Re: [tuning] Digest Number 1976

On 3/20/02 8:02 PM, "tuning@yahoogroups.com" <tuning@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

>>> Message: 22
>>> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 20:51:09 -0000
>>> From: "paulerlich" <paul@s...>
>>> Subject: Re: Digest Number 1971
>>>
>>> --- In tuning@y..., Gerald Eskelin <stg3music@e...> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The last part I understand, but what does that have to do with
>>>> anything?
>>>
>>> you seem to be suggesting that a ji third leads to a perception
> of a
>>> high third, but that a slightly higher third would lead to a
>>> perception of a third *lower* than the high third. right?
>>
>> First phrase: yes.
>>
>> Second phrase: huh?
>
> you're saying that if the actual third is *between* the ji position
> and the 'high' position, the perceived third will be *lower* than the
> perceived third from either a *true* ji third or a *true* high third.
> right?

Holy cow, Paul. You said that communication is sometimes difficult in these
matters. How about garbled. Hold on and let me figure out what you're
talking about here.

What is an "actual" third? Since I consider the physical (actual?) third to
*be* the JI third, it hardly can be "between" it's self. I know what the JI
position is and what the high position (both illusionary and vocally
reproduced) is. I also consider the illusionary and vocally produced high
thirds to be perceptually the same. There is nothing "between" these two
"positions," so far as I know.

My god, if your paragraph indicates what you think I have been saying, we
have a pretty big gap to close. Let's define terms:

JI third - 4:5 relation to sounding root. Perceptually compares to ET third
as being somewhat lower, which of course is expected.

Illusionary JI third - psycho-acoustic phenomenon that occurs (to some of
us) when the 4:5 third is sounded with both the root and a 2:3 fifth.
Perceptually compares to ET third as being somewhat higher, which is (as we
well know) surprising to some and unbelievabe to others.

Vocally-produced JI third - one that is sung at the 4:5 position above a
sounding root. It is easily perceived to be below ET. When sung within a
well-tuned triad, it likely can be heard as the illusionary JI third.

Vocally-produced high third - sung at a frequency that appears to match (to
some of us) the illusionary JI third, and is (to all of us) higher than ET.

So, we have two positions of the major third here, one lower than ET and the
other higher than ET. Both can be vocally reproduced, sometime unknowingly
and sometimes intentionally.

*PERCIEVED THIRDS* / *SUNG THIRDS (learned)*
"high" JI third within triad / high third w/ or w/o 5th
ET third ----------------------------------------------------------
JI third with root only / JI third w/ or w/o 5th

How's that? Clear? Not clear?

Jerry

--- In tuning@y..., Gerald Eskelin <stg3music@e...> wrote:
> On 3/20/02 8:02 PM, "tuning@y..." <tuning@y...> wrote:
>
> >>> Message: 22
> >>> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 20:51:09 -0000
> >>> From: "paulerlich" <paul@s...>
> >>> Subject: Re: Digest Number 1971
> >>>
> >>> --- In tuning@y..., Gerald Eskelin <stg3music@e...> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The last part I understand, but what does that have to do with
> >>>> anything?
> >>>
> >>> you seem to be suggesting that a ji third leads to a perception
> > of a
> >>> high third, but that a slightly higher third would lead to a
> >>> perception of a third *lower* than the high third. right?
> >>
> >> First phrase: yes.
> >>
> >> Second phrase: huh?
> >
> > you're saying that if the actual third is *between* the ji
position
> > and the 'high' position, the perceived third will be *lower* than
the
> > perceived third from either a *true* ji third or a *true* high
third.
> > right?
>
> Holy cow, Paul. You said that communication is sometimes difficult
in these
> matters. How about garbled. Hold on and let me figure out what
you're
> talking about here.
>
> What is an "actual" third? Since I consider the physical (actual?)
third to
> *be* the JI third,

i mean the *actual* third that is sung, whether it's ji or not.

> it hardly can be "between" it's self.

i mean an *actual* third at, say, 395 cents.

better?