making a home-style Fujara? I would like
to try my hand at creating one of these too - love that sound! If
you have some plans for building them and you feel compelled to share
them, please send them to me at my home email, and I will be
eternally grateful.

You know, I made two really incredible sounding Didgeridoos last
year, with subtly different designs. I did quite a bit of
experimentation to get the right tone, but found the two designs to
be very useful. The wax mouth-piece is crucial to the sound of the
instrument. I would be happy to share my plans with anyone who wants
to make one. But don't ask me how to circular breath! I'm lame at it!

>
> The one tricky hurdle I can imagine dealing with, besides agreeing
on
> tunings, would be deciding on compatible recording formats. I am
sure that
> on this list, we have, in addition to the Mac vs PC computers, also
an
> assortment of ADATs and Tascam DA88 type tapes, Roland VS and other
> standalone workstations, various direct to hard drive systems, both
> standalone and computer driven, 44.1 or 48k, at 16 bit, 24/96, etc.

On my end of things, I can convert just about any kind of audio
format into the WAV format that I use. If I get stuff in AIFF, that's
cool - easy to convert. And I'm beyond proficient at editing loops -
I have produced a commercial "electronica" sampling CD, so slaving
over a hot audio editing program is second nature to me.

> I remember hearing some music a few years ago, I think it was by
Laurie
> Anderson, that had a number of people improvise and record a track
to a
> basic guide track/loop that she composed. None of the other people
involved
> heard any of the parts that any one else involved recorded, except
for the
> guide track, and the whole thing was later assembled and mixed
without the
> original source. It sounded good, as I recall, and I've always
thought it
> would be fun to be involved in anything similar.

This is also the way I've heard that Eno and Byrne worked with Adrian
Belew as well. Yes, I think if contributors could work in a loop
based manner, it would facilitate doing this. I've got a library of
beats already made for this possibility.

In the collaborative effort I spoke of, we all agreed on one person
to put the final thing together, but here, I think the possibilities
of a few folks doing microtonal *remixes* would be quite cool.
Allowing this possibility would likely yield interesting variations
on the theme.

Let's discuss this more to see what we can do!

Thanks!

Jacky Ligon

I see limitless possibilities in thishear idea. What I'd like to do is add
a trombone part or parts to someone's accompaniment in whatever tuning they
choose. I can convert into and out of .wav, .mp3, midi, and real audio
formats. I'd learn a lot that way, seeing as how I compose either in a
Varesian "orgnized sound" format or a sorta John Harbisson idiom. I don't
yet really conceive melody/harmony stuff in any consistent manner in other
than 12-tet.

--- In tuning@y..., Jay Williams <jaywill@t...> wrote:
> I see limitless possibilities in thishear idea. What I'd like
to do is add
> a trombone part or parts to someone's accompaniment in whatever
tuning they
> choose. I can convert into and out of .wav, .mp3, midi, and real
audio
> formats. I'd learn a lot that way, seeing as how I compose either
in a
> Varesian "orgnized sound" format or a sorta John Harbisson idiom.
I don't
> yet really conceive melody/harmony stuff in any consistent manner
in other
> than 12-tet.

Jay!

May I ask what your opinion of Albert Mangelsdorf would be?

Thanks!

Jacky Ligon

on 2/16/01 3:59 PM, tuning@yahoogroups.com at tuning@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> From: ligonj@northstate.net

Hi Jacky

> Hey Seth, I've been meaning to ask you if you have been able to get
> your hands on some plans for making a home-style Fujara?

I haven't run into any plans yet, I really would like to find some, or a
reasonably priced existing instrument. I'll keep you posted if I find plans.
It is such an amazing sounding instrument. It can't be too hard to
construct, it's a 5.5 feet long cylinder, with what looks like a smaller
cylinder as the mouthpiece, and I believe it only has three finger holes.
But my failure rate at building useable instruments is considerable.

> You know, I made two really incredible sounding Didgeridoos last
> year, with subtly different designs. I did quite a bit of
> experimentation to get the right tone, but found the two designs to
> be very useful. The wax mouth-piece is crucial to the sound of the
> instrument. I would be happy to share my plans with anyone who wants
> to make one. But don't ask me how to circular breath! I'm lame at it!
>
I still can't circular breathe and play the didj at the same time. I can do
either one independantly, put them together, it just doesn't want to happen.
I keep hoping that some day, when I'm not trying, it'll just happen
naturally, as I am sure it should be.

> On my end of things, I can convert just about any kind of audio
> format into the WAV format that I use. If I get stuff in AIFF, that's
> cool - easy to convert. And I'm beyond proficient at editing loops -
> I have produced a commercial "electronica" sampling CD, so slaving
> over a hot audio editing program is second nature to me.

Sounds like recording should be easy enough then, since there are ways to
convert files.

> This is also the way I've heard that Eno and Byrne worked with Adrian
> Belew as well.

That certainly explains how they got the wonderful results that they did.

> In the collaborative effort I spoke of, we all agreed on one person
> to put the final thing together, but here, I think the possibilities
> of a few folks doing microtonal *remixes* would be quite cool.
> Allowing this possibility would likely yield interesting variations
> on the theme. them all together, from

Oh, I like the idea of the possible remixes, perhaps we could seamlessly
morph from one remix to anther and so on for a longer, multiply textured
piece.

Seth

--
Seth Austen

http://www.sethausten.com
emails: seth@sethausten.com
klezmusic@earthlink.net

"...you start out wanting to make the greatest movie ever made,
and you end up just wanting to live through it."
-Truffaut

>Jacky wrote:

>May I ask what your opinion of Albert Mangelsdorf would be?
>
>
>Thanks!
>
>Jacky Ligon
>
Fantastic! And thanks for providing his web page. Hadn't thought to see if
he had one. He began his rise in that golden age that produced Stuart
Dempster and Vinko Globucar. Too great a leap for most, though, most bone
players I know of who improvise are still keching up to J.J. Oh well, our
time will surely come.
Jay>
>
>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.
>
>
>

I thought a good way to collaborate would be with MIDI files,and i have plenty of material that would be suitable for this.Only send _unretuned_ midi files though,specifying what tuning should be used of course.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-
MATS �LJARE
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/oljare
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

At 02:10 AM 2/17/01 -0000, you wrote:
>I thought a good way to collaborate would be with MIDI files,and i have
>plenty of material that would be suitable for this.Only send _unretuned_
>midi files though,specifying what tuning should be used of course.
>I would really hate to exclude the sounds of "real" instruments. Not all
of us have access to easily tuned samplers into which we can adequately
represent, say, our 19-tet glass harmonicas or whatever. I do assume that
MIDI will be a sort of basic platform since it can be controlled so nicely,
but I think the project shouldbe able to include recordings too. And in
saying that, I'd be glad to mix and synchronize the efforts of folks
involved should assitance be needed.
Jay
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> MATS ÖLJARE
> http://www.angelfire.com/mo/oljare
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.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.
>
>
>

Mats,

Please send me an email to my home address.

Need your full email address, which I can't get from Yahoo.

Thanks,

Jacky Ligon

--- In tuning@y..., "Mats Öljare" <oljare@h...> wrote:
> I thought a good way to collaborate would be with MIDI files,and i
have
> plenty of material that would be suitable for this.Only send
_unretuned_
> midi files though,specifying what tuning should be used of course.
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-
> MATS ÖLJARE
> http://www.angelfire.com/mo/oljare
>
______________________________________________________________________
___
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com.