Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Maneri symbols in SCORE

So I'm doing nuttin', huh??

Well I did do ONE thing... I managed to get Joe Maneri's 72-tET
symbols into the SCORE notation system.

Originally I was trying to use the Ted Mook collection, but those
Postscript fonts were not working with SCORE.

I don't know how many people are still using SCORE on this list... I
would wager I'm the only person. People are probably using FINALE or
even SIBELIUS..

However, the major publishers in New York STILL use score and since
one of my good friends is a maverick with it (no questions possibly
unanswered) I don't plan on abandoning it just yet.

In any case, since the Mook symbols didn't work I was able to use the
utility called DRAW in the SCORE program to make my OWN Maneri
symbols...

I have some "qualms" about some of them. For instance, I'm not
particularly fond of his 1/4 tone symbols... they look a little like
some kind of square root signs. Besides, there are already
established DEFAULT quarter-tone symbols... or at least it seems to
ME there are... (you know, the little sharp with only one crossline,
etc...)

But, regardless, since the Maneri symbols are being taught and
practiced, it would probably be in my best interest to use them AS
IS...

If anyone uses SCORE and would like these symbols, I will send you
the "DRAW" file so you won't have to take the time to draw them
yourself.

It's the first time I ever used that utility... and it is a
little "scary" the way they present it, but it turned out to not be
as difficult as I originally suspected, once I took the "plunge..."

__________ ________ ________
Joseph Pehrson

🔗monz <joemonz@yahoo.com>

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

/tuning/topicId_23301.html#23301

> Well I did do ONE thing... I managed to get Joe Maneri's
> 72-tET symbols into the SCORE notation system.
>
> ..
>
> I have some "qualms" about some of them. For instance, I'm
> not particularly fond of his 1/4 tone symbols... they look
> a little like some kind of square root signs. Besides,
> there are already established DEFAULT quarter-tone symbols...
> or at least it seems to ME there are... (you know, the little
> sharp with only one crossline, etc...)
>
> But, regardless, since the Maneri symbols are being taught
> and practiced, it would probably be in my best interest to
> use them AS IS...

Joe, *you yourself* wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21636.html#21776

> You know, I wish Maneri himself had used ASCII symbols
> rather than the ink symbols he uses in his book. Has this
> been discussed before (most things have!)? It seems it
> would have been much more applicable in the "computer age..."
> and now it's kind of late, since you have all these
> instrumentalists in Boston knowing the other symbols... (??)

To which I wholeheartedly agreed:

/tuning/topicId_21636.html#21802

> Hey, since Maneri is putting out a new version of his
> book, maybe he can be convinced to change the notation
> to this version before publishing it? Someone care to
> pass it along to him? Or give me his email address?

So Joe, why don't *you* take a step in this direction and
create a SCORE font for the ASCII 72-EDO symbols and use
those instead?! That gets my vote. Why back down now,
when you have an opportunity to do something influential?

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

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗monz <joemonz@yahoo.com>

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

/tuning/topicId_23301.html#23316

> Hi Monz!
>
> Your point is well taken, but the ASCII symbols DO NOT work for
> conventional notation.
>
> Look at the "<"
>
> It looks like an "accent" mark.
>
> Same with the "^" (bowings or martellato)
>
> They don't work!
>
> __________ _________ _______
> Joseph Pehrson

OK... good points. But I've used the ASCII symbols to good
effect in some of my own handwritten scores... never tried
it in Finale (which is my notation software).

Seems to me that the placement of these symbols before
the note-head would not engender any confusion with
phrasing marks.

But if so, then there's still a 72-EDO that IMO is better
than the Boston notation. It uses the same up and down
"half-arrows" for the 1/6-tones as the Boston notation
instead of < and >, and uses regular up and down arrows
for the 1/4-tones instead of ^ and v. It retains + and -
for the 1/12-tones. These are unique symbols, so there's
no confusion with any other markings.

This in fact was the 72-EDO notation I devised before
making the ASCII adaptation, and was itself an adaptation
of Herf's, with maybe a little nod to the Bostonians.

Seems like it was fairly easy for you to create that font...
try it with this system. I think you'll like it.

And seriously, can someone who's in contact with Maneri
present these ideas to him? He may be willing to adopt
them in the new edition of his book if he can be convinced
that they're better.

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

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

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

/tuning/topicId_23301.html#23325

> >
> > They don't work!
> >
> > __________ _________ _______
> > Joseph Pehrson
>
>
> OK... good points. But I've used the ASCII symbols to good
> effect in some of my own handwritten scores... never tried
> it in Finale (which is my notation software).
>
> Seems to me that the placement of these symbols before
> the note-head would not engender any confusion with
> phrasing marks.
>

Thank you, Joe, for continuing this discussion, which is an important
one for me.

I thought about that, too, but I'm still unconvinced that in
a "regular" score those ascii characters would not be mistaken for
either accent marks *or* bowing marks...

> But if so, then there's still a 72-EDO that IMO is better
> than the Boston notation. It uses the same up and down
> "half-arrows" for the 1/6-tones as the Boston notation
> instead of < and >, and uses regular up and down arrows
> for the 1/4-tones instead of ^ and v. It retains + and -
> for the 1/12-tones. These are unique symbols, so there's
> no confusion with any other markings.
>

I like this better than the current Maneri notation.

However the "quandry" is this:

1) How many performers have been practicing the arrows as 1/12
tones?? If they have, and I ASSUME they have, it's going to cause
confusion to have them suddenly convert the arrows to the quarter
tones! It would NEVER be good to use the SAME symbols in a different
way if one were to transfer notations. What performance confusion
could result, particularly in fast sight-reading!

It would be better to go with an entirely different symbol for the
quarter tones. What *I* would personally advocate would be the
REGULAR quarter tone symbols that have become somewhat "traditional"
by now... the little "half" sharp for a quartertone sharp and the
little "backwards flat" for the quartertone flat. (As long as THAT
wouldn't get confused with the "half arrow.") SCORE has these as
quartertone "defaults" in the software, WITHOUT any "drawing..."

I *do* like the plusses and minuses for the 1/12 tones. I suppose
the only "drawback" to that is that they may not be too OBVIOUS on
quick reading. Somebody else mentioned this "legibility" problem of
the plusses and minuses, but I can't remember who it was...
The "arrows" *do* stand out more...

2) The biggest question is how "ingrained" the notation is ALREADY in
the Boston school. By the look of Maneri's notation book, which I
have in front of me (thanks for sending it!) it seems as though there
has been a CONSIDERABLE amount of ear and notation training ALREADY
taken place!

So, in other words, maybe we're a little "stuck" with this. Maybe
it's a little like the QWERTY keyboard at present. Not the best, but
would you like to type quickly on ANOTHER one?? Not me, if you
please...

So, the question of TRAINING and USAGE is a pertinent one here. I
guess I might be prone to err on the conservative side and try to use
what is ALREADY the "lingua franca" in this, IF it already is....

3) Well, and the third is a simple fact... the fact that I was ABLE
to get the crazy Maneri quartertones in the computer... looking
like "square root" signs!

That was a challenge to do and, naturally, I want to use them now
that I did that!!!

So, in summary, I believe the assessment should be how INGRAINED the
Boston notation ALREADY is in Boston or anyplace else. How about in
Ezra Sims scores?? Does he always use the Maneri?? It looks like it
from the Ted Mook page...

Since Sims is one of our MOST imporant American microtonal composers,
this is also an important question... since so many of his scores
have circulated and have been performed...

These are important questions to answer...

> This in fact was the 72-EDO notation I devised before
> making the ASCII adaptation, and was itself an adaptation
> of Herf's, with maybe a little nod to the Bostonians.
>
> Seems like it was fairly easy for you to create that font...
> try it with this system. I think you'll like it.
>

Well, Monz, there would be nothing to that. I would simply use the
arrows for 1/4 tones rather than 1/12 tones and plusses and minuses
are in just about EVERY font. Not a problem.

However, I think you can see the reservations I have mentioned above
about changing the system.

Probably it is best to err on the side of "conservatism" and NOT to
change it if it can be implemented. Since I finally figured out how
to do it on my computer, I believe I will go with the existing
notation for now... at least on this piece.

Maybe later I can change... if I want to..

> And seriously, can someone who's in contact with Maneri
> present these ideas to him? He may be willing to adopt
> them in the new edition of his book if he can be convinced
> that they're better.
>

Now this is a guess... just a guess... but I bet that Maneri isn't
going to change. I don't know, and I don't know him, so I can't find
out, but it seems that the amount of work and training that has
already gone into this system means that he's not going to want to
give a different set of symbols to his students. You can see from
the book how much training they ALREADY have!!!

I think we're STUCK with it... square root signs and all. CERTAINLY
Maneri is NOT going to be willing to use the upwards arrows for 1/4
tones instead of the accustomed 1/12 tones at this time.

That one I could almost bet money on!!!

Thanks for the commentary!!!!!!!!!

Joe

_________ _______ _______ _____
Joseph Pehrson

🔗paul@stretch-music.com

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

--- In tuning@y..., paul@s... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_23301.html#23336

> Hi Folks . . . well, Boston microtonalists, from New England
Conservatory and the Boston
> Microtonal Society, all know the Sims/Maneri notation. They're not
particularly fond of the "square
> root sign", which is a very bizarre sign if you ask me, but they
pretty much feel comfortable with
> the notation now that they've gone through the ear-training and
everything.
>
> I'll see if I can get Steven Lantner to come onto this list and
make further comments.

Thanks Paul, for reinforcing my assessment. Monz is right
about "improvements," but I fear it is too late... many things
happen this way...

I'm just glad I could get these "weird" symbols into my computer!

At any rate, it would be good to get other people's opinions before
re-inventing an established notation.

I assume that Steven Lantner is connected with the Boston Microtonal
Society.... (??)

Thanks!

__________ ______ _____
Joseph Pehrson

🔗paul@stretch-music.com

🔗monz <joemonz@yahoo.com>

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

/tuning/topicId_23301.html#23341

> Thanks Paul, for reinforcing my assessment. Monz is right
> about "improvements," but I fear it is too late... many
> things happen this way...

Joe, I'm sorry but I firmly believe that it's only
"too late" if those who have a chance to change things
buckle under instead and *decide* that it's too late.

As long as you *believe* a bad situation can be made better,
and you are willing to make the effort, it can happen.

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

/tuning/topicId_23301.html#23335

> 1) How many performers have been practicing the arrows as
> 1/12 tones?? If they have, and I ASSUME they have, it's
> going to cause confusion to have them suddenly convert the
> arrows to the quarter tones! It would NEVER be good to use
> the SAME symbols in a different way if one were to transfer
> notations. What performance confusion could result,
> particularly in fast sight-reading!

Yeah, well... what exactly is a "C#", anyway?
Do you see my point?

> 2) The biggest question is how "ingrained" the notation is
> ALREADY in the Boston school. By the look of Maneri's
> notation book, which I have in front of me (thanks for
> sending it!) it seems as though there has been a CONSIDERABLE
> amount of ear and notation training ALREADY taken place!
>
> So, in other words, maybe we're a little "stuck" with this.
> Maybe it's a little like the QWERTY keyboard at present.
> Not the best, but would you like to type quickly on ANOTHER
> one?? Not me, if you please...
>
> So, the question of TRAINING and USAGE is a pertinent one here.
> I guess I might be prone to err on the conservative side and
> try to use what is ALREADY the "lingua franca" in this, IF it
> already is....

Your points here are all good.

But have you ever tried to type on a Dvorak keyboard? (For
those who don't know: it's a computer keyboard with a different
arrangement of letters. See
<http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/layout.html>.)

I found it difficult to pick my one thru it one letter at a
time, but when someone familiar with it got on it, he whizzed
thru it just like the way I type on a QWERTY. It all depends
on what you've gotten accustomed to.

All of Europe used to use the confusing measuring systems
that we still cling to here in the US, until the French
revolutionaries decided that the metric system was the only
way to go. Of course it was a bit of an upheaval at first,
but a couple of centuries down the road, *we're* the anomaly
and the rest of the world looks on and wonders why.

> So, in summary, I believe the assessment should be how
> INGRAINED the Boston notation ALREADY is in Boston or
> anyplace else. How about in Ezra Sims scores?? Does he
> always use the Maneri?? It looks like it from the
> Ted Mook page...
>
> Since Sims is one of our MOST imporant American microtonal
> composers, this is also an important question... since so
> many of his scores have circulated and have been performed...
>
> These are important questions to answer...

Actually, Joe, Ezra Sims is the person who invented the "Boston"
72-EDO notation. Maneri picked it up from him.

Sims liked the "square-root" sign for quarter-tones because
in 24-EDO the ratio of a quarter-tone is mathematically the
square-root of the ratio of a semitone.

(2^(1/12))^(1/2) = 2^(1/24)

> > Seems like it was fairly easy for you to create that font...
> > try it with this system. I think you'll like it.
> >
>
> Well, Monz, there would be nothing to that. I would simply
> use the arrows for 1/4 tones rather than 1/12 tones and plusses
> and minuses are in just about EVERY font. Not a problem.

Well, then, if it's really that easy... try it out and show us
some example scores in both notations! We've been getting some
sound files here lately, and examples of new notations, but we
still don't have many actual scores. Bring 'em on!

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