Tuning Cloud Chamber Bowls

Dear All

I've been saving up winemaking demijohns with a view to cutting and
tuning them to make Partch-like Cloud Chamber Bowls. I now have a dozen
and can get more if I need them and I am ready to roll. The music I
intend to make will be both harmonic and melodic and I will have up to
a maximum of 16 bowls. I'd be grateful for your thoughts on how you
would tune the bowls (any scale between 12 and 16 tones) and why you
would choose your tuning. I've a feeling that tuning the bowls to low
-ish number ratios will be easier than to various EDOs and I doubt if I
can go beyond 2 "octaves'" range but I eagerly await your ideas or
comments. Thanks in anticipation.

Best Wishes.

Alison,

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> I've been saving up winemaking demijohns with a view to cutting and
> tuning them to make Partch-like Cloud Chamber Bowls.

This is partly a historical post, for a very simple reason. During
his lifetime, Partch never actually "tuned" one of the Bowls (called
that for short) - they were, in essence, found pitches.

The original set of bowls were castaways from cloud chamber
experiments at the University of California, Berkeley. The
experiments used rings cut from the center of Pyrex chemical
jars/bottles, and thus the tops and bottoms were being discarded. A
number of these were collected, and when Partch gathered them he
simply hung them, found the pitches that he had gotten (the tops had
only 'fundamental' tones, played on the lower edge (the neck not
emitting a tone; the bottoms, hung upside down, had both an edge tone
and a high, short pitch from hitting the 'top' (what was the
actual 'bottom' of the jar).

At no point did he do any grinding or any kind of tuning. This, of
course, led to one of the most finite situations encountered in his
music: when a bowl would be broken (which *did* happen, through
transport, unfortunate strike, or acoustic phenomenon [story for
another time]) it was a dead end - the note could not be reproduced,
save by sheer luck, and parts using that note would have to be
rewritten, either to skip the note or find a complimentary pitch that
still existed.

After the initial gathering, Partch was able to get a hold of a
number of whole jars, and the cutting of them was fairly primitive: a
wire was attached to a transformer and then stretched tight around
the circumference of the jar. Current was applied and the wire was
heated red-hot. When the wire had been in place for a while, it was
removed and cold water was splashed. The jar would usually separate
right on the line of the wire. Usually.

One of the most amazing of his instruments to actually play and
be 'swimming' in the sound of (which I have done on many occasions),
it also was one of the most ephemeral.

These days, there may very well be ways of grinding/tuning. I also
imagine your glass is not nearly so thick - the Bowls were made of
glass that was 1/4 to 3/8 inch thick, as I recall. You might try to
contact some of the people that use glass instruments in their music.
I don't have contact information for them, but one of the longest
running ensembles is the Toronto Glass Orchestra, and they have
developed an extraordinary array of glass instruments, with a
corresponding repetoire to match.

Cheers,
Jon

Jon Szanto wrote:

>
> This is partly a historical post, for a very simple reason. During
> his lifetime, Partch never actually "tuned" one of the Bowls (called
> that for short) - they were, in essence, found pitches.
>
> The original set of bowls were castaways from cloud chamber
> experiments at the University of California, Berkeley. The
> experiments used rings cut from the center of Pyrex chemical
> jars/bottles, and thus the tops and bottoms were being discarded. A
> number of these were collected, and when Partch gathered them he
> simply hung them, found the pitches that he had gotten (the tops had
> only 'fundamental' tones, played on the lower edge (the neck not
> emitting a tone; the bottoms, hung upside down, had both an edge tone
> and a high, short pitch from hitting the 'top' (what was the
> actual 'bottom' of the jar).
>
> At no point did he do any grinding or any kind of tuning. This, of
> course, led to one of the most finite situations encountered in his
> music: when a bowl would be broken (which *did* happen, through
> transport, unfortunate strike, or acoustic phenomenon [story for
> another time]) it was a dead end - the note could not be reproduced,
> save by sheer luck, and parts using that note would have to be
> rewritten, either to skip the note or find a complimentary pitch that
> still existed.
>
> After the initial gathering, Partch was able to get a hold of a
> number of whole jars, and the cutting of them was fairly primitive: a
> wire was attached to a transformer and then stretched tight around
> the circumference of the jar. Current was applied and the wire was
> heated red-hot. When the wire had been in place for a while, it was
> removed and cold water was splashed. The jar would usually separate
> right on the line of the wire. Usually.
>
> One of the most amazing of his instruments to actually play and
> be 'swimming' in the sound of (which I have done on many occasions),
> it also was one of the most ephemeral.
>
> These days, there may very well be ways of grinding/tuning. I also
> imagine your glass is not nearly so thick - the Bowls were made of
> glass that was 1/4 to 3/8 inch thick, as I recall. You might try to
> contact some of the people that use glass instruments in their music.
> I don't have contact information for them, but one of the longest
> running ensembles is the Toronto Glass Orchestra, and they have
> developed an extraordinary array of glass instruments, with a
> corresponding repetoire to match.
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

Very interesting Jon. I'm going by my copy of Genesis where the ratios of the bowls are given, and
in fact you can see from the pictures that precise ratios are written on the bowls. I assume that
these are approximate ratios? Many thanks.

Regards.

Alison,

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> Very interesting Jon. I'm going by my copy of Genesis where the
ratios of the bowls are given, and
> in fact you can see from the pictures that precise ratios are
written on the bowls. I assume that
> these are approximate ratios?

I can't ever remember checking a bowls ratio with a stable (sort of)
reference tone, say, from the Chromelodeon. But even if they would
have been 'tuned' in some way, the Bowls had so many differing
overtones that, in effect, the ratios were *somewhat* approximate.
But the fundamental was pretty apparant, especially if you played
with good technique (hitting the very edge; going higher up on the
bowl gave more overtones and less fundamental).

In any event, certainly seemed to work for Partch's music; other
composers might have more exacting requirements. I know Harry liked
the way they looked besides how they sounded, and they may very well
be the most recognized of Partch's instruments. BTW, those suckers
are heavy!

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> Dear All
>
> I've been saving up winemaking demijohns with a view to cutting and
> tuning them to make Partch-like Cloud Chamber Bowls. I now have a dozen
> and can get more if I need them and I am ready to roll. The music I
> intend to make will be both harmonic and melodic and I will have up to
> a maximum of 16 bowls. I'd be grateful for your thoughts on how you
> would tune the bowls (any scale between 12 and 16 tones) and why you
> would choose your tuning. I've a feeling that tuning the bowls to low
> -ish number ratios will be easier than to various EDOs

I find that doubtful because you won't have any harmonic partials to eliminate beats between.

> and I doubt if I
> can go beyond 2 "octaves'" range but I eagerly await your ideas or
> comments. Thanks in anticipation.

Perhaps, since you've been working with 22-tET guitar, you'd like to consider some of the
12-tone subsets of 22-tET that I've composed in and posted about, so that you can use them
in ensemble work with the guitar. With 16 bowls you'd ideally have a full "minor tenth" span with
these tunings (assuming you can tune the bowls with full flexibility). I'm under the impression that
Manuel has included by four 12-tone subsets of 22-tET either as .scl or .kbd files in Scala. If not,
and if you need a refresher, I'd be happy to go over them again.

Paul Erlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> > Dear All
> >
> > I've been saving up winemaking demijohns with a view to cutting and
> > tuning them to make Partch-like Cloud Chamber Bowls. I now have a dozen
> > and can get more if I need them and I am ready to roll. The music I
> > intend to make will be both harmonic and melodic and I will have up to
> > a maximum of 16 bowls. I'd be grateful for your thoughts on how you
> > would tune the bowls (any scale between 12 and 16 tones) and why you
> > would choose your tuning. I've a feeling that tuning the bowls to low
> > -ish number ratios will be easier than to various EDOs
>
> I find that doubtful because you won't have any harmonic partials to eliminate beats between.
>
> > and I doubt if I
> > can go beyond 2 "octaves'" range but I eagerly await your ideas or
> > comments. Thanks in anticipation.
>
> Perhaps, since you've been working with 22-tET guitar, you'd like to consider some of the
> 12-tone subsets of 22-tET that I've composed in and posted about, so that you can use them
> in ensemble work with the guitar. With 16 bowls you'd ideally have a full "minor tenth" span with
> these tunings (assuming you can tune the bowls with full flexibility). I'm under the impression that
> Manuel has included by four 12-tone subsets of 22-tET either as .scl or .kbd files in Scala. If not,
> and if you need a refresher, I'd be happy to go over them again.

Thanks Paul. I think what I'll do is try tuning a couple to see how strong a fundamental I can get.
Your idea of subsets of 22 is interesting. I don't have a PC, so no Scala, but I'll look back over the
archives for these scales. My idea is to write for choir and bowls, using the tuned bowls to guide the
choir's intonation. I like the idea of the voices growing out of the wall of sound that the bowls can
create.

Regards.

>

"Mats �ljare" wrote:

> >I've been saving up winemaking demijohns with a view to cutting and
> >tuning them to make Partch-like Cloud Chamber Bowls. I now have a dozen
> >and can get more if I need them and I am ready to roll. The music I
>
> No,don't destroy them!They�re nice as they are...seriously,try asking the
> Oddmusic list for this,there�s probably someone there who has done something
> similar.I imagine there�d be plenty of things you could do with them,like
> some kind of enormous ocarina or reed instrument.Keep in mind that if you
> cut up identical but irregularly shaped objects you get not only inharmonic
> timbres,but DIFFERENT inharmonic spectrums...so it may not be possible to
> find a scale that works for it.
>

I've just subscribed so I'll see what turns up. Looks good for instrument making. Thanks Mats.

Best Wishes

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

> Thanks Paul. I think what I'll do is try tuning a couple to see how
strong a fundamental I can get.
> Your idea of subsets of 22 is interesting. I don't have a PC, so no
Scala, but I'll look back over the
> archives for these scales.

Let me know if you have any luck. By the way, the "Pythagorean
Phrygian" mode that you brought up:

1 4 4 4 1 4 4

exists in one transposition in one of the 12-tone subsets,
in three transpositions in another of the 12-tone subsets,
and in six transpositions in another of the 12-tone subsets.