Some 22 tet guitar pages

Hi Folks

You wouldn't guess that I managed to "borrow" a copy of a well known
website design programme. Anyway, those interested in 22 tet guitar
please check out : -

http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/22folder

You will probably have to do some enlarging of the staff notated chords.
I'll fix things at a later date.

This is just a beginning and I'll get round to compositionally useful
progressions soon so look out for updates.

Comments welcome.

Kind Regards

Alison,

Could you please post the links to your 22-tet mp3s again?

thanks,

--Dan Stearns

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alison Monteith" <alison.monteith3@which.net>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 2:54 PM
Subject: [tuning] Some 22 tet guitar pages

> Hi Folks
>
> You wouldn't guess that I managed to "borrow" a copy of a well known
> website design programme. Anyway, those interested in 22 tet guitar
> please check out : -
>
> http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/22folder
>
> You will probably have to do some enlarging of the staff notated
chords.
> I'll fix things at a later date.
>
> This is just a beginning and I'll get round to compositionally
useful
> progressions soon so look out for updates.
>
> Comments welcome.
>
> Kind Regards
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
Sponsor ---------------------~-->
> Unlimited calling with 3-way conferencing. Only $1/Mo.
> with CrystalVoice! FREE trial. Click Here.
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/Hb1xVB/HxbDAA/ySSFAA/RrLolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-~->
>
> 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..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> Hi Folks
>
> You wouldn't guess that I managed to "borrow" a copy of a well known
> website design programme. Anyway, those interested in 22 tet guitar
> please check out : -
>
> http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/22folder
>
> You will probably have to do some enlarging of the staff notated
chords.
> I'll fix things at a later date.

I look forward to it.

This is a great resource! What I wonder is, why didn't you choose
a "key" for Dynamic Symmetrical Minor such that all the open strings
are in the key?

"D.Stearns" wrote:

> Alison,
>
> Could you please post the links to your 22-tet mp3s again?
>
> thanks,
>
> --Dan Stearns

I have to juggle files, so, there are two up just now : -
http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/Satyrical.mp3

http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/Treebird.mp3

I'll keep these up till the 25th, then I'll replace them with these two: -

http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/Contradanza.mp3

http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/Gardenjazz.mp3

Kind Regards

paulerlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> > Hi Folks
> >
> > You wouldn't guess that I managed to "borrow" a copy of a well known
> > website design programme. Anyway, those interested in 22 tet guitar
> > please check out : -
> >
> > http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/22folder
> >
> > You will probably have to do some enlarging of the staff notated
> chords.
> > I'll fix things at a later date.
>
> I look forward to it.
>
> This is a great resource! What I wonder is, why didn't you choose
> a "key" for Dynamic Symmetrical Minor such that all the open strings
> are in the key?

Good point. The "key" that I'm in would have two flats, Eb and Ab. It
would also have three v
symbols, Gv, Dv and Av, and three ^ symbols, Bb^, F^ and C^ . I suppose
it would look like the
following : -

http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/22key.jpg

The question marks are over those notes that have two accidentals
allocated to them in the key
signature. I'm sure that a solution has been found for this but my
suggestion would be to rename
some notes, eg, G# instead of Ab, or to eliminate flats and sharps from
the key signature which
might lead to messy scores.

The "key" for the Dynamic Symmetrical Minor that would leave open
strings in the key would be : -

G, Ab ^, A , Bb^ , B, Db^, D, Eb^, E, F^ . Four flats and five ^ symbols.

Comments Welcome

Kind Regards

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> >
> > This is a great resource! What I wonder is, why didn't you choose
> > a "key" for Dynamic Symmetrical Minor such that all the open
strings
> > are in the key?
>
> Good point. The "key" that I'm in would have two flats, Eb and Ab.
It
> would also have three v
> symbols, Gv, Dv and Av, and three ^ symbols, Bb^, F^ and C^ . I
suppose
> it would look like the
> following : -
>
> http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/22key.jpg
>
> The question marks are over those notes that have two accidentals
> allocated to them in the key
> signature. I'm sure that a solution has been found for this but my
> suggestion would be to rename
> some notes, eg, G# instead of Ab,

You mean G#v instead of Ab^?

> or to eliminate flats and sharps from
> the key signature which
> might lead to messy scores.

I recommend either (a) tablature or (b) my notation system in my
paper or (c) forget about key signature and let the score be "messy".
The notation system you are using would make some of the chords quite
intuitive, but it would make many of the chords, even in the key,
look a bit strange. For example:

A, Db^, E, G

E, Ab^, B, D

could be re-notated

A, C#v, E, G

E, G#v, B, D

to better get across the idea that these should be "consonant
dominant seventh chords".

> The "key" for the Dynamic Symmetrical Minor that would leave open
> strings in the key would be : -
>
> G, Ab ^, A , Bb^ , B, Db^, D, Eb^, E, F^ . Four flats and five ^
symbols.

Certainly seems preferable, don't you think? There's one other
possibility also that uses all the open strings.

Anyway, I'm very excited to see this stuff, and I will be following
your webpage closely as it develops, at some point actually going
home and trying everyting on my 22-tET guitar. I'm also excited to
see someone actually following through with my ideas in real music-
making -- I think you're only the fourth person to do that.

P.S. How did you come to choose Dynamic Symmetrical Minor? Do you
dislike the "perfect fourth" scale degree?

Alison,

A cursory glance revealed two errors at

http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/22folder/fingers%20.html

The G string is mislabelled A, and there should be a little red
circle at the 12th fret of that string.

note that all the decatonic scales are easily played in one position
with four notes per string (aren't we lucky to have four fingers on
our left hand?)

-Paul

paulerlich wrote:

> Alison,
>
> A cursory glance revealed two errors at
>
> http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/22folder/fingers%20.html
>
> The G string is mislabelled A, and there should be a little red
> circle at the 12th fret of that string.
>
> note that all the decatonic scales are easily played in one position
> with four notes per string (aren't we lucky to have four fingers on
> our left hand?)
>
> -Paul

You're absolutely right. I'll correct the errors in my next update. Many thanks.

Best wishes

>
>

paulerlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is a great resource! What I wonder is, why didn't you choose
> > > a "key" for Dynamic Symmetrical Minor such that all the open
> strings
> > > are in the key?
> >
> > Good point. The "key" that I'm in would have two flats, Eb and Ab.
> It
> > would also have three v
> > symbols, Gv, Dv and Av, and three ^ symbols, Bb^, F^ and C^ . I
> suppose
> > it would look like the
> > following : -
> >
> > http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/22key.jpg
> >
> > The question marks are over those notes that have two accidentals
> > allocated to them in the key
> > signature. I'm sure that a solution has been found for this but my
> > suggestion would be to rename
> > some notes, eg, G# instead of Ab,
>
> You mean G#v instead of Ab^?

Yes, and also along the lines of your examples below. I don't quite understand why G#v would
replace an Ab^. Why not G#^, in otherwords, using a straight enharmonic equivalent? I suspect this
goes to the heart of the idiosyncracies of notating 22 tet.

By the way were you able to enlarge the pages? If so you would have seen the ^ and v notated with
up and down slashes through ordinary noteheads. A useful feature of Sibelius. As I said I'll play
around with Photoshop to try to enlarge the diagrams.

> > or to eliminate flats and sharps from > the key signature which
> > might lead to messy scores.
>
> I recommend either (a) tablature or (b) my notation system in my
> paper or (c) forget about key signature and let the score be "messy".
> The notation system you are using would make some of the chords quite
> intuitive, but it would make many of the chords, even in the key,
> look a bit strange. For example:
>
> A, Db^, E, G
>
> E, Ab^, B, D
>
> could be re-notated
>
> A, C#v, E, G
>
> E, G#v, B, D
>
> to better get across the idea that these should be "consonant
> dominant seventh chords".

So if I use an enharmonic equivalent, say, C# for Db, I substitute a v for a ^? In all cases?

Tablature I like, and it makes life easy for the guitarist. Now that I have a new instrument
chamber ensemble on the way I intend after the Blackjack project(s) to arrange some existing 22
tet pieces and write some new ones for the instruments (I've added 5 strings to the 17 string
psalteries). I'll also be able to incorporate 22 tet guitar into the ensemble. That's why I'm
looking for a reliable and efficient system of notation across the board. I agree entirely that
"consonant dominant seventh chords" benefit from familiar notation as you point out.

I am also fascinated by Partch's many and various systems of notation. But I'd like to keep things
as familiar as possible for the conventionally trained musicians 'round here. At least in the
beginning.

Through lack of time I haven't had a good look at your notation system. I'll put some time aside
over the next week or so and no doubt will have some questions to ask.

>
>
> > The "key" for the Dynamic Symmetrical Minor that would leave open
> > strings in the key would be : -
> >
> > G, Ab ^, A , Bb^ , B, Db^, D, Eb^, E, F^ . Four flats and five ^
> symbols.
>
> Certainly seems preferable, don't you think? There's one other
> possibility also that uses all the open strings.

Can't find any other 'Symmetricals' unless it's the mode of the above starting on Db^.

> Anyway, I'm very excited to see this stuff, and I will be following
> your webpage closely as it develops, at some point actually going
> home and trying everyting on my 22-tET guitar. I'm also excited to
> see someone actually following through with my ideas in real music-
> making -- I think you're only the fourth person to do that.

Well, at some point I felt that if I was going to understand the harmonic resources of this
temperament I'd have to do do some digging. The lattices have been most helpful and once I've
figured out the useful structures I'll chart them out and notate. As things go along I'll get
round to looking at the 'Pentachordals'. I need to add a note to the effect that all the
'Symmetricals' are modes of each other and likewise the 'Pentachordals'.

> P.S. How did you come to choose Dynamic Symmetrical Minor? Do you
> dislike the "perfect fourth" scale degree?

No, I started there because I knew little about its properties and because there were a couple of
useful lattices, one in each of your papers.

Best wishes.

>

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

> > > I'm sure that a solution has been found for this but my
> > > suggestion would be to rename
> > > some notes, eg, G# instead of Ab,
> >
> > You mean G#v instead of Ab^?
>
> Yes, and also along the lines of your examples below. I don't
quite understand why G#v would
> replace an Ab^.

Because # raises you 3/22 oct., b lowers you 3/22 oct., ^ raises you
1/22 oct., and v lowers you 1/22 oct.

> Why not G#^, in otherwords, using a straight enharmonic equivalent?

Surely you can see that G# is two steps higher than Ab in this
notation, no? So G#^ is two steps higher than Ab^.

> I suspect this
> goes to the heart of the idiosyncracies of notating 22 tet.

It sure does. Perhaps you should spend some more time getting to
understand Dave Keenan's proposed notation for 22-tET.

> By the way were you able to enlarge the pages?

Not yet.

> So if I use an enharmonic equivalent, say, C# for Db, I substitute
a v for a ^? In all cases?

Well, C#v is Db^, but Dbv is not C#^! In fact, Dbv is C, and C#^ is D.

> > > The "key" for the Dynamic Symmetrical Minor that would leave
open
> > > strings in the key would be : -
> > >
> > > G, Ab ^, A , Bb^ , B, Db^, D, Eb^, E, F^ . Four flats and five
^
> > symbols.
> >
> > Certainly seems preferable, don't you think? There's one other
> > possibility also that uses all the open strings.
>
> Can't find any other 'Symmetricals' unless it's the mode of the >
above starting on Db^.

That's the one! And it has the exact same notes! Now you see why
it's 'symmetrical'! And I guess in a way you were right when you said
you couldn't find any -- since this has the same notes, it doesn't
look much like a distinct possibility.

paulerlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
>
> > > > I'm sure that a solution has been found for this but my
> > > > suggestion would be to rename
> > > > some notes, eg, G# instead of Ab,
> > >
> > > You mean G#v instead of Ab^?
> >
> > Yes, and also along the lines of your examples below. I don't
> quite understand why G#v would
> > replace an Ab^.
>
> Because # raises you 3/22 oct., b lowers you 3/22 oct., ^ raises you
> 1/22 oct., and v lowers you 1/22 oct.

Duuhhh! Nobody told me that, but it's patently obvious from the fretboard. Not so obvious from
the lattice unless I substitute 22 tet steps for note names.

>
> > Why not G#^, in otherwords, using a straight enharmonic equivalent?
>
> Surely you can see that G# is two steps higher than Ab in this
> notation, no? So G#^ is two steps higher than Ab^.

Again obvious from the fretboard. I'll try to engage my brain before waffling next time.

>
> > I suspect this
> > goes to the heart of the idiosyncracies of notating 22 tet.
>
> It sure does. Perhaps you should spend some more time getting to
> understand Dave Keenan's proposed notation for 22-tET.
>
> > By the way were you able to enlarge the pages?
>
> Not yet.
>
> > So if I use an enharmonic equivalent, say, C# for Db, I substitute
> a v for a ^? In all cases?
>
> Well, C#v is Db^, but Dbv is not C#^! In fact, Dbv is C, and C#^ is D.
>
> > > > The "key" for the Dynamic Symmetrical Minor that would leave
> open
> > > > strings in the key would be : -
> > > >
> > > > G, Ab ^, A , Bb^ , B, Db^, D, Eb^, E, F^ . Four flats and five
> ^
> > > symbols.
> > >
> > > Certainly seems preferable, don't you think? There's one other
> > > possibility also that uses all the open strings.
> >
> > Can't find any other 'Symmetricals' unless it's the mode of the >
> above starting on Db^.
>
> That's the one! And it has the exact same notes! Now you see why
> it's 'symmetrical'! And I guess in a way you were right when you said
> you couldn't find any -- since this has the same notes, it doesn't
> look much like a distinct possibility.
>

Thanks for the patient guidance.

Best Wishes

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

> > Because # raises you 3/22 oct., b lowers you 3/22 oct., ^ raises
you
> > 1/22 oct., and v lowers you 1/22 oct.
>
> Duuhhh! Nobody told me that, but it's patently obvious from the
fretboard. Not so obvious from
> the lattice unless I substitute 22 tet steps for note names.

What lattice are you looking at?

paulerlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
>
> > > Because # raises you 3/22 oct., b lowers you 3/22 oct., ^ raises
> you
> > > 1/22 oct., and v lowers you 1/22 oct.
> >
> > Duuhhh! Nobody told me that, but it's patently obvious from the
> fretboard. Not so obvious from
> > the lattice unless I substitute 22 tet steps for note names.
>
> What lattice are you looking at?

In a posting from Thursday 26 July, Dave gave the following as one possible proposal for a 22 tet
notation. (Can't guarantee alignment) : -

G\ D\ A\ E\ B\ F#\
Ab Eb Bb F C G D A E B
Db/ Ab/ Eb/ Bb/ F/ C/

Obviously I've been using the symbols v for \ and ^ for /

Regards.

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

> In a posting from Thursday 26 July, Dave gave the following

Gotcha. Yes, harmonic lattices usually do not give melodic
information, unless you orient them Canright's way.

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
>
>
> paulerlich wrote:
>
> > Alison,
> >
> > A cursory glance revealed two errors at
> >
> > http://homepages.which.net/~alison.monteith3/22folder/fingers%
20.html
> >
> > The G string is mislabelled A, and there should be a little red
> > circle at the 12th fret of that string.
> >
> > note that all the decatonic scales are easily played in one
position
> > with four notes per string (aren't we lucky to have four fingers
on
> > our left hand?)
> >
> > -Paul
>
> You're absolutely right. I'll correct the errors in my next update.
> Many thanks.

Alison, this could end up being the most important webpage in my
life, so will you allow me a few more comments?

The diagram, once corrected, applies just as much to _all_ the modes
of the Symmetrical Decatonic -- not just the Dynamic Minor mode or
whatever. It would be good to differentiate the little circles
somehow to show where to find the roots of these various modes.

Then, it would be good to add diagrams for the Pentachordal
Decatonic, heptatonics like 4 1 4 4 1 4 4 and 3 3 3 4 3 3 3,
etc. . . . I'd be happy to provide you with ASCII versions if you
wish . . .

I could also provide you with some more "musical" progressions of the
chords you so wonderfully map out, based on the decatonic pieces Ara
and I performed at Microthon I and Microthon II . . .

Contact me offlist -- I'd like to be actively engaged with you (at
whatever frequency of involvement suits you) in expanding this
wonderful resource . . .

Best,
Paul

Paul!
If you are interested in Pelog, you could do some Pelog like stuff in 22 by creating a 9 tone
cycle of varied 4ths as in
10 10 10 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 9
or any of the permutations of 10s and 9s
likewise if you saw it as a varied (or unvaried) 11 tone scale one could use a cycle of 10s but
this lacks the variety of the former. I have applied such a thing to other scales

paulerlich wrote:

>
>
> I could also provide you with some more "musical" progressions of the
> chords you so wonderfully map out, based on the decatonic pieces Ara
> and I performed at Microthon I and Microthon II . . .
>

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

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

--- In tuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
> Paul!
> If you are interested in Pelog, you could do some Pelog like
stuff in 22 by creating a 9 tone
> cycle of varied 4ths as in
> 10 10 10 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 9

I'm confused. That doesn't form a closed cycle in 22, nor does it
give a 9-tone scale. Help!

Paul!
yes too many 10s take off the first two
10 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 9

paulerlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
> > Paul!
> > If you are interested in Pelog, you could do some Pelog like
> stuff in 22 by creating a 9 tone
> > cycle of varied 4ths as in
> > 10 10 10 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 9
>
> I'm confused. That doesn't form a closed cycle in 22, nor does it
> give a 9-tone scale. Help!
>

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

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

--- In tuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
> Paul!
> yes too many 10s take off the first two
> 10 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 9

Aha! Well, when Steve Rezsutek was playing with my decatonic scales
in 22-tET, he found that a great way to tune the percussion sounds
was with exactly this scale! See
http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/doc/modename.html and look under 22
tone modes.

I'm going to stick metal objects near the bridge of my 22-tone guitar
and try this scale!

Thanks Kraig.

--- In tuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:

> Paul!
> yes too many 10s take off the first two
> 10 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 9

BTW one can get the same scale by consistently using a generator of 5.

This is the chain-of-7/6s derivation of "Pelog" you've mentioned
before, only now in 22-tET.

Paul!
You also have all the scales with the permutations of where the 9's are (assuming you don't
have duplicating pitches but it doesn't look like this happens)

paulerlich wrote:

> --- In tuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
> > Paul!
> > yes too many 10s take off the first two
> > 10 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 9
>
> Aha! Well, when Steve Rezsutek was playing with my decatonic scales
> in 22-tET, he found that a great way to tune the percussion sounds
> was with exactly this scale! See
> http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/doc/modename.html and look under 22
> tone modes.
>
> I'm going to stick metal objects near the bridge of my 22-tone guitar
> and try this scale!
>
> Thanks Kraig.
>

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

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

--- In tuning@y..., "paulerlich" <paul@s...> wrote:

> I'm going to stick metal objects near the bridge of my 22-tone
guitar
> and try this scale!

I have played on guitar with this 9-tone scale (sans metal objects)
and it is indeed a fun scale to play with. It is wildly unfamiliar
(to these western ears) so it really takes you out there. I thought
of it as a chain of 5/22, but I suppose the chain-of-pelog-fourths
idea could be another useful way of looking at it...

kp