Re: Paul/Brett

[Paul Erlich/Brett Barbaro wrote:]
> As for me, I think the ideal tuning for diatonic triadic music would
> be a compromise between adaptive JI and meantone, closer to adaptive
> JI (but not one based on 12-tET).

Fair enough. My reasons for centering on 12-tET have largely to do with
my desire to retrofit existing 12-tET pieces to adaptive JI without
worrying about the Pythagorean comma where flat meets sharp. If one is
composing new music, that approximation is not necessary or desirable.

> I would take all the "pains" you listed and add the "pain" of not
> having simultaneities in JI, which would have to be balanced
> against all the other pains.

That IS one of my "pains", the pain of not being tuned correctly:

[Me, td145:]
>> In my (as yet unwritten) leisure retuning software I intend to pay
>> more strict attention to retune motion, and to "drift" the average
>> tuning center as best suits the piece on the fly, attempting to
>> balance the pain of drift vs. the pain of retune motion (also vs.
>> pain of chords that for one reason or another can't be fully JI
>> tuned).

We are talking about the same thing, yes?

[Paul/Brett:]
> In addition, I think truly exact JI is painful due to potential
> frequency cancellations, but that's rarely a concern with current
> equipment (which rarely achieves truly exact JI anyway).

Well, I've never experienced the "pain" of having a chord too well
tuned! I do believe that it is mathematically possible to get a
phase-lock that cancels part of the sound, and if that DID happen, I
agree that a slight deviation from absolutely perfect JI should be
introduced, to make the phases of the components shift about slowly.

By the way, am I mis-remembering, or did Paul Erlich post a reply to
Brett Barbaro a few digests ago? This is getting too circular!

JdL

I wrote,

>> I would take all the "pains" you listed and add the "pain" of not
>> having simultaneities in JI, which would have to be balanced
>> against all the other pains.

John A. deLaubenfels wrote,

>That IS one of my "pains", the pain of not being tuned correctly:

OK, so ideally you would tune the chords in the I-vi-ii-V-I progression
close to just, but not quite, since the pain of not being tuned correctly is
being balanced against the pain of retune motion?

>By the way, am I mis-remembering, or did Paul Erlich post a reply to
>Brett Barbaro a few digests ago?

No way! (I may have been quoting myself, but I certainly wouldn't reply to
myself!)

[Paul Erlich/Brett Barbaro wrote:]
> OK, so ideally you would tune the chords in the I-vi-ii-V-I
> progression close to just, but not quite, since the pain of not being
> tuned correctly is being balanced against the pain of retune motion?

In the strict application of the "pains" as I have formulated them, the
answer is yes. What falls out is an exponential decay toward perfect
JI. It gets very close in a fraction of a second with a reasonable set
of coefficients, so the difference between that "never quite" motion and
a linear transition to perfect JI is probably academic rather than
audible. As we have already discussed, the last tiny bit (1 or 2 cents,
say) is of little significance to the ear, and may even be beneficial.

What IS significant is the decision of whether to retune a fast passage
or let it go in a consistent tuning that is not ideally suited to the
chords in passing. That decision depends, of course, on the details of
the sequence being considered, and on the tastes of a particular ear.
By providing adjustable coefficients (for example, by bumping the pain
of retune motion to infinite, one forces a fixed tuning of some sort,
at least while notes are sounding), I hope to write a leisure retune
program that will accommodate many tastes.

JdL

>> Always interested in *your* feedback, Paul/Brett.
>
> Stop that! My name is Paul, and you met Brett yourself.

Aw, I was just having some fun. No problem.
I think the 'alias' joke has run its course anyway.

Joseph L. Monzo....................monz@juno.com
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/homepage.html
|"...I had broken thru the lattice barrier..."|
| - Erv Wilson |
--------------------------------------------------

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]