Time ignored ?

Firstly thanks to everyone who responded to my ruminations about time.

I'll tackle them one by one ! :)

Here's Jon's response
>Justin,

--- In tuning@y..., "Justin White" <justin.white@d...> wrote:
>> Any thoughts about how time can sometimes laugh at our timeless
>> [all pitches at once theories] ?

>Only that you've come up with one of the most unique observations
>I've seen around here in a long... while.

>Can we call you Justin Time? <g>

You may Jon !:)

>Cheers,
>Jon

Here's Paul's

--- In tuning@y..., "Justin White" <justin.white@d...> wrote:

>> But real music does not consider every note that exists in a scale
or gamut.
>> Music [or should I say the listener] only take the pitches that are
souning in
>> present time into account.

>I disagree.

So do I to a certain extent Paul. If this was totally true melody would be
impossible.I guess I was playing both sides of the game !.

My feeling is that tempo has alot to do with it. For instance if we slow a chord
progression right down [I believe La Monte Young has done this with blues]
memory becomes less important. Also various devices can [in my experience] make
the present time experience so interesting that memory has no importance or
bearing [repetition, extreemly fast and complex rhythms etc.].

But a melody at a moderate tempo will rely on memory much more.

>> And if we are remembering former phrases where is our
>> attention ?

>Many levels of attention, in many degrees of rememberance. A pitch
>set (particularly one with 5-10 notes) makes its mark on our musical
>mind, and if the set is "coherent" enough, a change in this set
>stands out as a musical "event" of significance.

Agreed. One of the main points I was making though was that analysis should be
based on compositions and reflect how compositions change over time.

Taking for examples sake Partch's 43 tone scale and analysing this as a
periodicty block, constant structure or improper or not does not tell us much
about Partchs music other than how the instruments were tuned. H.P cursed Cage
for mentioning 43.

I do admit that these theories are important. But mostly for instrument design
etc.

The fact that the struti system is improper does not mean that some raags cannot
be strictly proper.

I guess I am calling for some awareness of the imperfections of our static
measuring systems so that we don't start worshipping them.

>> Do we continually relate every new pitch back to pitches sounded
>> earlier ?

>Yes, but not to the extent claimed by Boomsliter & Creel (IMHO),
>which you (ironically enough) seem very impressed by.

Ironic only if you think these positions are mutually exclusive. I think that
they are both correct. See above re: tempo.

B&C's theories are all based on interpretations of empirical evidence and
aesthetic intonation choices made by musicians. Time would obviously have been
accounted for, if only because the test subjects were selcting pitches for
music, not playing with numbers and geometric ideas.

B&C's studies could [IMHO] only be lacking in their interpretation of the data.
Perhaps extended reference and direct reference of higher partials [a la Monzo's
work] are at play ?

Anyway it works for what I'm doing now musicwise. That's really all that
matters.

>> Can a scale be said to be strictly proper if not all the pitches in
the scale
>> are used ?

>That would seem hard to justify, wouldn't it?

And Joe wrote
>>
>> Any thoughts about how time can sometimes laugh
>> at our timeless [all pitches at once theories] ?

>Hi Justin,

>This is something I touch on at the very end of my book.
>It's interesting to me that, from my perspective, even
>harmonic analysis is totally time-dependent.

>If one is analyzing pitches in terms of their frequency
>ratios, one is certainly taking time into consideration,
>since frequency is defined as the number of waveform periods
>*per second of time*.

Good point ! But some theories especially those to do with scale construction,
and melody etc. are lacking in the time dept.

>The first thing I teach any of my new music students
>is that music is unique among all art-forms because it
>is the only abstract art which requires prolongation thru
>time in order to be perceived. Every aspect of it, except
>the "timeless all pitches at once theory", involves time.

I wish I had yourself as my music teacher !

Haresh wrote

"Haresh BAKSHI" <hareshbakshi@hotmail.com>

--- In tuning@y..., "Paul Erlich" <paul@s...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@y..., "Justin White" <justin.white@d...> wrote:
>
>>>> But real music does not consider every note that exists in a
scale or gamut. Music [or should I say the listener ]only take the
pitches that are souning in present time into account. >>>>

<If I may venture to speak, perehaps, for Indian music. Music does
consider every pitch, in the gamut.>

Really ? When I say gamut in reference to Indian music I would probably refer to
the shruti system. Is this what you mean as gamut ? A raag [correct me if I am
mistaken] takes certain pitches from the 22 shruti scale. Do you mean that a
raag somehow reaveals that it belongs to part of the shruti set ?

This is interesting. How does this happen ?

>>>> Do we continually relate every new pitche back to pitches
sounded earlier ? >>>>

>>>> [Paul's comments] Yes, but not to the extent claimed by
Boomsliter & Creel (IMHO), > which you (ironically enough) seem very
impressed by. >>>>

<Before 500-600 years, yes, we related to every new note as an
interval, related to the previous note, and NOT related to the tonic
given by the tanpura: there neither was a tonic, nor was there a
tanpura, then, at least in the "Chamber" Indian music.>

So the continuous sounding of the tonic etc.helps suggests the rest of the
unheard scale ?

I have often thought that aesthetics are the right choices at the right time and
place and that in any given situation there is [I don't know why !] an optimum
choice.

Have you ever heard a piece of music that seems to lead to a given destination ?
It's almost like at any point in time there is only one correct choice of pitch
duration and timbre, and when that is not satisfied you are a little
dissapointed.

Just changing one note in a Bach Chorale destroys the whole effect.

>>>> Can a scale be said to be strictly proper if not all the pitches
in the scale are used ? >>>>

<Again, until close to the 15th century, Yes, we had scales with only
5 or 6 notes, too; they were called moorchchhana-s, the modal scales.>

Are these the scales that you posted for George Zelenz that rotated ?

This fascinating where can i learn more about moorchchhana-s ?

>Any thoughts about how time can sometimes laugh at our >timeless [all pitches
>at
>once theories] ?

>Justin White

Andy you understood what the point I was making best of all.

It is important to remove misleading complexities from analysis of compositions.
I have nothing against lattices [I use a zometool thingy all the time !]. Paul
mentions that he finds them useful due to the way he thinks about music. This I
imagine is good for Paul who understands that the piece modulates etc. Other
less experienced fellows may be misled into thinking of it as some sort
monophonic fabric. Oh well each to his own.

<Hi Justin,

You bring up a very interesting point which I myeslf have been noticing about
some of the analysis. To be specific I have seen a few diagrams, lattices, etc
lately of some of Ben Johnston's work. I use this example only because I am
thoroughly familiar with his work.

Some of the diagrams shown on here have been, so to speak, complete lattices of
an entire piece. Specifically posted not long ago were lists of notes with the
6th quartet, if I remember correctly.>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 14
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:59:10 EDT
From: PageWizard17@aol.com
Subject: Re: Time ignored ?

Brent

wrote,

<Justin,

I have believed for quite a long time now, even in the ignorant presence
of the 12 ET system, that when time is involved with a scale system, the
consonance/dissonance of the scale is determined by the complex relations
between the ratios before and theoretically after it. You can see this
simply by taking even a very "consonant chord" such as a sus4 and placing it
in the middle of a dissonant chord progression. Subjectively, the individual
chordal consonance is sacrificed and combined with the other dissonances or
consonances of the progression. This is why an entire composition in memory
will seem as roughly one huge "watercolor" chord. The brain tends to group
similar things into one. >

Yes I agree with this but when I was a teenageer I had the revelation that I
could play any chord next to each other and if I played my chords slow enough I
would forget the chord that came before. Read what I said on tempo.

< This is also evident with overtones and octave
equivalence and with all consonances for that matter.
I believe the that the sole reason of consonance is due to the similarity
it bears to the reference. Since unity is the ultimate consonance, any other
tone which bears a closer resemblance to unity will have a stronger
consonance than any tone which does not.>

Yep some people say that this is exactly what consonance is. I'd agree.

< As of now, though, I cannot concern
myself particularly with the complexities which time and memory involve,
though I still enjoy theorizing about it. In order to find the optimal
tuning system, I must first search after purity of ratios. I feel that there
are many ratios, possessing certain purities, which have never been
discovered.>

I think all the important consonances based on the harmonic series have been
discovered already but there is endless fields of investigation to find new and
exciting ways of organising these basic building blocks.

< It would only be through the experimentation of a new system
that I would be able to figure out what its true potential was. I have been
doing such experimentation with the 12 ET system. I have found that it lacks
consonance to a large degree. There are few real "consonances" with 12 ET.
There are a great deal of dissonances that exist. These dissonances are not
very good either because they tend to "blend" into one another. I have
discovered that this blending is no good. Each individual tone, or chord,
should have a distinct quality whether that be a consonant or a dissonant
one.>

You should read Harry Partchs 'Genesis of a Music' if you haven't already done
so.

You will find him and his philosophy kindred spirits.

< This will allow the a piece of music in the new system to have a
stronger effect upon one's perceived memory. This will also make music much
more powerful since it is the computation of the relations between ratios
which gives music its strengths or weaknesses. Please let me know what you
think.>

Absolutely ! Go for it. Music thrives on contrasts and personally I despise
music in shades of grey.

Paul then replied to Andy,

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

> With Johnston's work it is all about modulation to microtonal keys.
>Lets say for example he uses a major chord. I'm using this example
>merely for simplicity.
>
> C-E-G.
>
>> Now lets say he modulates to, in his notation, C-(C minus). He
>>would argue that this the same chord modulated down via comma. To
>>look at this and list all 6 pitch classes is not as important as
>>understanding that the music modulates.

>But even more important is, how does he get there? From C to C-?
>Surely by going through some intermediate regions in the lattice, yes?

>> On a last note this is not intended as a thorough description of
>>Ben's modulation technique so please dont take it as such. In a
>>nutshell however its basically standard modulation technique. Common
>>tones, etc..

>What better way to see that than on a lattice?

>> So to sum up I agree. Time is an extremely important part of music.
>> Lattices, analysis, etc, should reflect it if possible.

<Exactly. Monz's JustMusic software is intended to show the music
evolving on the lattice, by "lighting up" the pitches that are being
played at any given time. This could be very "illuminating", though
Monz and I differ in how we like to construct our lattices.>

This sounds cool Monz, do you have a mac version planned ?

Joe Monzo wrote

<I'd also like JustMusic to be able to analyze harmonic timbres
on lattice diagrams. And hey, why not rhythms or meters too?>

Any ideas on how you would do this Joe ?

Sorry for the length of this message

Best wishes,

Justin White

Haven't the Sir Cam Virus mentionned on the list and since it is
wreaking havoc with a lot of email thought it might be useful for
anyone who doesn't know about it.

It takes the form of an email from a friend that says need your
advice or something on that order...don't open the attachment and
delete immediately.

In case you did open the attachment, here's McCaffe's removal
instructions ( I use Norton Antivirus myself so I haven't checked the
validity of the instructions)

Use specified engine and DAT files for detection and removal.
Windows ME Info:
NOTE: Windows ME utilizes a backup utility that backs up selected
files automatically to the C:\_Restore folder. This means that an
infected file could be stored there as a backup file, and VirusScan
will be unable to delete these files. These instructions explain how
to remove the infected files from the C:\_Restore folder.

Disabling the Restore Utility

1. Right click the My Computer icon on the Desktop.
2. Click on the Performance Tab.
3. Click on the File System button.
4. Click on the Troubleshooting Tab.
5. Put a check mark next to "Disable System Restore".
6. Click the Apply button.
7. Click the Close button.
8. Click the Close button again.
9. You will be prompted to restart the computer. Click Yes.
NOTE: The Restore Utility will now be disabled.
10. Restart the computer in Safe Mode.
11. Run a scan with VirusScan to delete all infected files, or browse
the file's located in the C:\_Restore folder and remove the file's.
12. After removing the desired files, restart the computer normally.
NOTE: To re-enable the Restore Utility, follow steps 1-9 and on step
5 remove the check mark next to "Disable System Restore". The
infected file's are removed and the System Restore is once again
active.

Registry Entries:
The W32/SirCam@M... virus makes changes to the registry.

HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\
RunServices\Driver32=C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\SCam32.exe

HKLM\Software\Sircam

In Infected state: HKCR\exefile\shell\open\command
\Default="C:\recycled\SirC32.exe" "%1"%*

In Clean state this should be: HKCR\exefile\shell\open\command
\Default=""%1"%*"

Note that manual modification of registry items is dangerous and
should not be needed at all as VirusScan will clean all the registry
items automatically.

Mary

--- In tuning@y..., "Justin White" <justin.white@d...> wrote:
/tuning/topicId_26425.html#26425

> > [monz]
> > The first thing I teach any of my new music students
> > is that music is unique among all art-forms because it
> > is the only abstract art which requires prolongation thru
> > time in order to be perceived. Every aspect of it, except
> > the "timeless all pitches at once theory", involves time.
>
> I wish I had yourself as my music teacher !

I drive all over San Diego County to my students's houses.
You live anywhere nearby? :)

> >> So to sum up I agree. Time is an extremely important part of
music.
> >> Lattices, analysis, etc, should reflect it if possible.
>
> <Exactly. Monz's JustMusic software is intended to show the music
> evolving on the lattice, by "lighting up" the pitches that are being
> played at any given time. This could be very "illuminating", though
> Monz and I differ in how we like to construct our lattices.>
>
> This sounds cool Monz, do you have a mac version planned ?

Sure... if someone with a Mac would come up with some code...
There's a JustMusic Group, devoted to develoment of the app,
for serious programmers and mathematicians; once the software
is finally released the Group will be open to all:
/justmusic

>
>
> Joe Monzo wrote
>
>
> <I'd also like JustMusic to be able to analyze harmonic timbres
> on lattice diagrams. And hey, why not rhythms or meters too?>
>
> Any ideas on how you would do this Joe ?

In the particular case of Ben Johnston's compositions, for
instance, one often finds rhythmic groups which are related
proportionally as low-integer ratios, such as 2:3:4:5:6:7 etc.
These would be latticed the same way as harmonies. Same
thing with timbres, as long as they're harmonic. Inharmonic
timbres, if they can be measured mathematically, can still
be plugged into lattice formulas like mine, since I have
figured out (with arguable success... refer to Paul Erlich)
how to lattice meantones and EDOs on my JI lattices.

Here's my webpage with all the links for the rudimentary
pre-release version of the JustMusic software:
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/justmusic/introtoJM.htm

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

--- In tuning@y..., nanom3@h... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_26425.html#26426

> Haven't the Sir Cam Virus mentionned on the list and since it is
> wreaking havoc with a lot of email thought it might be useful for
> anyone who doesn't know about it.

I received "Sir" Cam myself.... Fortunately, I didn't open the
attachment. It's a BIG file, about 2 megs. I would never open
attachments from untrusted sources (and frequently don't open them
from "trusted" sources!), but I knew about it as a member of the
free "mcafee dispatch."

I know this isn't about tuning... but if one doesn't have a computer
it makes alternate tuning much more difficult.

If you don't already know, "mcafee dispatch" can be found here:

http://dispatch.mcafee.com/

________ ______ ________
Joseph Pehrson

--- In tuning@y..., "Justin White" <justin.white@d...> wrote:
>
> >Many levels of attention, in many degrees of rememberance. A pitch
> >set (particularly one with 5-10 notes) makes its mark on our
musical
> >mind, and if the set is "coherent" enough, a change in this set
> >stands out as a musical "event" of significance.
>
> Agreed. One of the main points I was making though was that
analysis should be
> based on compositions and reflect how compositions change over time.

Lots of this kind of analysis has been done for works of tonal and
post-tonal music. But a lot of the work that has been going on here,
that may be bothering you, has been the work of trying to understand
what it is that makes a pitch set "coherent" in the first place.
This, and the creative scale-construction work that revolves around
it, is mainly _pre-compositional_ in nature -- it serves as a
starting point for the composer to begin exploring the infinite sea
of possibilities that microtonality has to offer. Rather than trying
thousands and thousands of possibilities in order to find one that
works, one tries to do a little _thinking_ first in order to try to
narrow one's search.

>Andy you understood what the point I was making best >of all.

>It is important to remove misleading complexities from >analysis of
>compositions.
>I have nothing against lattices [I use a zometool >thingy all the time !].
>Paulmentions that he finds them useful due to the way >he thinks about music.
>This I
>imagine is good for Paul who understands that the >piece modulates etc. Other
>less experienced fellows ma>y be misled into thinking >of it as some sort
>monophonic fabric. Oh well each to his own.

I'm very glad I was correctly understanding your point. I think your comments are well said and I most definitely agree with everything you are saying here.

Andy

Paul wrote this to Andy,

</tuning/topicId_26380.html#26380

I'm sorry my post was so mysterious to you. Hopefully Justin
understood what I was trying to say. Clearly Monz understood my
post . . . maybe he can help . . . I can't think of a better way to
say what I said. If you have any more specific questions, please ask.>

Yes Paul I unserstand your p o v well now. The post from your physics group was
also interesting. Those guys sound like they would fit in very

Also your comments regarding the PB and Ben Johnstons [unconscious? ] use of it
were well worth the price of admission : ). I will then not worry about PB's and
see if they crop up in my compositions using B&C matrixes. I am interested to
find out the veracity of this view. If it is true it will give us a good
insight into how the organism hears music.

I am though still of the opinion that as self determined spiritual beings we can
choose to listen to music in any way we choose although our bodies and organic
hearing mechanisms do restrict this to certain degrees. This is probably a
discussion best left for other forums.

Best,

Justin White

Hi,
I just recently subscribed to the tuning group. I've enjoyed all
of the interesting email that I have been getting.
I'm just curious. I've seen some postings of some of Monz's and
Erlich's writing on the web. I'm just wondering if you guys are teaching
tuning, electronic/computer music, composition or theory somewhere.

David Hunter

> From: david charles hunter <dchunter@midway.uchicago.edu>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Cc: david charles hunter <dchunter@midway.uchicago.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 8:57 PM
> Subject: [tuning] Paul Erlich and Monz
>

> Hi,
> I just recently subscribed to the tuning group. I've enjoyed all
> of the interesting email that I have been getting.
> I'm just curious. I've seen some postings of some of Monz's and
> Erlich's writing on the web. I'm just wondering if you guys are teaching
> tuning, electronic/computer music, composition or theory somewhere.

Hi David,

Paul and I are friends, but we live on opposite sides of the US,
he in the Boston area, and me in San Diego.

I'm making my living these days as a music teacher, but my students
are mostly learning piano and woodwinds... and I throw in as much
theory as I can get away with. :)

I did have a student back in 1998 who was actually taking lessons
from me to study my own theories about tuning, but alas, I had
to make an extended stay on the east coast and have not been able
to pick her back up again. (In fact, it was during that trip
that I first met Paul in person.)

And then there's J. Gill, who recently started posting to the list
and who is *almost* a student of mine, except that he lives 1000
miles away and we've never met. :) But he really does admire
my work a lot and uses it as a basis for his own theoretical
speculations now.

So if you're anywhere within an hour's drive of San Diego,
I'd be happy to teach you in your own home!

Actually, Jonathan Glasier and I had big plans to turn the
Sonic Arts Gallery into a real Institute of Microtonal Music
back in '98, but my trip to Philly derailed that idea, and
I've been so busy since returning to San Diego that I hardly
even spend much time at the Gallery these days. Hopefully
someday that will change... it really is a fantastic space,
with a marvelous collection of microtonal instruments. I'm
just caught up in my own projects at the moment. (Big trip
to a symposium in Europe coming up in September)

love / peace / harmony ...

-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

On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, monz wrote:

>
> > From: david charles hunter <dchunter@midway.uchicago.edu>
> > To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> > Cc: david charles hunter <dchunter@midway.uchicago.edu>
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 8:57 PM
> > Subject: [tuning] Paul Erlich and Monz
> >
>
> > Hi,
> > I just recently subscribed to the tuning group. I've enjoyed all
> > of the interesting email that I have been getting.
> > I'm just curious. I've seen some postings of some of Monz's and
> > Erlich's writing on the web. I'm just wondering if you guys are teaching
> > tuning, electronic/computer music, composition or theory somewhere.
>
>
> Hi David,
>
> Paul and I are friends, but we live on opposite sides of the US,
> he in the Boston area, and me in San Diego.
>
> I'm making my living these days as a music teacher, but my students
> are mostly learning piano and woodwinds... and I throw in as much
> theory as I can get away with. :)
>
> I did have a student back in 1998 who was actually taking lessons
> from me to study my own theories about tuning, but alas, I had
> to make an extended stay on the east coast and have not been able
> to pick her back up again. (In fact, it was during that trip
> that I first met Paul in person.)
>
> And then there's J. Gill, who recently started posting to the list
> and who is *almost* a student of mine, except that he lives 1000
> miles away and we've never met. :) But he really does admire
> my work a lot and uses it as a basis for his own theoretical
> speculations now.
>
> So if you're anywhere within an hour's drive of San Diego,
> I'd be happy to teach you in your own home!

I am currently a Ph.D candidate at the University of Chicago, in
composition and ethnomusicology. I studied tuning theory with Easley
Blackwood, and studied composition with John Eaton. I am also a gamelan
player (Central Javanese, Cirebonese, West Javanese, and a little Balinese
Gamelan Angklung). I am also a didjeridoo player, and have done some
computer music pieces, and analog pieces with sound-text and other things.
My current project is working with 23-tone equal temperament,
which is the crux of my dissertation.

>
> Actually, Jonathan Glasier and I had big plans to turn the
> Sonic Arts Gallery into a real Institute of Microtonal Music
> back in '98, but my trip to Philly derailed that idea, and
> I've been so busy since returning to San Diego that I hardly
> even spend much time at the Gallery these days. Hopefully
> someday that will change... it really is a fantastic space,
> with a marvelous collection of microtonal instruments. I'm
> just caught up in my own projects at the moment. (Big trip
> to a symposium in Europe coming up in September)
>
>

Cool. I am glad to see so many folks so active in the area of
alternate tunings. So much progression from the days when Partch and
Johnston were forging their way.
I've heard of J. Gill and Jonathan Glasier as well. Hey, I do a
weekly radio show featuring new music. It's a small 10 watt radio station
at U Chicago, but we are now broadcasting on the internet at
nibblebox.com. If any of you "tuning" cats would like to have some
airplay, burn some CD's for me. We would love to hear your stuff.
I've done this show for eight years, on Wednesdays from 12:00 -
1:30, sometimes until 3:00.(Central Time)

David Hunter
1341 E Madison Park #1
Chicago IL 60615

> > love / peace / harmony ... > It's all relative, ain't it?

All good things to you.

Hunter

> -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
>
>
>
> You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
> email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@yahoogroups.com - join the tuning group.
> tuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com - unsubscribe from the tuning group.
> tuning-nomail@yahoogroups.com - put your email message delivery on hold for the tuning group.
> tuning-digest@yahoogroups.com - change your subscription to daily digest mode.
> tuning-normal@yahoogroups.com - change your subscription to individual emails.
> tuning-help@yahoogroups.com - receive general help information.
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

--- In tuning@y..., david charles hunter <dchunter@m...> wrote:
> Hi,
> I just recently subscribed to the tuning group. I've enjoyed
all
> of the interesting email that I have been getting.
> I'm just curious. I've seen some postings of some of Monz's
and
> Erlich's writing on the web. I'm just wondering if you guys are
teaching
> tuning, electronic/computer music, composition or theory somewhere.
>
> David Hunter

Not me, if you mean teaching professionally. I've taught music and
guitar privately in the past, but now I have better sources of income
so I pretty much offer my knowledge for free . . . I even visited
Joseph Pehrson in New York to give him some free private
tutelage . . . if you're anywhere near Boston, I would consider
spending some time with you . . . more than a few hours, though, and
I might consider some compensatory arrangement . . .