Re: [tuning] Ethics of Altering Past Compositions (was) Re: back in Cali.; meeting with Kees

monz schrieb:
>
> Several months ago,
>
> --- In tuning@y..., " Monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:
>
> /tuning/topicId_17073.html#17165
>
> > Schoenberg's big apparent error, as pointed out by Partch, was
> > the inconsistency (in the Erlichian sense) of his mapping of
> > 13-limit ratios to the 12-tET scale. I say "apparent" because
> > Schoenberg had absolute pitch and certainly would have known,
> > had he heard them, that the 7th, 11th and 13th harmonics were
> > *far* off from their supposed 12-tET representatives. But most
> > likely, he never did hear them, and his argument would thus
> > be based entirely on theoretical considerations. He admitted to
> > being less than conversant in the mathematics of tuning, so
> > he probably never did realize how inaccurate his ideas were.
>

Schönberg was a cello player! Very likely he knew the trick of the
overtone glissandos (? Where can I find the rules for this dumb
plural -oes?) and had heard "all" those partials - without any
mathematics.

I never tried it (somebody with a knack for it please do), but I
believe that in his serial music, the series can to advantage be
interpreted as a sequence of simple intervals. You won't necessarily
get consonant verticalities, but you would get different tunings for
each piece as implied by the interval sequence of the series. In
other words, I don't believe he conceived of his series in terms of
invariant transpositions, but melodically (transposed motives in his
rows being, as far as I recall, fifths apart).

klaus

--- In tuning@y..., klaus schmirler <KSchmir@z...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21955.html#21955

> Schönberg was a cello player! Very likely he knew the trick of
> the overtone glissandos (? Where can I find the rules for this
> dumb plural -oes?) and had heard "all" those partials - without
> any mathematics.

Very good point, Klaus! I've emphasized before the paradox
of Schoenberg's strong adherence to 12-EDO in light of the
fact that as a performer he was primarily a player of fretless
string instruments.

BTW, the best well-known example of "overtone glissando" I can
think of appears in the introduction to Stravinsky's _Firebird
Suite_, where the entire string section uses it to create a
really weird (for 1910) sound.

As for English spelling rules: forget it. There are none.
One of the unfortunate circumstances for those who did not
grow up learning it as a native language (and very often
even for those who did!).

>
> I never tried it (somebody with a knack for it please do), but I
> believe that in his serial music, the series can to advantage be
> interpreted as a sequence of simple intervals. You won't necessarily
> get consonant verticalities, but you would get different tunings for
> each piece as implied by the interval sequence of the series. In
> other words, I don't believe he conceived of his series in terms of
> invariant transpositions, but melodically (transposed motives in his
> rows being, as far as I recall, fifths apart).

Klaus, if you missed it, you would probably be very interested
in my posts about Ben Johnston's simultaneous use of both
just-intonation *and* serialism. Search the archives... I've
written about it quite often, and just very recently too.
The best example is his _6th Quartet_.

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