mp3 excerpt of my Johnston 8th Quartet MIDI-file

Since we (OK, mostly I) have been talking so much lately
about Ben Johnston's work, I thought it would be good to
give an example of one of his compositions for those who've
never heard anything by him.

http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/johnston/jnstn-82.mp3

This is the beginning of the 2nd movement (tempo: Lazy, Rocking)
from his _8th Quartet_, dated at the end "April 13, 1986".

(I hope it sounds OK - it's the first mp3 I've ever created
and uploaded on my own.)

The opening section, which covers almost all of my mp3, is based
in a mixolydian mode based on G- major, or in Partch's terms,
40/27 Otonality. This pitch happens to be notated the same
way (G-) in both the Johnston and HEWM notations.

The harmony is primarily an alternation of major chords on
G- and F- (which is also spelled the same way in both notations,
and represents 320/243 Otonality). The F- chord-root is
a 9:8 below the G- root.

A lot of the music has a blues flavor, and the progressions
to "harmonic 7th chords" on C- (160/81 Otonality, the "IV")
and D- (10/9 Otonality, the "V") enhance that effect.

Unfortunately, my unregistered copy of Cool Edit truncates
all saved files to only the first minute. So at the very end,
you can hear just a little bit of a beautiful modulation onto
the mediant, 50/27 Otonality, which Johnston notates as B-.
In HEWM notation this would be B--, because prime-factor 5
now has an exponent of 2.

The music here has the some alternating rocking as the first
section, with the second chord-root again a 9:8 below the first.

But a look at the score at this point discloses the kinds of
problems we've been discussing here. This 50/27 Otonality,
or B- (Johnston) or B-- (HEWM) chord, which right here is a
"major 7th chord", is spelled in Johnston's notation
B- : D#- : F# : A# . So the two "perfect 5ths" in this
chord are spelled B- : F# and D#- : A# !! Yuck!

In HEWM notation this chord would be spelled
B-- : D#--- : F#-- : A#--- , which admittedly is also pretty
ugly-looking. But at least the "perfect 5ths" make visual
sense: B-- : F#-- and D#--- : A#--- .

This brings up an interesting point in connection with Johnston's
harmonic practice. You'll often find these mediant-related
modulations in his scores, which makes his music a bit different
from the usual. Music normally tends to modulate according to
Pythagorean root-movement.

I'm thinking right now that it's probably more than a coincidence.
The nature of Johnston's notation keeps the simplest notations
lined up along a 25:24 axis. So it seems to me that he tends
to modulate along the 5-axis rather than the 3-axis because
it keeps the visual look of his scores the simplest.

With the profusion of bewildering accidentals in his scores,
I'd bet that this really is a consideration while he's composing,
whether he's conscious of it or not.

Very interesting...

-monz
http://www.monz.org
"All roads lead to n^0"

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21464.html#21464

> http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/johnston/jnstn-82.mp3
>
> This is the beginning of the 2nd movement (tempo: Lazy, Rocking)
> from his _8th Quartet_, dated at the end "April 13, 1986".

I thought I should say a little more about the harmony.

The first 3 measures are 5-limit.

Prime-factor 7 is used starting in measure 4 (~9 seconds).

Prime-factor 11 enters at the end of measure 5 (~13.5 seconds).

Prime-factor 13 enters in measure 11 (~31 seconds).

The modulation occurs at measure 19 (~58.5 seconds).

This gradual entry of successively higher prime-factors is
quite typical of the Johnston scores I've examined. In his
_4th Quartet_ (Amazing Grace), he composed entire variations
in successive prime-limits.

-monz
http://www.monz.org
"All roads lead to n^0"

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21464.html#21464
>
> Since we (OK, mostly I) have been talking so much lately
> about Ben Johnston's work, I thought it would be good to
> give an example of one of his compositions for those who've
> never heard anything by him.
>
> http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/johnston/jnstn-82.mp3
>

Well, I have to admit that I am pretty impressed by this already! I
think I'm going to be a Johnston "fan..."

> This brings up an interesting point in connection with Johnston's
> harmonic practice. You'll often find these mediant-related
> modulations in his scores, which makes his music a bit different
> from the usual. Music normally tends to modulate according to
> Pythagorean root-movement.
>
> I'm thinking right now that it's probably more than a coincidence.
> The nature of Johnston's notation keeps the simplest notations
> lined up along a 25:24 axis. So it seems to me that he tends
> to modulate along the 5-axis rather than the 3-axis because
> it keeps the visual look of his scores the simplest.
>
> With the profusion of bewildering accidentals in his scores,
> I'd bet that this really is a consideration while he's composing,
> whether he's conscious of it or not.
>
> Very interesting...

Well, this is an EXTREMELY interesting observation and is a good
case, of course, of the NOTATION DRIVING the composer, if what you
infer is true.... This is another good reason why it is important
that composers know ALL current and developing notations and systems
thoroughly... or at least as thoroughly as they can... even if they
never use them!

________ _____ ______ ___
Joseph Pehrson

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21464.html#21485

> --- In tuning@y..., "monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:
>
> /tuning/topicId_21464.html#21464
> >
> > Since we (OK, mostly I) have been talking so much lately
> > about Ben Johnston's work, I thought it would be good to
> > give an example of one of his compositions for those who've
> > never heard anything by him.
> >
> > http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/johnston/jnstn-82.mp3
> >
>
> Well, I have to admit that I am pretty impressed by this
> already! I think I'm going to be a Johnston "fan..."

IMO, Johnston is a very talented composer. Be warned: my version
(since it's done on a computer) is probably the only one that
will ever be tuned as accurately as he would like it to be!

As I've said, Johnston intends for his notation and harmonic
structures to work together to make his music intelligible.
But because of the large number of different prime-factors,
and the correspondingly convoluted notation, it's more than
most live performers can handle.

Also, be warned that I use much more _rubato_ in my
interpretations than most other performers. Some listeners
feel it's excessive, but I feel that it gives more life
and shape to the music. (I'm "old school" in this respect:
I got the idea from Mahler/Schoenberg/Webern.)

> > This brings up an interesting point in connection with Johnston's
> > harmonic practice. You'll often find these mediant-related
> > modulations in his scores, which makes his music a bit different
> > from the usual. Music normally tends to modulate according to
> > Pythagorean root-movement.
> >
> > I'm thinking right now that it's probably more than a coincidence.
> > The nature of Johnston's notation keeps the simplest notations
> > lined up along a 25:24 axis. So it seems to me that he tends
> > to modulate along the 5-axis rather than the 3-axis because
> > it keeps the visual look of his scores the simplest.
> >
> > With the profusion of bewildering accidentals in his scores,
> > I'd bet that this really is a consideration while he's composing,
> > whether he's conscious of it or not.
> >
> > Very interesting...
>
> Well, this is an EXTREMELY interesting observation and is a
> good case, of course, of the NOTATION DRIVING the composer,
> if what you infer is true.... This is another good reason
> why it is important that composers know ALL current and
> developing notations and systems thoroughly... or at least
> as thoroughly as they can... even if they never use them!

Thanks for adding that, Joe! That's the summary *I* should
have given as a conclusion, because that's exactly why I pointed
it out.

I'd also like to note that this is another instance of the
value of discourse on this list. Even tho *I* was the person
doing the explaining, I noticed something here about Johnston's
music that I've only very vaguely apprehended in the past.
It was explaining the score of this example to you that caused
me to finally become fully conscious of it and to make the
connection with his use of notation.

-monz
http://www.monz.org
"All roads lead to n^0"

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21464.html#21503
>
> I'd also like to note that this is another instance of the
> value of discourse on this list. Even tho *I* was the person
> doing the explaining, I noticed something here about Johnston's
> music that I've only very vaguely apprehended in the past.
> It was explaining the score of this example to you that caused
> me to finally become fully conscious of it and to make the
> connection with his use of notation.
>

It's the power of the "collective mind." Go Jung! (??)

_________ ______ ______ ____
Joseph Pehrson

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21464.html#21465

>
> --- In tuning@y..., "monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:
>
> /tuning/topicId_21464.html#21464
>
> > http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/johnston/jnstn-82.mp3
> >
> > This is the beginning of the 2nd movement (tempo: Lazy, Rocking)
> > from his _8th Quartet_, dated at the end "April 13, 1986".
>
>
> I thought I should say a little more about the harmony.
>
> The first 3 measures are 5-limit.
>
> Prime-factor 7 is used starting in measure 4 (~9 seconds).
>
> Prime-factor 11 enters at the end of measure 5 (~13.5 seconds).
>
> Prime-factor 13 enters in measure 11 (~31 seconds).
>
> The modulation occurs at measure 19 (~58.5 seconds).
>
>
> This gradual entry of successively higher prime-factors is
> quite typical of the Johnston scores I've examined. In his
> _4th Quartet_ (Amazing Grace), he composed entire variations
> in successive prime-limits.
>

Hi Monz!

Well, then, this is also a VERY important point about the way Ben
Johnston composes and its relationship to NOTATION.

In other words, he has a lattice out in front of him (well, certainly
he has internalized it by now, but probably did at the beginning) and
progressively explores it in the course of the piece BECAUSE OF THE
NATURE of the tuning notation he is using!!!

Yes, no, richtig, krank, poof!

________ _______ ______ ____
Joseph Pehrson