Re: [tuning] Digest Number 1940

On 3/1/02 7:13 PM, "tuning@yahoogroups.com" <tuning@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

> Message: 14
> Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 22:28:34 -0000
> From: "paulerlich" <paul@stretch-music.com>
> Subject: Re: More "Jerries"
>
> --- In tuning@y..., Gerald Eskelin <stg3music@e...> wrote:
>
>> If you still have the energy, interest and time, you might consider
> redoing
>> the items with the root and fifth sounding alone for about three
> seconds (so
>> I can establish my "well-tuned" third), then add the third for
> about five
>> seconds, then drop out the root and fifth so I can see where the
> third is
>> sounding in relation to "my" third. Whaddaya think?
>>
>> Another option would be to supply the root and fifth *below* the
> third
>> (where it would fall in the partial series 2/3/5). I find it's much
> easier
>> to hear and tune in that configuration.
>
> i did both:
>
> /tuning-math/files/Paul/sounds/

HOLY B'GEEEESUS!!!!!!

Paul, as you likely remember, I initially agreed with Joe that the third
sounded "high" on jerry0, and then later changed my mind and thought it to
be JI (I guess because it sounded so "good").

So, when I first played it in this new format, I sang a JI third into the
open fifth. When the recorded third came in, I fell off my chair!!!! It was
*way* higher than 4:5. So, then I sang "my" high third into the open fifth
and when the recorded third came in we had a tonal love affair!

The third in jerry0 might still be a smidge low, but then that may be due to
the adrenaline pumping through the sheer excitement of finding a synthesized
major chord with human ears. WOW!

I'll go back and spend some time with the others and offer my "evaluations."
It'll really be easy with the new format. Thanks for your efforts. I can't
wait to find out what you did to prepare these examples.

I think I'll go pour me a stiff one. Cheers!!!!!!!

Jerry

On 3/1/02 7:13 PM, "tuning@yahoogroups.com" <tuning@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

>
> Message: 22
> Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 02:49:05 -0000
> From: "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@rcn.com>
> Subject: Re: More "Jerries"
>
> --- In tuning@y..., "paulerlich" <paul@s...> wrote:
>
> /tuning/topicId_34628.html#35119
>
>> --- In tuning@y..., Gerald Eskelin <stg3music@e...> wrote:
>>
>>> If you still have the energy, interest and time, you might
> consider
>> redoing
>>> the items with the root and fifth sounding alone for about three
>> seconds (so
>>> I can establish my "well-tuned" third), then add the third for
>> about five
>>> seconds, then drop out the root and fifth so I can see where the
>> third is
>>> sounding in relation to "my" third. Whaddaya think?
>>>
>>> Another option would be to supply the root and fifth *below* the
>> third
>>> (where it would fall in the partial series 2/3/5). I find it's
> much
>> easier
>>> to hear and tune in that configuration.
>>
>> i did both:
>>
>> /tuning-math/files/Paul/sounds/
>
> ***I'm not getting this.
>
> This sounds like a *minor* third followed by a *major* sixth to me.
>
> Is there something wrong with my hearing?
>
> Also, all but the very first sound the same to me. Even the rapidity
> of beating sounds the same. They must vary by only a very, very few
> cents...
>
> I think I want to go back to 17 being the smallest "deliminator..."
>
> :)
>
> jp

Sorry, Joe, that it wasn't clear to you (and perhaps others) in my request
to Paul. The first interval you hear is an open perfect fifth in lower
pitches (relative to a male singing range). The idea was to sing a major
third (actually a tenth) over the open fifth and tune it to the open fifth.
Then when the recorded third comes in, it's pretty easy to tell whether your
vocal third matches the recorded third. If it seems noisy, you can get a
clue to whether its higher or lower by singing past the point where the bass
and fifth drop out. By stopping your vocal third during the time the
recorded third is sounding without the root and fifth, you can hear whether
it is slightly higher or lower than your vocal third.

Hope that helps. If not, ask again.

Jerry

--- In tuning@y..., Gerald Eskelin <stg3music@e...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_35154.html#35155

> On 3/1/02 7:13 PM, "tuning@y..." <tuning@y...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Message: 22
> > Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 02:49:05 -0000
> > From: "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...>
> > Subject: Re: More "Jerries"
> >
> > --- In tuning@y..., "paulerlich" <paul@s...> wrote:
> >
> > /tuning/topicId_34628.html#35119
> >
> >> --- In tuning@y..., Gerald Eskelin <stg3music@e...> wrote:
> >>
> >>> If you still have the energy, interest and time, you might
> > consider
> >> redoing
> >>> the items with the root and fifth sounding alone for about three
> >> seconds (so
> >>> I can establish my "well-tuned" third), then add the third for
> >> about five
> >>> seconds, then drop out the root and fifth so I can see where the
> >> third is
> >>> sounding in relation to "my" third. Whaddaya think?
> >>>
> >>> Another option would be to supply the root and fifth *below* the
> >> third
> >>> (where it would fall in the partial series 2/3/5). I find it's
> > much
> >> easier
> >>> to hear and tune in that configuration.
> >>
> >> i did both:
> >>
> >> /tuning-math/files/Paul/sounds/
> >
> > ***I'm not getting this.
> >
> > This sounds like a *minor* third followed by a *major* sixth to
me.
> >
> > Is there something wrong with my hearing?
> >
> > Also, all but the very first sound the same to me. Even the
rapidity
> > of beating sounds the same. They must vary by only a very, very
few
> > cents...
> >
> > I think I want to go back to 17 being the
smallest "deliminator..."
> >
> > :)
> >
> > jp
>
> Sorry, Joe, that it wasn't clear to you (and perhaps others) in my
request
> to Paul. The first interval you hear is an open perfect fifth in
lower
> pitches (relative to a male singing range). The idea was to sing a
major
> third (actually a tenth) over the open fifth and tune it to the
open fifth.
> Then when the recorded third comes in, it's pretty easy to tell
whether your
> vocal third matches the recorded third. If it seems noisy, you can
get a
> clue to whether its higher or lower by singing past the point where
the bass
> and fifth drop out. By stopping your vocal third during the time the
> recorded third is sounding without the root and fifth, you can hear
whether
> it is slightly higher or lower than your vocal third.
>
> Hope that helps. If not, ask again.
>
> Jerry

***I'll try it again, Jerry, and report back. Thanks!

jp