Newbie

Dear Tuning List members:

My name is Kurt Nelson. I'm new to the list-- been reading it for more
than a month, and wish I had time to participate in all the threads.

I have similar reservations to describing myself as a composer as others
on this list, but suffice it to say I am very interested in tuning
variations, counterpoint, early music, and other such composerly things.
I will spare you all the details of my bio, and just provide this link to
my brand new site for anyone who's interested:
http://homestead.juno.com/kurtnelson2/files/KurtFrontPage.html

The site contains some mp3 excerpts from my demo CD. "Farey Music",
track 4, is the only JI piece, although these ratios govern the rhythms
in tracks 6 and 7.

This brings me to a question: Is there a current version of the tuning
FAQ which being so tantalizingly discussed? If so, where do I find it?
You see, what I call "Farey Trees" seem quite similar to the lattices and
x-anies which have been discussed recently. I want to be sure that I use
the most widely accepted terminology when talking about these things.

I share Jacky's interest in scale symmetry. Since the Farey Trees
consist of interlocking fragments of harmonic and subharmonic series,
there is a great deal of symmetry in them. I will post a couple of
scales derived from them in the near future, but first I want to catch up
on my reading of the digests (I'm about 10 days behind).

I am also quite interested in the notion of Intervals of Equivalence
other than the "octave." I am undertaking an analysis of spectral
concurrences of pitches in the Farey set of size 16, and using
multidimensional scaling solution mapping in order to demonstrate that
2:1 is only the first of an infinite set of similarity dimensions in
pitch space. Since I am doing this in my "spare time" it is taking quite
a while, so if anyone knows of previously published papers on this
subject please let me know; it would save me some work.

Another issue wrapped up in this is the idea that pitch class is not a
linear quantity. Most traditional designs for keyed instruments make the
assumption that pitch, like frequency, is linear. I am exploring the
feasibility of building a series of instruments which incorporate the
two-dimensional structure of the Farey Tree into their control surfaces.
This would permit the ebb and flow of dissonance of melodic phrases to be
directly analogous to the portions of the control surface covered by the
player throughout the phrase. For instance, 1:1 would be the median of
the instrument, extending all the way to the front edge. Other "primary"
intervals, like 2:1, 2:3, 4:3, are near the player. As intervals get
into more dissonant territory (like 7:5, 13:8, farther up the Farey
tree), they are farther away from the player. Should one wish to employ
dynamic JI, electronic instruments could have a "sample and hold" type
foot switch which, when pressed, would transpose the median note to the
frequency of the currently sounded note. I hope to post a drawing of one
of these proposed designs in the near future; I'm sure that a visual
representation would clarify what I mean.

If anyone thinks that it is worth pursuing these lines of development,
please let me know, because I am struggling in poverty and anonymity, and
I could use the encouragement.

Glad to be on the Tuning List
Sincerely,
Kurt Nelson

Welcome Kurt!
Lou harrison recently commented on the fact that music scales where based on defined locations
of where pitches were whereas there was a whole other world based solely on intervals that remains
unexplored. I sense this is what you are attempting to explore via your Farey series. BTW there is
the scale tree at http://www.anaphoria.com/sctree.PDF which may or may not be of some use to you.
It seems that the Farey series could be a better guide to con/disonance than limits.

Kurt S Nelson wrote:

> Dear Tuning List members:
>
> My name is Kurt Nelson. I'm new to the list-- been reading it for more
> than a month, and wish I had time to participate in all the threads.
>
> I have similar reservations to describing myself as a composer as others
> on this list, but suffice it to say I am very interested in tuning
> variations, counterpoint, early music, and other such composerly things.
> I will spare you all the details of my bio, and just provide this link to
> my brand new site for anyone who's interested:
> http://homestead.juno.com/kurtnelson2/files/KurtFrontPage.html
>
> The site contains some mp3 excerpts from my demo CD. "Farey Music",
> track 4, is the only JI piece, although these ratios govern the rhythms
> in tracks 6 and 7.
>
> This brings me to a question: Is there a current version of the tuning
> FAQ which being so tantalizingly discussed? If so, where do I find it?
> You see, what I call "Farey Trees" seem quite similar to the lattices and
> x-anies which have been discussed recently. I want to be sure that I use
> the most widely accepted terminology when talking about these things.
>
> I share Jacky's interest in scale symmetry. Since the Farey Trees
> consist of interlocking fragments of harmonic and subharmonic series,
> there is a great deal of symmetry in them. I will post a couple of
> scales derived from them in the near future, but first I want to catch up
> on my reading of the digests (I'm about 10 days behind).
>
> I am also quite interested in the notion of Intervals of Equivalence
> other than the "octave." I am undertaking an analysis of spectral
> concurrences of pitches in the Farey set of size 16, and using
> multidimensional scaling solution mapping in order to demonstrate that
> 2:1 is only the first of an infinite set of similarity dimensions in
> pitch space. Since I am doing this in my "spare time" it is taking quite
> a while, so if anyone knows of previously published papers on this
> subject please let me know; it would save me some work.
>
> Another issue wrapped up in this is the idea that pitch class is not a
> linear quantity. Most traditional designs for keyed instruments make the
> assumption that pitch, like frequency, is linear. I am exploring the
> feasibility of building a series of instruments which incorporate the
> two-dimensional structure of the Farey Tree into their control surfaces.
> This would permit the ebb and flow of dissonance of melodic phrases to be
> directly analogous to the portions of the control surface covered by the
> player throughout the phrase. For instance, 1:1 would be the median of
> the instrument, extending all the way to the front edge. Other "primary"
> intervals, like 2:1, 2:3, 4:3, are near the player. As intervals get
> into more dissonant territory (like 7:5, 13:8, farther up the Farey
> tree), they are farther away from the player. Should one wish to employ
> dynamic JI, electronic instruments could have a "sample and hold" type
> foot switch which, when pressed, would transpose the median note to the
> frequency of the currently sounded note. I hope to post a drawing of one
> of these proposed designs in the near future; I'm sure that a visual
> representation would clarify what I mean.
>
> If anyone thinks that it is worth pursuing these lines of development,
> please let me know, because I am struggling in poverty and anonymity, and
> I could use the encouragement.
>
> Glad to be on the Tuning List
> Sincerely,
> Kurt Nelson

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

--- In tuning@y..., Kurt S Nelson <kurtnelson2@j...> wrote:
> Dear Tuning List members:
>
> My name is Kurt Nelson. I'm new to the list-- been reading it for
more
> than a month, and wish I had time to participate in all the threads.

Kurt,

Hello!

Let me extend the warmest possible welcome to you! Glad to have you
here!

>
> I have similar reservations to describing myself as a composer as
others
> on this list,

Yes - I agree. Words like "composer" and "microtonalist" are mere
contextual conveniences.

>
> The site contains some mp3 excerpts from my demo CD. "Farey Music",
> track 4, is the only JI piece, although these ratios govern the
rhythms
> in tracks 6 and 7.

Have listened and enjoyed! Keep up the good work! It's good to have
three folks here on the list now, who actively work in the
contemporary Electronica idioms - Catharsis, you and myself (if I've
missed anyone - sorry. Make yourself known!)

> I share Jacky's interest in scale symmetry. Since the Farey Trees
> consist of interlocking fragments of harmonic and subharmonic
series,
> there is a great deal of symmetry in them. I will post a couple of
> scales derived from them in the near future, but first I want to
catch up
> on my reading of the digests (I'm about 10 days behind).

Ah - immense common ground! I will personally be very interested to
see what you have to offer. Please post!

>
> I am also quite interested in the notion of Intervals of Equivalence
> other than the "octave." I am undertaking an analysis of spectral
> concurrences of pitches in the Farey set of size 16, and using
> multidimensional scaling solution mapping in order to demonstrate
that
> 2:1 is only the first of an infinite set of similarity dimensions in
> pitch space. Since I am doing this in my "spare time" it is taking
quite
> a while, so if anyone knows of previously published papers on this
> subject please let me know; it would save me some work.

This is like a refreshing drink of water in a Partched desert. You
know, you are absolutely right! When we insist on the supremacy of
the 2/1, we block ourselves from the rich and infinite treasures to
be found with other IoEs. There are entire other worlds of JI to be
explored here, and totally untapped microtonal beauty to harness in
new compositions. There's quite a few here who have embraced this
theoretically, and a number who have compositionally.

I have the better part of an article ready to post on the above, so
please bring forth yours, and we'll get the ball rolling on one of my
favorite topics.

Brings to mind one of my favorite personal microtonal koans: "Is it
JI without 2/1?"

>
> Another issue wrapped up in this is the idea that pitch class is
not a
> linear quantity. Most traditional designs for keyed instruments
make the
> assumption that pitch, like frequency, is linear. I am exploring
the
> feasibility of building a series of instruments which incorporate
the
> two-dimensional structure of the Farey Tree into their control
surfaces.
> This would permit the ebb and flow of dissonance of melodic phrases
to be
> directly analogous to the portions of the control surface covered
by the
> player throughout the phrase. For instance, 1:1 would be the
median of
> the instrument, extending all the way to the front edge.
Other "primary"
> intervals, like 2:1, 2:3, 4:3, are near the player. As intervals
get
> into more dissonant territory (like 7:5, 13:8, farther up the Farey
> tree), they are farther away from the player. Should one wish to
employ
> dynamic JI, electronic instruments could have a "sample and hold"
type
> foot switch which, when pressed, would transpose the median note to
the
> frequency of the currently sounded note. I hope to post a drawing
of one
> of these proposed designs in the near future; I'm sure that a visual
> representation would clarify what I mean.

Wow! Let's see it!

>
> If anyone thinks that it is worth pursuing these lines of
development,
> please let me know, because I am struggling in poverty and
anonymity, and
> I could use the encouragement.

It's hard to know how what we do today will impact on things
tomorrow, but I know if we don't try, then it's sure to fail.
Anything to get more music happening has profoundest meaning to me.

Thanks,

Jacky Ligon

--- In tuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
> Welcome Kurt!
> Lou harrison recently commented on the fact that music scales
where based on defined locations
> of where pitches were whereas there was a whole other world based
solely on intervals that remains
> unexplored. I sense this is what you are attempting to explore via
your Farey series. BTW there is
> the scale tree at http://www.anaphoria.com/sctree.PDF which may or
may not be of some use to you.
> It seems that the Farey series could be a better guide to
con/disonance than limits.
>

Kraig Grady! Whazz-up!

That's one thing I realy dig about the fragments of Erv's work I have
grasped - he doesn't always have to have that old 2/1.

Maybe you can tell me if Lou has ever composed any music with scales
which exclude the 2/1? Perhaps his Gamelan work would qualify, but I
mean with other instruments, and personally designed scales? It's one
thing to recognize these things are there, and another to compose
with them, and I'm imagining that acoustic performance would be a
bear with deliberate use non-octave scales.

Have you built any instruments in non-2/1 scales? Curious to know how
they behave for you and the ensembles.

Thank ye,

Jacky Ligon

ligonj@northstate.net wrote:

> Kraig Grady! Whazz-up!
>
> That's one thing I realy dig about the fragments of Erv's work I have
> grasped - he doesn't always have to have that old 2/1.
>
> Maybe you can tell me if Lou has ever composed any music with scales
> which exclude the 2/1?

All his compositions in free style in which I am sure Bill Alves can fill us in on.
These pieces require unfixed instrument.

> Perhaps his Gamelan work would qualify, but I
> mean with other instruments, and personally designed scales?

I know he decided not to stretch the octaves

> It's one
> thing to recognize these things are there, and another to compose
> with them, and I'm imagining that acoustic performance would be a
> bear with deliberate use non-octave scales.
>
> Have you built any instruments in non-2/1 scales?

no. But i tend not to be attracted to non- anything. There is usually something i want to have and
have to be quite sure that whatever i build is not boxing me into a corner i can't get out of. But
having octaves doesn't prevent me from exploring this area in a way. The Lake Aloe (vibraphone)
solo on From the Interiors of Anaphoria is based on a scale that takes 17 tones of a 22 tone scale
as an octave and then takes 12 tones subsets out of these. Here the tuning is treated as a melodic
scale and not ratio based although they are there. Even in 12 ET you can take 19 units and use 12
tone or 7 tone subsets as your scale. i have done this with various 12 tone tunings. I also like 7
units of a 12 tone scale with taking 5 note subsets.

> Curious to know how
> they behave for you and the ensembles.
>
> Thank ye,
>
> Jacky Ligon

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

--- In tuning@y..., ligonj@n... wrote:

>That's one thing I realy dig about the fragments of Erv's work I
>have
>grasped - he doesn't always have to have that old 2/1.

Wow! I didn't know Erv had done any work with non-octave scales, but
I've love to see it. Is any of this on the Anaphoria site?

Paul!
This went past me cause I knew his attitude about it, especially his looking at Gamelan
tunings where the octave is very often stretched. I know he has stated that the Horagrams do not
imply the 2/1 octave. Also the examples of MOS at other intervals besides the 2/1 was shown to me
by him first. I have not seen him use ratio division like Jacky though where he takes a 3/2 of a
stretch octave. But he likes to hide things from people from time to time until he has what he
wants to do with it pretty far down the road. The Lambdomas are another example where the Octave
might be present but not the unifying device. He tends not interested in Non- anything and scales
without octaves he would get to by doing something, not not doing. (like looking at a Gamelan with
a particular size octave.

PERLICH@ACADIAN-ASSET.COM wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., ligonj@n... wrote:
>
> >That's one thing I realy dig about the fragments of Erv's work I
> >have
> >grasped - he doesn't always have to have that old 2/1.
>
> Wow! I didn't know Erv had done any work with non-octave scales, but
> I've love to see it. Is any of this on the Anaphoria site?

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

--- In tuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
>
> Even in 12 ET you can take 19 units and use 12
> tone or 7 tone subsets as your scale.

I love it! I enjoy taking 19 units as the periodicity and using these
11 tone subsets:

C D E F G A B C D E F (G) (1st 3/1)

G A B C D E F# G A B C (D) (2nd 3/1)

D E F# G A B C# D E F# G (A) (3rd 3/1)

etc.

> i have done this with various 12 tone tunings. I also like 7
> units of a 12 tone scale with taking 5 note subsets.

That works too but not as well IMO (I'm thinking 4 note subsets:

C D E F G
G A B C D
D E F# G A
A B C# D E

etc.)