mighty weird theory book

Well, I decided to "spring" for the Mathieu _Harmonic Experience_
theory book and it is, indeed, mighty strange...

If you know *me*, that is not necessarily a criticism...

I've never seen a harmony book that EVER had any references to
lattices or tuning...

I'm just saying that, in comparison to the other very _standard_
texts that I've had to ingest over the years, this is rather er..
ideosyncratic...

I think I'm going to enjoy it, though... when I get the time...

_______ ______ ________
Joseph Pehrson

In a message dated 6/22/2001 2:48:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
jpehrson@rcn.com writes:

> Well, I decided to "spring" for the Mathieu _Harmonic Experience_
> theory book and it is, indeed, mighty strange...
>
> If you know *me*, that is not necessarily a criticism...
>
> I've never seen a harmony book that EVER had any references to
> lattices or tuning...
>
> I'm just saying that, in comparison to the other very _standard_
> texts that I've had to ingest over the years, this is rather er..
> ideosyncratic...
>
> I think I'm going to enjoy it, though... when I get the time...
>
> _______ ______ ________
>

Just wait till you get to the strange names that start popping up. You'll see
what I mean prettty soon into the book. I found some of the names bizzare and
I didn't feel the names were important enough to warrant me going through
memorizing them. I am really not sure why he didn't use standard solfege, and
other reasonably standard names, for an american audience. Or at least names
more standard then the ones he chose. (I will leave the actual names in the
abstract cause I dont particularly feel like going through the book and
listing them)

Overall I thought the book was good and I did get something out of reading
it, but its definitely ideosyncratic, and I definitely have my criticisms.

One thing for sure though is that Mathieu is an interesting author and his
voice, text writing voice, has a real flare to it ... my own criticisms
aside.

Cheers,

Andy

--- In tuning@y..., JoJoBuBu@a... wrote:

> Just wait till you get to the strange names that start popping up.
You'll see
> what I mean prettty soon into the book. I found some of the names
bizzare and
> I didn't feel the names were important enough to warrant me going
through
> memorizing them. I am really not sure why he didn't use standard
solfege, and
> other reasonably standard names, for an american audience. Or at
least names
> more standard then the ones he chose.

Sir, the names he uses are the _Indian_ solfege names. Since
Americans are highly outnumbered by citizens of India, and since the
first part of the book concerns intonational practices which are far
closer to Indian than to American practice, I feel this was a good
choice on his part. The book is a good complement to a study of raga
with a teacher of Indian music, in which situation the Indian solfege
names would be memorized within the first few days anyway.

I feel that there are many much more substantive criticisms of the
book that can be made than this (as I've discussed in the past).

This was just my humble opinion and should be considered fairly
irrelevant -- nothing to start a flame war over.

In a message dated 6/22/2001 6:49:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
paul@stretch-music.com writes:

> Sir, the names he uses are the _Indian_ solfege names. Since
> Americans are highly outnumbered by citizens of India, and since the
> first part of the book concerns intonational practices which are far
> closer to Indian than to American practice, I feel this was a good
> choice on his part. The book is a good complement to a study of raga
> with a teacher of Indian music, in which situation the Indian solfege
> names would be memorized within the first few days anyway.
>
> I feel that there are many much more substantive criticisms of the
> book that can be made than this (as I've discussed in the past).
>
> This was just my humble opinion and should be considered fairly
>

Flame Flame Flame Flame. hehe(just kidding)

Surely we're outnumbered but that does not mean those words are not wierd to
americans. I do not think it was a good choice because it does not reflect
his target audience which is americans AND beginners. Microtones can be
difficult enough for a beginning student. Using standard terminology that
students already know is essential and reduces the learning curve by not
forcing unnecessary memorization. Besides I was talking about more than just
the solfege. There are plenty of other nonstandard terms he uses, some of
which are a little bizzarre. Using all of those terms I think could have
been, and should have been, avoided.

ALso the title of this message was "mighty weird theory book" not "what is
wrong with harmonic experience?" I was therefore not giving an in depth
criticism of the book but instead doing as the title indiciates and saying
what I considered "weird" about the book. And in this case I thought the
terminology, solfege and otherwise, was a rather weird choice for an american
audience. If I was giving a criticism I would have written a paper, not a
short few line post about one very small aspect of the book.

(not a flame)

/ \
/ \
/ \ (a poorly drawn flame - kind of) :)

Andy

American? English speaking!

I read a few chapters and quickly found that I already
know this sort of material. I'll work my way through
the book someday....can't be "bad".

I'm fine with sa re ga ma...

I stopped in to my favorite guitar store to pick a gtr
in for a set up and the salesman told me he got this book as
a cut out. He used to make fun of my JI guitar because
of a seasonal set up and now he's reading this book.

This afternoon I treked (traffic is bad in NJ/NY on a weekday
in the afternoon) over to the "local" Guitar Center to get a back
up Line 6 DL4. I was telling the salesman about how the Line 6 filter
doesn't have the resolution to be in tune. At some point we discussed
the tuning fundamental - a=440. I use 426.7 and he asked me
if it was lower than a=440. "It's a'bout a 3 quarter tone flat".
"Like a Micotone?"---and then he explains how
his girlfriend is playing in the new Montclar
Partch Ensemble

db

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> Well, I decided to "spring" for the Mathieu _Harmonic Experience_
> theory book and it is, indeed, mighty strange...
>
> If you know *me*, that is not necessarily a criticism...
>
> I've never seen a harmony book that EVER had any references to
> lattices or tuning...
>
> I'm just saying that, in comparison to the other very _standard_
> texts that I've had to ingest over the years, this is rather er..
> ideosyncratic...
>
> I think I'm going to enjoy it, though... when I get the time...

I've been trudging my way through it for several months now. I think
the point is to actually *sing* the notes -- assuming one can, in
fact, hold a sung note, something I have a fair amount of trouble at.
I've had to settle for coding the intervals on the computer, which I
doubt seriously is the right thing to do. And a large chunk of the
book is dedicated to 12-TET, which might turn some JI purists away.
The *theory* part is probably not new to anyone here -- the key is to
actually sing the notes and internalize the concepts. At least that's
my take. Right now, I have laryngitis and don't expect to be singing
anything for a while :-). I think you're going to enjoy it, too :-).

In a message dated 6/23/2001 11:23:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
znmeb@aracnet.com writes:

> I've been trudging my way through it for several months now. I think
> the point is to actually *sing* the notes -- assuming one can, in
> fact, hold a sung note, something I have a fair amount of trouble at.
> I've had to settle for coding the intervals on the computer, which I
> doubt seriously is the right thing to do. And a large chunk of the
> book is dedicated to 12-TET, which might turn some JI purists away.
> The *theory* part is probably not new to anyone here -- the key is to
> actually sing the notes and internalize the concepts. At least that's
> my take. Right now, I have laryngitis and don't expect to be singing
> anything for a while :-). I think you're going to enjoy it, too :-).
>

I spoke briefly to the author about this a few months back. Your comments
seem to fit right in line with the way he described his book to me. As for
alot of it being in 12 TET My impression from the book, the author didn't say
this to me but this was my general impression from the book, was that he was
trying to show what equal temperament "implies" meaning what ratios any given
equal tempered chord would imply.

Andy

In a message dated 6/22/2001 6:49:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
paul@stretch-music.com writes:

> Sir, the names he uses are the _Indian_ solfege names. Since
> Americans are highly outnumbered by citizens of India, and since the
> first part of the book concerns intonational practices which are far
> closer to Indian than to American practice, I feel this was a good
> choice on his part. The book is a good complement to a study of raga
> with a teacher of Indian music, in which situation the Indian solfege
> names would be memorized within the first few days anyway.
>
> I feel that there are many much more substantive criticisms of the
> book that can be made than this (as I've discussed in the past).
>
> This was just my humble opinion and should be considered fairly
>

Flame Flame Flame Flame.  hehe(just kidding)

Surely we're outnumbered but that does not mean those words are not wierd to
americans. I do not think it was a good choice because it does not reflect
his target audience which is americans AND beginners. Microtones can be
difficult enough for a beginning student. Using standard terminology that
students already know is essential and reduces the learning curve by not
forcing unnecessary memorization. Besides I was talking about more than just
the solfege. There are plenty of other nonstandard terms he uses, some of
which are a little bizzarre. Using all of those terms I think could have
been, and should have been, avoided.

ALso the title of this message was "mighty weird theory book" not "what is
wrong with harmonic experience?" I was therefore not giving an in depth
criticism of the book but instead doing as the title indiciates and saying
what I considered "weird" about the book. And in this case I thought the
terminology, solfege and otherwise, was a rather weird choice for an american
audience. If I was giving a criticism I would have written a paper, not a
short few line post about one very small aspect of the book.

(not a flame)

 / \
/   \
/     \   (a poorly drawn flame - kind of)    :)

Andy

(This response did not go through on my browser for some reason. If this is a
repeat sorry)

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <JoJoBuBu@aol.com>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2001 8:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: mighty weird theory book
>
>
> In a message dated 6/23/2001 11:23:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> znmeb@aracnet.com writes:
>
>
> > I've been trudging my way through it for several months now. I think
> > the point is to actually *sing* the notes -- assuming one can, in
> > fact, hold a sung note, something I have a fair amount of trouble at.
> > <snip>
> > The *theory* part is probably not new to anyone here -- the key is to
> > actually sing the notes and internalize the concepts. At least that's
> > my take. Right now, I have laryngitis and don't expect to be singing
> > anything for a while :-). I think you're going to enjoy it, too :-).
> >
>
> I spoke briefly to the author about this a few months back. Your comments
> seem to fit right in line with the way he described his book to me.

I was in correspondence with Mathieu several years ago, just before
his book was published. He talked a lot to me about how he believes
that JI is a "natural" tuning because it actually resonates within
our body cavities. So, yes, "internalize" is a key word here.

He sent me an early draft of the book, and it used to have a different
subtitle: _Harmonic Experience: The Revival of Resonance_.

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

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Joe!
This is very much my own sensation, After performances i strongly feel it in my body.
pleasurable i might say. Often other music will produce no corporeal effect or a negative one,
common with noise based music

monz wrote:

He talked a lot to me about how he believes

> that JI is a "natural" tuning because it actually resonates within
> our body cavities. So, yes, "internalize" is a key word here.

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

Kraig Grady wrote:

> Joe!
> This is very much my own sensation, After performances i strongly
> feel it in my body. pleasurable i might say. Often other music will
> produce no corporeal effect or a negative one, common with noise based
> music
>
> monz wrote:
>
> He talked a lot to me about how he believes
>
>> that JI is a "natural" tuning because it actually resonates within
>> our body cavities. So, yes, "internalize" is a key word here.
>
One of my first pitches to the list was inspired by reading this book
and I remember getting a bit of a blasting for talking in emotive terms
as regards JI. And for what it's worth the singing of sa, re, ga can be
spiritually invigorating as these are Sanskrit syllables. Over to the
other list for this discussion. It's nice to see that these issues are
being discussed freely again.

Best Wishes.

on 6/24/01 4:53 AM, tuning@yahoogroups.com at tuning@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> I was in correspondence with Mathieu several years ago, just before
> his book was published. He talked a lot to me about how he believes
> that JI is a "natural" tuning because it actually resonates within
> our body cavities. So, yes, "internalize" is a key word here.
>
> He sent me an early draft of the book, and it used to have a different
> subtitle: _Harmonic Experience: The Revival of Resonance_.
>
>
> -monz

Personally, I liked his approach of using sargam instead of solfege,
although I'm more used to the latter (I sometimes did the exercises using
do-re-mi, or no syllable at all where it felt more comfortable). It seemed
to help greatly with the internalization process, which seems to be the main
point of this book. I'm no more singer than many on this list, an octave
plus a few notes on a good day, but singing the tones against a guitar drone
and *feeling* the resonance has been very beneficial, I feel like I get some
aspects of JI in a way that I never did before! To me it was helpful to
learn to construct the just scale from the ground up, so to speak.

I haven't gone through the 12ET section yet, I mostly bought the book for
the first part, but it looks interesting. In the same way hat many of us
will use an x-tET to approximate JI, he obviously advocates the change in
perception that a musician could have when playing in 12 after gaining more
understanding of JI.

Seth

--
Seth Austen

http://www.sethausten.com
emails: seth@sethausten.com
klezmusic@earthlink.net