Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning I was hoping...

> From: "D.Stearns" <STEARNS@CAPECOD.NET>
> Subject: Re: miracle music
>
> Paul,
>
> I'm tired of banging my head against this.

I had hoped that this discussion wouldn't turn brutal
because there were some interesting points here which
I felt like commenting on.

>
> <<Anyway, assuming you're right that "the closest things to it are
> probably to be found in the diehard JI camp", does that mean that this
> "camp" has an exclusive right to dictate the methods that can be used
> to achieve "it"? That's a rather bizarre view of the world, I'd say.>>
>

This was in reply to comments that implied that most current
composers (Maneri was referred to) were using microtonality
to further emancipate dissonance, rather than to find greater
consonance. The exception Dan seemed to see were the JI camp
and Paul seemed to take some umbrage(?) at this suggestion.

I think if we look at the whole of music being made today, much
of it is still staying in note vocabularies that may be referred
to as consonant or concordant. Although much of it is tonal,
I think some of the more 'accepted' pieces of twentieth century
classical music (which are not tonal) still recognize that
concordant note relations have a very natural way of allowing
one to control the tension and release in a piece of music in
a way that 'normal' listeners can relate to. (I'm hearing 'non
dissonant non-tonal and'or polytonal' compositions in my
head by the likes of Shostakovitch, Prokofiev, Otto Luening,
George Rochberg, Fritz Perl...) Even music that doesn't use
a lot of tension and release (minimalism) may use a lot of
those relationships (here I mainly think of Steve Reich who
is my favorite from this school, hammering away at big juicy
'jazz chords').

Perhaps in the microtonal world one could pose "except for the
JI camp, microtonality is being used to find new dissonances".
Those with the Perspectives microtonal issues from 1994
will find Bill Shchoadstatt (Dinosaur Music) comments which
are exactly along these lines (and making a jab at 'tiresome
cranks spouting small integer ratios').

From things on this list it seems that both Harry Partch and
Arnold Schoenberg felt they were liberating SLIGHTLY higher
harmonics to participate in the world of concordance where
only the fifth harmonic and below had been allowed.

I guess the point is that howver exceptional M is as
a structure, it is (as far as I can gather) for those who
want to work along the path that is suggested above.

Whether enough talented people are on that path or not
to make a difference is another thing, but I think that
there are many on this list who are (though they may
use completely different Swiss-Army knives than MIRACLE,
despite its benefits).

Bob Valentine

--- In tuning@y..., Robert C Valentine <BVAL@I...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_22994.html#22994

> From things on this list it seems that both Harry Partch and
> Arnold Schoenberg felt they were liberating SLIGHTLY higher
> harmonics to participate in the world of concordance where
> only the fifth harmonic and below had been allowed.

I have a paper I wrote way back in 1988 that's never been
published (online or off) that I really should turn into
a webpage. It's called "Similarities between Partch and
Schoenberg as Originators of New Harmonic Principles".
Indeed, there were many similarities (as well as the
very obvious differences).

(I've never published it because I think that in comparison
to my later writing it's rather crude... but still, I think
there's some valuable information in it.)

I was surprised to see that this was pointed out by others
after I wrote my paper. I think one author who did was
Bob Gilmore in his analysis of Partch's _Li-Po Lyrics_
which appeared in _Perspectives of New Music_.

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

I was hoping...

🔗Robert C Valentine <BVAL@IIL.INTEL.COM>

🔗monz <joemonz@yahoo.com>

🔗Dave Keenan <D.KEENAN@UQ.NET.AU>