Greetings.

Greetings,

Well, where to start. I will make this brief as I am just beginning my independent journey with music theory and microtonality (been on list since January). Needless to say much is still over my head at the time (as it should be). I have been a guitarist for 17 years and a DJ (techno; the real genre) for almost 3 now. I did have 10 years of guitar lessons (age 6 to 16), however it was mediated by your average guitar teacher (IE what song do you want to learn this week?; rather than theory/application). I have been following popular electronic music from more dance related and industrial/experimental/IDM areas since '94 to microsound in the last year .

I have been online and programming (started with C) back in '92 and am currently finishing my computer science undergrad at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. Needless to say, I am a little disappointed with my college experience, but such is life (with State run institutions!). I have taken most of the last year off from college to pursue music and producing (check out my studio gear at http://www.egregious.net/~catharsis/equipment.html) I own a Cerwin Vega Intense sound system with a friend and have run/promoted/DJed over 80 events in the San Luis Obispo area (central coast of California). Most recently a weekly club night focusing on electronic dance music (badmonkey.egregious.net). I do hope this list will take this pursuit seriously as there is musical relevance in something so visceral as dance music. IE. in terms of DJing (like anything else) it is what you put into it.

I have applied for a summer intensive session for computer music at CCMix (http://www.upic.asso.fr/). If I am to go onto graduate studies it will be for computer music, but up to now my academic experience has been less that satisfactory so I might just go about all of this independently.

Anyway, I will be lurking on this list as I find a lot of the discussion interesting. I believe I have a really good breadth view of music at the time and soon will start plunging into particular areas for more depth. Obviously, I would like to communicate in person as there really is not anyone in my area that I am aware of working with anything microtonal and I don't see "eye to eye" with the Cal Poly music department; IE far too liberal arts and conservative. Luckily I have an acquaintance who is a student at Harvey Mudd, so I will be coming to the Microfest this weekend as I have a place to stay. It also helps that the conference is free otherwise I could not attend! I am young; I do have a "radical haircut", so there will be no doubt who I am (IE look for the multicolored mohawk). Don't be afraid to say hello! I keep my hair the way I do for fun and it is great in a town like San Luis Obispo where 95% of the students fit the frat/sorority mold. =:)

--Mike (Catharsis)

Egregious
"Spiritual renewal through music for those outside the heard."
http://www.egregious.net/

Welcome Mike (Catharsis) and greetings to you too.

--- In tuning@y..., Catharsis <catharsis@e...> wrote:
> Greetings,
>
..............
>>Needless to say, I am a little disappointed with my college
experience, but such is life ..............>>

Hello Mike (Catharsis), I am VERY disappointed with the way music
courses do NOT cover microtonality/tuning and temperament. I have,
by now, contacted six universities. I feel that, apparently, they do
not think microtonality/tuning and temperament is of any importance
to students. When we study the messages on the Tuning group (20756
at the time of my writing this), we get some idea about the depth and
breadth, the nature and pre-requisites of the study material, even to
thoroughly follow those postings. There is NO course available
anywhere, suitable for entry to the pre-requisites to the kind and
level of this group. I would have gladly opted for the degree course
in Western music, but I see that it will not help me for my specific
requirements. I do not even know what those requirements are!

But for encouraging postings from members like Jacky and Margo; but
for the interest that the members have shown in Indian music; but for
the hope that, sooner or later, somebody will show the way, I would
have considered putting my membership on hold.

Did you come across any courses -- universities or Online -- that can
help begin at the beginning? Of course, I understand that your
problem is not so acute as mine. In my csae, I would have to really
begin at tne beginning, unlike you.

Thanks,
Haresh.

Haresh BAKSHI wrote:Hello Mike (Catharsis),

I am VERY disappointed with the way music
courses do NOT cover microtonality/tuning and temperament. I have,

> by now, contacted six universities. I feel that, apparently, they do
> not think microtonality/tuning and temperament is of any importance
> to students. When we study the messages on the Tuning group (20756
> at the time of my writing this), we get some idea about the depth and
> breadth, the nature and pre-requisites of the study material, even to
> thoroughly follow those postings. There is NO course available
> anywhere, suitable for entry to the pre-requisites to the kind and
> level of this group. I would have gladly opted for the degree course
> in Western music, but I see that it will not help me for my specific
> requirements. I do not even know what those requirements are!
>
> But for encouraging postings from members like Jacky and Margo; but
> for the interest that the members have shown in Indian music; but for
> the hope that, sooner or later, somebody will show the way, I would
> have considered putting my membership on hold.
>
> Did you come across any courses -- universities or Online -- that can
> help begin at the beginning? Of course, I understand that your
> problem is not so acute as mine. In my csae, I would have to really
> begin at tne beginning, unlike you.
>
> Thanks,
> Haresh.

I suggest that you are better to rely on your own resources in the study of microtonality. The
only academic help I would seek would be to reach a level of mathematical proficiency that allows
me to follow the more technical discussions on this list and the concepts that arise from the
study of the numerous links that branch off from this study. Then I will be able to offer my own
theories and participate fully in discussions. I also think that it would be of great benefit to
know the subject inside out if, like me, you intend composing and performing a lot in JI or non-12
systems. Good music will speak for itself but if you want funding and co-operation from the
'establishment' to help with performances it helps to be on top of the subject. Hence my
particular need for a brush up in mathematics which in my opinion is the language most used to
dicuss the intricacies of JI/microtonal music.

In the UK it is definitely not in the interest of University music departments to offer courses
that don't feed into the commercial sector, in the case of music, the conventional 'classical'
industry. In Scotland there are only two of our fine original historical universities which still
have music departments, the rest closed down under Thatcher's ethical onslaught. Of the two that
exist, one that I know well wouldn't know a microtone from the hole in its ****, so to speak.
'Distinguished' composers and academics can be terrified that they don't know it all so they
ignore it.

I've opted for the Open University, an excellent UK based open learning establishment with local
tutors that offers modular degree courses in all subjects. I'm going back to the formal study of
mathematics next January.

If you want to compose microtonally then it can be of benefit to study Western music and the
techniques used by the best composers. But it's a long haul and seems a roundabout way of getting
a handle on microtonality. I think a resourceful individual can learn the essential stuff of music
without the help of a University.

Best Wishes.

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
>
>
Hello Alison,

>> I suggest that you are better to rely on your own resources in the
study of microtonality. >>

How very true! All the time I was refusing to accept this. My
exasperation came from the contrast created by my vast experience in
Indian music with the very little exposure to the requirements for
the study of microtonality.

>> The only academic help I would seek would be to reach a level of
mathematical proficiency that allows me to follow the more technical
discussions on this list and the concepts that arise from the study
of the numerous links that branch off from this study. >>

Again, you have given me a very practical advice. I appreciate your
suggestions in regard to the math and microtonality.

I have opted for the Online "Math & Music" course offered by Colorado
University.

>> I'm going back to the formal study of mathematics next January. >>

That will be formidable!

Again thanks for the constructive and pragmatic suggestions. And, of
course, I am very fortunate in getting help from the gracious and
benevolent Tuners.

Regards,
Haresh.

The last math course I took was high school algebra. What kind of math
and/or what online courses would be advisable? Please be specific--I did a
search on math courses and came up with a huge number of topics.

Thanks,

Stan

--- In tuning@y..., Stan Hoffman <stanhoffman@m...> wrote:
>

>> .......

Hi Stan,

Please try this [if you already have not]:
http://www.math.niu.edu/~rusin/uses-math/music/index.html

Haresh.

--- In tuning@y..., Stan Hoffman <
stanhoffman@m...> wrote:
> The last math course I took was high school algebra. What kind of math
> and/or what online courses would be advisable? Please be specific--I did a
> search on math courses and came up with a huge number of topics.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stan

I really don't think you'll need much more. If
you understand logarithms, you should pretty
much know all the math you need to for
microtonality. Of course, it's fun to get into
the nitty-gritty with more advanced math --
on this list, I've helped Joe Monzo with the
calculus that Woolhouse used to derive the
optimal meantone temperament, Pierre
Lamothe has made reference to group theory,
we've brought up the Ferguson-Forcade
algorithm; I started a new list based on a
concept learned in an information theory
class. . . But really, all the important
microtonal concepts and results should be
understandable to a bright high school senior,
or even freshman -- a microtonalist who uses
more advanced math will typically be able to
explain it to you on the spot, without
requiring you to go through a math course to
learn it first.

I urge Stan and anyone else who has trouble
following the math on this list to do two
things: search the list archives for earlier
discussion of the topic in question; and feel
free to post questions in response to any post
that puzzles you.

Please be aware, you'll find that there are
extremely conflicting views on how to use
math in microtonality, beyond the most
pedestrian calculations. For example, some
(like Pierre Lamothe) feel that pitch heights
should correspond to simple ratios; others
(like myself) subscribe instead to the view
that intervals should correspond as closely as
possible to simple ratios; others (like Stephen
Soderberg) don't care about ratios at all and
are interested instead in the "set theory" math
of pitch classes (this is not related to the "set
theory" you'd find offered in a mathematics
department; it relates instead to the numerics
of musicians like Forte and Babbitt). We'll
probably debate these things endlessly (if
given the opportunity) -- you should come to
your own conclusions based on some serious
and honest listening on your own (and of
course a means of producing microtonal
musical examples).

Finally, I don't want to discourage anyone
from pursuing advanced mathematics _not_
suggested by a musical problem and then
finding ways of applying it to music. In the
past I've expressed the opinion that this is
"silly", that math should only be used when a
specific musical problem needs to be solved,
and that the music must always be the end
and math can only be the means. But if
someone chooses to use a purely
mathematical creation as the source for a
musical composition, so be it -- it is certainly
a valid act of creativity, and it might even
sound like good music (though I've yet to
hear an example of that)!

Paul,

I just wanted to say that this was the most sensible and clear
descriptions of the mathematical necessities and varieties that come
into play on the list -- very well put!

I've threatened time and time to do 'it', but I've always lacked that
one ingrediant: time! What is 'it'? A few years ago I found a 7 or 8
CD set of math courses, all the way from HS algebra on up through
basic calculus. I think it would be great to have them sitting here,
and pop one in (sequentially, of course) when I had a few spare
minutes, and work my way back to being semi-conversant.

'Course, I haven't had those spare minutes... :)

--- In tuning@y..., PERLICH@A... wrote:
> I've helped Joe Monzo with the calculus that Woolhouse used to
> derive the optimal meantone temperament

Ahem, well, since he *owes* you one, you might want to write Joe
Monzo and ask him about what happened on late Friday afternoon at
MicroFest. See if he'll send you documentation.

That's all I'll say.

Cheers,
Jon

It's time to come out about my mathematical past: there is none to very
little. After high school algebra and geometry, that was it.

Only when learning microtonal intervals (intervals other than those produced
by 12-tET) that something developed in me with numbers. Since a 5/4 (at 386
cents) is only that, my emotional memory kicked in to designate the accurate
number place for the interval. And so on.

People that I meet seem so sure of themselves that I miss me a math wizard
(like so many on this list). It is not true. Numbers are a great
representation of intervals, superior to phrases like "small major third," or
"pure major third," or "sweet major third," or "English major third," etc.
Only 386 cents is appropriate and it is as a result of the 5/4 proportion.

May I suggest that jumping into Math deep water is not necessarily the best,
and certainly not the only direction to take. Learn all of a system so that
you can hear it, and then switch systems. Soon you will have transversed the
once tabula rasa with every little interval producible. (I did 24-tET, then
31-tET, then JI which could based on any distinct fundamental, 19-tET, and
then Pythagorean, and many others). The eventually fall in on each other
with shared information. Concepts like meantone and well-tempered makes most
sense within a cultural context.

Ultimately, all intervals made sensible to the mind and heart, are expressed
by numbers....but not by any means high mathematics.

Johnny Reinhard
AFMM

--- In tuning@y..., Catharsis <catharsis@e...> wrote:

> ... Luckily I have an acquaintance who is a student at Harvey
> Mudd, so I will be coming to the Microfest this weekend
> as I have a place to stay. It also helps that the conference
> is free otherwise I could not attend! I am young; I do have
> a "radical haircut", so there will be no doubt who I am
> (IE look for the multicolored mohawk).

Hey Mike, it was great meeting you. Cool haircut.

-monz

In post 20820 Paul Erlich wrote :

<< some (like Pierre Lamothe) feel that pitch heights
should correspond to simple ratios; >>

I would like to temperate this impression resulting probably of my
intensive simple ratios using. It will be minimal for I can express deep
opinion only in french (besides it's why I post above all on maths).

I "feel" that precision in tuning is much more important for those who have
the corresponding sensibility and pay attention to the tuning values. By
analogy, when someone is speaking, the majority hear only what is said
while few only remark also vocabulary, grammar and style faults.

I "feel" that there exist two simultaneous perception type of tones
relation : width relations and sonance relations. I "feel" that simple
octave ratios are important in width-axis organization while simple
frequency ratios are important in sonance-axis organization. The problem is
: these two types of simple ratios are not strictly compatible. I never
talk against temperament using and tended, in french text, to justify its
usage.

I "feel" however that actual luthery constraints could change so we could
obtain a better dynamic compatibility. I "feel" first that precision is
more important in sonance perception than in width perception. So with an
adaptive tuning system permiting anticipation and not only automated
corrections based on present and past context it would be possible to use a
better precision for simple frequency ratios without impact on width
perception.

e.g. At moment of a modulation to a neighbour tonality (in
Zarlino just context) the machine could start a ~2 cents
imperceptible global shift if it "knowed" the musician
intention to execute a complete cycle of 12 such modulations
falling finally precisely on the start tonality.

What I would like to discuss deeply with musicians (but in french and
private) is the possibility for a musician to eventually distinguish
easily, about the comma problem, when the comma is used as a bridge to
extend possibilities (over the normal case where tones separated would be
more distant). I would ask that for there exist no systemic difference
between structures where tones are well separated and where there exist
commas. The commas should add possibilities by interaction between
width-axis and sonance-axis but it seems they are treated in statical
manner by temperament as it would be essential for the compositor to
dispose of a fix pitches space without pre-definite relational constraints.

Its just "feelings" but not so just-minded.

Pierre Lamothe

Hi Pierre,

I wrote,

<< some (like Pierre Lamothe) feel that pitch heights
should correspond to simple ratios; >>

Pierre, your reply addressed a very different issue than the one I was
bringing up here. You're talking about temperament and comma problems and
such, which we can talk about later. But that's not at all the distinction I
was trying to make.

Even in discussing pure JI scales, it appears we have a significant
philosophical difference.

Your guiding principle seems to be that pitch heights should correspond to
simple ratios.

My guiding principle is instead that intervals should correspond to simple
ratios.

Pierre Lamothe wrote ...

>I "feel" however that actual luthery constraints could change so we could
>obtain a better dynamic compatibility. I "feel" first that precision is
>more important in sonance perception than in width perception. So with an
>adaptive tuning system permiting anticipation and not only automated
>corrections based on present and past context it would be possible to use a
>better precision for simple frequency ratios without impact on width
>perception.
>
>e.g. At moment of a modulation to a neighbour tonality (in
> Zarlino just context) the machine could start a ~2 cents
> imperceptible global shift if it "knowed" the musician
> intention to execute a complete cycle of 12 such modulations
> falling finally precisely on the start tonality.

For a software synthesizer that does more or less exactly that please see www.midicode.com/features/features9.shtml. You can play the synthesizer from an external MIDI keyboard as usual. When you want to modulate to a new key you hit the new key note on the on-screen keyboard or on a pedal board or MIDI keyboard using a MIDI channel for the purpose. The software immediately re-tunes the (just) tuning to the new key. You can download a demo version of the software from the web site.

Peter Frazer.

Peter Frazer wrote,

>For a software synthesizer that does more or less exactly that please see
>www.midicode.com/features/features9.shtml. You can play the synthesizer
>from an external MIDI keyboard as usual. When you want to modulate to a
>new key you hit the new key note on the on-screen keyboard or on a pedal
>board or MIDI keyboard using a MIDI channel for the purpose. The software
>immediately re-tunes the (just) tuning to the new key. You can download a
>demo version of the software from the web site.

Hi Peter!

How would your software handle a I-vi-ii-V-I progression? Or a I-IV-ii-V-I
progression?

Thanks,
Paul

At 14:44 10/04/01 -0400, Paul H. Erlich wrote:
>
>Hi Peter!
>
>How would your software handle a I-vi-ii-V-I progression? Or a I-IV-ii-V-I
>progression?
>
>Thanks,
>Paul

Hi Paul,

If you are talking chord progressions within a single key without re-tuning then my software will do nothing unusual.

If you were to modulate through a series of keys on key notes corresponding with those degrees of the original scale and re-tune to the new key note in each case then for both examples you would arrive back at in the original key at a slightly flatter pitch (assuming JI).

Why not download the software and try it? You will find that it also has additive harmonic synthesis roughly analogous to a drawbar organ and therefore addresses the issue of re-tuning something of that generic type without the inconvenience of cutting new gear wheels.

Peter Frazer.
www.midicode.com