Music Notation Modernization Association

These guys are hilarious. They have been working on it for 16 years
and they haven't even agreed on how to notate 12-tET.

One of their criteria is that the notation must be "adaptable to a
variety of microtonal systems". But they apparently assume that 12-tET
is the best or only possible basis for that and that Ab will always
equal G# etc.

http://www.speechskript.com/mnma.htm

In-Reply-To: <a5dgln+8kkn@eGroups.com>
dkeenanuqnetau wrote:

> These guys are hilarious. They have been working on it for 16 years
> and they haven't even agreed on how to notate 12-tET.

I found this site a while back, from Charles Lucy's. At least they've
been able to put out lots of books and newsletters. They haven't worked
out the difference between German and Dutch yet. This Klavar notation
looks interesting

<http://web.inter.nl.net/hcc/Jo.Jansen.Deurne/totklave.htm>

or

<http://web.inter.nl.net/hcc/Jo.Jansen.Deurne/totklavn.htm>

in Dutch (not German) avoiding the frames and the background music.

It's partly Erv Wilson's dodecatonic notation turned on its side, and
without the accidentals to get you beyond 12 notes. I can't find anything
there or on the linked website (which started throwing popups at me) about
when it was supposed to have been invented.

> One of their criteria is that the notation must be "adaptable to a
> variety of microtonal systems". But they apparently assume that 12-tET
> is the best or only possible basis for that and that Ab will always
> equal G# etc.

I couldn't find anything on the microtonality either. Basing it on a 12
note octave makes some sense, as it's the way musicians already seem to be
thinking. And it's common to meantone, schismic and diaschismic
temperaments. Not especially useful for neutral third scales though.

Graham

On 2/25/02 9:11 AM, "dkeenanuqnetau" <d.keenan@uq.net.au> wrote:

> These guys are hilarious. They have been working on it for 16 years
> and they haven't even agreed on how to notate 12-tET.
>

BAAAAAAAAAA HAAAA HAA... Oh I needed this today. Thank you so much.

> One of their criteria is that the notation must be "adaptable to a
> variety of microtonal systems". But they apparently assume that 12-tET
> is the best or only possible basis for that and that Ab will always
> equal G# etc.
>

Personally I like Sample 8. I'm inspired:

"Why did the milk dud cross the road?"
"Because G# is Ab in 12."

Funny, they make one of their criterion "all keys should be equally notated
and not centered around C major like bad ugly history blah blah" yet umm all
of their so called notation examples have C as a root.

Oh and what's this 123456789XN?! Yeesh... I would deduce there's no
computer geeks in the organization if they're not even using A and B for 10
and 11.

> http://www.speechskript.com/mnma.htm
>

I think it would be good therapy to just trash this bunch. Ah well.

Marc

--- In tuning@y..., "dkeenanuqnetau" <d.keenan@u...> wrote:

> One of their criteria is that the notation must be "adaptable to a
> variety of microtonal systems". But they apparently assume that 12-tET
> is the best or only possible basis for that and that Ab will always
> equal G# etc.

It's just as possible to start out from a 12 basis as a 7 basis--in fact, at one point I thought that was what George was proposing.

--- In tuning@y..., "dkeenanuqnetau" <d.keenan@u...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_34823.html#34823

> These guys are hilarious. They have been working on it for 16 years
> and they haven't even agreed on how to notate 12-tET.
>
> One of their criteria is that the notation must be "adaptable to a
> variety of microtonal systems". But they apparently assume that 12-
tET
> is the best or only possible basis for that and that Ab will always
> equal G# etc.
>
> http://www.speechskript.com/mnma.htm

****Dave, I think you should join to help them out. Looks like they
need a little "higher octane" mental horsepower there...

JP