Study no. 1 in 22 tet - new score.

At last I've managed to upload a score. Here are the three pages.
http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/image5.gif
http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/image6.gif
http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/image7.gif
This is a simple study for 22 tet guitar in tablature. I'll score it out
in standard notation soon after I recover from the euphoria of this
technological success. The piece is an exploration of the Spanish or
Latin idiom and makes use of the inflections that 22 tet offers in that
idiom.

Best Wishes.

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:

> At last I've managed to upload a score. Here are the three pages.
> http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/image5.gif
> http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/image6.gif
> http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/image7.gif
> This is a simple study for 22 tet guitar in tablature. I'll score
it out
> in standard notation soon after I recover from the euphoria of this
> technological success. The piece is an exploration of the Spanish or
> Latin idiom and makes use of the inflections that 22 tet offers in
that
> idiom.
>
> Best Wishes.

Thanks so much Alison! I'll try playing these on my 22-tET electric
guitar (with the 7th string ignored). One problem with the scores is
that you are using standard notation to specify the open string
tunings, but standard notation doesn't fit well with 22-tET. For
example, should D-F# be 7 frets or 8 frets? Perhaps you should put in
a little more detail on the open string tuning, to avoid ambiguity.

Paul Erlich wrote:

>
>
> Thanks so much Alison! I'll try playing these on my 22-tET electric
> guitar (with the 7th string ignored). One problem with the scores is
> that you are using standard notation to specify the open string
> tunings, but standard notation doesn't fit well with 22-tET. For
> example, should D-F# be 7 frets or 8 frets? Perhaps you should put in
> a little more detail on the open string tuning, to avoid ambiguity.

Yes, this was written a while ago when I was still prone to thinking in terms of 12 tet. D-F# is
at 7 frets. Please see the next posting for another score. I'm afraid it's feast or famine chez
moi.

Regards

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:

> Yes, this was written a while ago when I was still prone to
thinking in terms of 12 tet. D-F# is
> at 7 frets.

Oof -- then one of the fourths or octaves in the "open chord" will be
out of tune by 1/22 octave. Which one?

Paul Erlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
>
> > Yes, this was written a while ago when I was still prone to
> thinking in terms of 12 tet. is
> > at 7 frets.
>
> Oof -- then one of the fourths or octaves in the "open chord" will be
> out of tune by 1/22 octave. Which one?

Good point - I have a compromise between that and the pure quartal chord in the upper three
strings. Fretting D-F# at 8 is rather tasty though.

Regards

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
>
> Good point - I have a compromise between that and the pure quartal
chord in the upper three
> strings.

So it's not actually in 22-tET? Can you explain what the tuning
actually is?

> Fretting D-F# at 8 is rather tasty though.

What do you mean, "fretting D-F# at 8"?

On 6/8/01 6:22 PM, "Paul Erlich" <paul@stretch-music.com> wrote:

>> Fretting D-F# at 8 is rather tasty though.
>
> What do you mean, "fretting D-F# at 8"?

Playing the F# at the 8th fret
of the D string instead of at the 7th?

Paul Erlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> >
> > Good point - I have a compromise between that and the pure quartal
> chord in the upper three
> > strings.
>
> So it's not actually in 22-tET? Can you explain what the tuning
> actually is?

What on earth are you talking about? Of course it's in 22 tet. There are 22 frets to the octave on
the guitar. You yourself gave me the fret distances which the luthier checked. I thoink we're
talking about scordatura here rather than tuning.

Let's retrace the thread again. You asked if I tuned the F# to the 7th or the 8th fret of the D
string. I said the 7th which gives a reasonable 4:5 D-F#. The B is tuned as a 22 tet 4:3 with F#
and the E similarly to the B. Thus a nice quartal chord on the upper three strings. But as you
pointed out this puts the B string out by 1/22 of an octave. Nonetheless to MY ears that doesn't
affect the mood of the piece. I can't speak for others though and wouldn't presume to.

> > Fretting D-F# at 8 is rather tasty though.
>
> What do you mean, "fretting D-F# at 8"?

You implied that the D-F# could be tuned to the 8th fret of the D string, making the F# a 22 tet
supermajor third. This makes the F# somewhat exotic in relation to the D string but keeps the B
and E strings good with the low E. And that is about all I can say in answer to your question.

Best Wishes.

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
>
>
> Paul Erlich wrote:
>
> > --- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Good point - I have a compromise between that and the pure quartal
> > chord in the upper three
> > > strings.
> >
> > So it's not actually in 22-tET? Can you explain what the tuning
> > actually is?
>
> What on earth are you talking about?

I'm just asking you a question, Alison!

> Of course it's in 22 tet. There are 22 frets to the octave on
> the guitar.

But you can still tune the open strings to something other than a subset of 22-tET, if you want to.

> You yourself gave me the fret distances which the luthier checked. I thoink we're
> talking about scordatura here rather than tuning.

That depends on the above.

> Let's retrace the thread again. You asked if I tuned the F# to the 7th or the 8th fret of the D
> string. I said the 7th which gives a reasonable 4:5 D-F#. The B is tuned as a 22 tet 4:3 with F#
> and the E similarly to the B.

Well, that I didn't know. You didn't tell me that before. Which is why I asked! Jon Catler uses a
27:20 between his G string and his D string. So this wasn't obvious.

> Thus a nice quartal chord on the upper three strings. But as you
> pointed out this puts the B string out by 1/22 of an octave.

Out relative to what? Just tell me how the rest of the strings are tuned, and I can attempt to play
the piece. That's all I wanted to know!

Nonetheless to MY ears that doesn't
> affect the mood of the piece. I can't speak for others though and wouldn't presume to.
>
> > > Fretting D-F# at 8 is rather tasty though.
> >
> > What do you mean, "fretting D-F# at 8"?
>
> You implied that the D-F# could be tuned to the 8th fret of the D string, making the F# a 22 tet
> supermajor third. This makes the F# somewhat exotic in relation to the D string but keeps the
B
> and E strings good with the low E. And that is about all I can say in answer to your question.

Well, I'm glad you did. Because now I think I know how the guitar is to be tuned in your piece.
You have the following 22-tET intervals between open strings: 9-9-7-9-9. Yes? That's all I was
asking! Sorry if it appeared otherwise -- but if you look over the above again, you can see that I
wanted nothing more than to be informed as to what the open string tuning for the piece was to
be. That's all!

On 6/9/01 10:57 AM, "Alison Monteith" <alison.monteith3@which.net> wrote:

(first)
> Let's retrace the thread again. You asked if I tuned the F# to the 7th or the
> 8th fret of the D string. I said the 7th which gives a reasonable 4:5 D-F#.
> The B is tuned as a 22 tet 4:3 with F# and the E similarly to the B. Thus a
> nice quartal chord on the upper three strings.

Okay.

You tune to E - A - D - F# - B - E, right...

You tune your D to F# 7 notes apart,
the F# to B, 9 notes (the 22-tET 4:3)
and also the B to E, 9 notes, right...

From this paragraph, so far we have:

Tuning 1. E (?) A (?) D (7/22) F# (9/22) B (9/22) E

(later)
> You implied that the D-F# could be tuned to the 8th fret of the D string,
> making the F# a 22 tet supermajor third. This makes the F# somewhat exotic in
> relation to the D string but keeps the B and E strings good with the low E.

Tuning 2. E (?) A (?) D (8/22) F# (9/22) B (9/22) E

By keeping the B and E strings "good" with the low E,
you mean the E strings are two octaves apart, right.

<------------- two octaves (44/22) ------------->
| |

Tuning 2. E (?) A (?) D (8/22) F# (9/22) B (9/22) E

| |
<--- 18/22 --->

You attribute this "keeping good" with only the second tuning.
You sort of imply the first tuning doesn't allow this,
which would mean you maybe tune
the E and A down in 4:3 intervals from the D,
as that would throw the low E off from the B and high E strings.

Tuning 4:3 - 4:3 - 5:4 - 4:3 - 4:3,
or 9/22 - 9/22 - 7/22 - 9/22 - 9/22,
would make 43/22 total, 1 note short of two octaves.
Your E's wouldn't be tuned two octaves apart in this case.

I think what's confusing is whether or not
you tune the low and high E's together.
If you do, this would make your E to D jump 19/22.
Which means either your E to A, or A to D would be off.
If you tune your E's 2 octaves apart,
then one of these would be 9/22 and the other 10/22.

<------------ two octaves? (44/22) ------------->
<-------- two octaves minus one? (43/22) ------->
| |

Tuning 1. E (?) A (?) D (7/22) F# (9/22) B (9/22) E

| |
<-- 18/22 ? -->
<-- 19/22 ? -->

So I think the leftover question is,
how do you tune your lowest two strings?

* Do you tune your high and low E strings together?
And if so, where's the A?

or

* Do you tune your A down 4:3 from D
and your E 4:3 down from A,
throwing your E's off?

E (?) A (?) D

I was just illustrating my sense of the confusion here.
All you need do I think is fill in those two blanks there.

Marc

Paul Erlich wrote:

>
> Because now I think I know how the guitar is to be tuned in your piece.
> You have the following 22-tET intervals between open strings: 9-9-7-9-9. Yes? That's all I was
> asking! Sorry if it appeared otherwise -- but if you look over the above again, you can see that I
> wanted nothing more than to be informed as to what the open string tuning for the piece was to
> be. That's all!

Ooops - misunderstandings and apologies from me. I hope I can clear this up now. Yes, 9-9-7-9-9
between strings, but I will experiment a bit more with 9-9-8-9-9 on your suggestion.

I think that this sort of numbering (9-9-8-9-9) would be the clearest way to describe tunings in
future because letter names as we have seen can be misinterpreted and ratios could be interpreted as
either pure or tempered leading to further misunderstanding. As for the 27/20 between G and D, I'd
have to sit down and figure out the implications of that. I'll be putting up some sound clips soon of
the tetrachordal explorations, and , in time, the scores. Oh and many thanks for inspiring me to have
a guitar refretted to 22 in the first place. I've rarely looked back.

Best Wishes.

"Orphon Soul, Inc." wrote:

> On 6/9/01 10:57 AM, "Alison Monteith" <alison.monteith3@which.net> wrote:
>
> (first)
> > Let's retrace the thread again. You asked if I tuned the F# to the 7th or the
> > 8th fret of the D string. I said the 7th which gives a reasonable 4:5 D-F#.
> > The B is tuned as a 22 tet 4:3 with F# and the E similarly to the B. Thus a
> > nice quartal chord on the upper three strings.
>
> Okay.
>
> You tune to E - A - D - F# - B - E, right...
>
> You tune your D to F# 7 notes apart,
> the F# to B, 9 notes (the 22-tET 4:3)
> and also the B to E, 9 notes, right...

Yes

>
> So I think the leftover question is,
> how do you tune your lowest two strings?
>
> * Do you tune your high and low E strings together?
> And if so, where's the A?

No

> or
>
> * Do you tune your A down 4:3 from D
> and your E 4:3 down from A,
> throwing your E's off?

Yes

> E (?) A (?) D

Blanks filled in, giving E (9) A (9) D

> I was just illustrating my sense of the confusion here.
> All you need do I think is fill in those two blanks there

> Marc

I hope this clears up the confusion. Please see my reply to Paul for further clarification.

Best Wishes.

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:

> Ooops - misunderstandings and apologies from me. I hope I can clear this up now. Yes, 9-9-7-9-9
> between strings, but I will experiment a bit more with 9-9-8-9-9 on your suggestion.

That wasn't a suggestion I was making. But it might be worth trying. I tune my 22-tET
guitar 9-9-9-8-9 (ignoring the extra "low B" string I have), since that involves a set of
very simple and quickly-learned adjustments relative to the way I understand the
standard-tuned 12-tET guitar. For example, did you see my post a while back on
decatonic fingerings? They're very easy if you know your pentatonic fingerings on the
standard-tuned 12-tET guitar. Also the "Pythagorean" diatonic scales, such as the one
you're using in your other piece (1-4-4-4-1-4-4, correct?) are very easy to finger all over
the neck if you know how to play 12-tET diatonics fluently on the standard-tuned 12-tET
guitar. If, however, you're a lute player, then 9-9-8-9-9 may make more sense.

> Oh and many thanks for inspiring me to have
> a guitar refretted to 22 in the first place. I've rarely looked back.

You're very welcome. I'm having fun with the 31-tET guitar now but I'm having trouble
finding anything really "unique" and musically convincing to do with it . . . I'll just keep
practicing diatonic triadic stuff on it for now since it sounds so sweet . . . half-step 3,
whole step 5, half step 3, whole step 5 . . .

Paul Erlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
>
> > Ooops - misunderstandings and apologies from me. I hope I can clear this up now. Yes, 9-9-7-9-9
> > between strings, but I will experiment a bit more with 9-9-8-9-9 on your suggestion.
>
> That wasn't a suggestion I was making. But it might be worth trying. I tune my 22-tET
> guitar 9-9-9-8-9 (ignoring the extra "low B" string I have), since that involves a set of
> very simple and quickly-learned adjustments relative to the way I understand the
> standard-tuned 12-tET guitar. For example, did you see my post a while back on
> decatonic fingerings? They're very easy if you know your pentatonic fingerings on the
> standard-tuned 12-tET guitar. Also the "Pythagorean" diatonic scales, such as the one
> you're using in your other piece (1-4-4-4-1-4-4, correct?) are very easy to finger all over
> the neck if you know how to play 12-tET diatonics fluently on the standard-tuned 12-tET
> guitar. If, however, you're a lute player, then 9-9-8-9-9 may make more sense.
>
> > Oh and many thanks for inspiring me to have
> > a guitar refretted to 22 in the first place. I've rarely looked back.
>
> You're very welcome. I'm having fun with the 31-tET guitar now but I'm having trouble
> finding anything really "unique" and musically convincing to do with it . . . I'll just keep
> practicing diatonic triadic stuff on it for now since it sounds so sweet . . . half-step 3,
> whole step 5, half step 3, whole step 5 . . .

I did the Jimi thing with my 22 tet guitar. Took it to the bathroom, played it in bed, at the TV and
so on. Then I caught some motifs, ostinatos and progressions and was at least able to make something
I could call my own music. I remember reading that Carlos Santana took about an hour's practice to
get rid of the Hendrix, Clapton and Benson blues influences before he could do his own thing. What I
like about 22 is that it's fresh and I haven't much to refer back to. I'm not sure but perhaps the
diatonic and good triadic layout of 31 makes it that much harder to find original riffs and changes.
I'd love to try 31 one day though. Just a few thoughts.

Best Wishes.