why use "octave"

We're all so brainwashed with old habits. Who can disagree? I think it's
unbelievable that we're all going around talking about “octaves” all the
time. Why use this term at all? It's inconsistent with every view of music
that refers to something other than some pattern of 8 subtended by 2:1.
Heck, even an “octave” of 12 parts is totally illogical. Consult the New
Harvard dictionary of music and we see that an “octave” is defined as a
ratio of frequencies which is a double, i.e., 2:1. Duh. It says absolutely
nothing about the “oct” being of any significance. 8 what? What does 8
have to do it? Nothing. Ok, 8 is twice 4, and 8 feet strings and pipes are
the “written = sounding” pitches on organs and pianos, etc. Ok, consult New
Groves and get a better definition. Ok, I know, Greek theory... who is
talking about Greek theory when they say “72 equal divisions of an octave”?
So okay, use it in Greek theory. Use it in historical music theory where
everone else was talking about “octaves.” But let’s face it: “octave” is a
meaningless term in 21st century microtonality.* Call it 2. It's 2. Even
“regular” musicians might like it. A flute overblows at 2. A clarinet
overblows at 3. How hard is that? Makes a lot more sense than an "octave"
and a "twelfth" and it puts the cognition in the right place. 8 and 12 have
nothing to do with it. 2 and 3 do.

...*but there's another silly term: “microtonality”. Why don't we just say
“music” That's all it is ... it's all music... but that's another rant e
ntirely.

shalom,
Aaron

In a message dated 5/18/01 2:15:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
Pitchcolor@aol.com writes:

> ...*but there's another silly term: “microtonality”. Why don't we just
> say
> “music” That's all it is ... it's all music... but that's another
> rant e
> ntirely.
>
>

I've been saying this for years. Only it is a difficult concept for people
to accept...maybe it's too lonely a position for some to take. People have
to accept the changing meanings of words, like with the word octave.

Since the octave hasn't had only 7 different notes (?) for ages now, but has
12 or more on ALL conventional instrument, I'd just assume retaining the term
"octave" for better conveyance of meaning.

The octave may be the one of or "the" only universal in music. I find that
even the purposeful lengthening or shortening of the octave in Indonesia or
elsewhere, is done with full awareness of the interval itself. Shouldn't 12
have become a "thirtave?"

Johnny Reinhard

Johnny Reinhard

> ...*but there's another silly term: sn't had only 7 different
> notes (?) for ages now, but has 12 or more on ALL conventional
> instrument, I'd just assume retaining the term "octave" for
> better conveyance of meaning.

> The octave may be the one of or "the" only universal in music.
> I find that even the purposeful lengthening or shortening of the
> octave in Indonesia or elsewhere, is done with full awareness of
> the interval itself. Shouldn't 12 have become a "thirtave?"

> Johnny Reinhard

Ah geez Johnny you make a good point.

And just when I was ready to jump on the bandwagon
carrying the octave to town to be burned at the stake.

If we want to be intellectually honest with ourselves,
and get rid of octave because the 8 connotation is
now irrilevant in our minds, then we MUST remain
consistant and BANISH these terms AS WELL:

minor second
major second
minor third
major third
perfect fourth
perfect fifth
minor sixth
major sixth
minor seventh
major seventh
eighth or octave
ninth
tenth
eleventh
twelfth
etc.

See, we _could_ call the octave
the eighth so that it would all be in
english.

But then what?

Are we really ready to stop using all of
this bin descriptors just because they
have archaic numerical implications?

- Jeff