[redirect] [In]necessity of tuning

----------
>From: klaus schmirler <KSchmir@z.zgs.de>
>To: crazy_music@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [crazy_music] month-old roadkill [is: Schoenberg
again, or rather the bitching about him]
>Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 00:51:26 +0100

[Klaus said to Brian:]

> Isn't all this tuning talk a bunch of bullwash? I am almost
> sure (but scientists aren't interested in thinking like this,
> so I am left alone with my beliefs, kook that I am) that you
> can make music very well without tuning anything at all, or
> without tuning more than is necessary beyond establishing a
> same-different dichotomy.

(May I jump in to this conversation?)

Klaus, this is absolutely correct in my experience
and aligns with my philosophy.

> But:

> If you'd like to make music with others, or if you want to
> make sure that you sing a liturgical piece the correct way,
> you might want to quantify some aspects of your music a
> little bit. Whether you do that by comparing string lengths,
> cycles of overtones, or logarithms is very much a matter of
> contemporary science. But whether your measuring implements
> take their units from eternal truths or last night's dream
> should, societal acceptance aside, affect the value of the
> music very little.

Klaus, this is very close to how I think of a part of
the origins of tuning and notation.

- Jeff