Set or series

My fault.

Consequences of being UK based. I am used to Brindle's 'Serial Composition',
in which a 'series' or 'set' is defined as an ordered sequence of the 12
pitch classes of 12EDO, without repetition. I was making a common musical
mistake, and forgetting that 'set theory' prefers a more rigorous
definition, but entirely of a different kind, like having a predicate
calculus operator or something...

So I meant good-ol' serial music, or set or row, for a 'really old fashioned
term'

That's what happens when you mix music an mathematics - everyone with
crossed definitions.

>
> ?? yes, i think mark was actually thinking of a "series" (as in
> serial music) or something,

I don't wan't to think that I am marginalising - but there are some who
would marginalise others:

jon ("jonszanto" <JSZANTO@ADNC.COM>) says:

> And while I have often called for civility (and tried to do it in a
> non-condescending manner), we are going to be looking at some very personal,
> artistic decisions that are being discussed. These areas are not data, or
> theorems, or factoids to be proved or disproved. I expect people to argue - on
> both sides - with both head *and* heart. A fair number of points Ms. Werntz
> puts forward are not merely the 0/1 of factual content, but opinion and
> preference.

Which is my point about the Werntz article - it makes out that everyone else
is wrong and only ms Werntz is right. I'm sorry, but this is a musical
democracy. Unlike whoever said that "I disagree with what you say, but I'll
defend to the death your right to say it", I will not defend people who
would take away the right to free speech. And that is what ms Werntz is
implying by her dismissal of JI ideas, suggesting that we all use little
series of microtonal pitches from an EDO scale, with lots of micropolyphony
and microgradus ad parnassum (apologies Claude, and l'Ecole).

My own article is based around EDOs, and it also discusses JI. I feel that
one is an approximation to the other. Note I state this as a feeling, an
opinion, not as a pseudo-fact. Some EDOs approximate to very little in JI,
yet they are very 'musical', viz the dicussion on 11EDO recently.

But, how you or I choose our notes is, to some extent, a personal thing.
Whatever the philosophy that gave rise to the notes, only the notes will be
left in the end. Wagner is a case in point. No rational person would
subscribe to his philosophy today (well, there are some...), but his impact
on music as a composer is undeniable. And this goes for Schoenberg,
Partch... you name the composer. Their life and methods are unimportant -
only their music.

There is no tuning war.

Mark

--- In tuning@y..., Mark Gould <mark.gould@a...> wrote:
> My fault.
>
> Consequences of being UK based. I am used to Brindle's 'Serial
Composition',
> in which a 'series' or 'set' is defined as an ordered sequence of
the 12
> pitch classes of 12EDO, without repetition.

ok, sorry about the misunderstanding. this particular thing has
always been called a "row" or "tone row" in my US-based experience.

> Which is my point about the Werntz article - it makes out that
everyone else
> is wrong and only ms Werntz is right. I'm sorry, but this is a
musical
> democracy. Unlike whoever said that "I disagree with what you say,
but I'll
> defend to the death your right to say it", I will not defend people
who
> would take away the right to free speech. And that is what ms
Werntz is
> implying by her dismissal of JI ideas

fair enough . . . no need to hide behind margo, then.

why don't we give julia some breathing room so that we may have, if
nothing else, a post-mortem on her article (if it is as stillborn as
you suggest). maybe we can all learn something -- as it is, i fear we
may have lost her altogher.

--- In tuning@y..., Mark Gould <mark.gould@a...> wrote:

> That's what happens when you mix music an mathematics - everyone with
> crossed definitions.

It doesn't need to be--why not either use standard terminology, or else coin your own?

Some EDOs approximate to very little in JI,
> yet they are very 'musical', viz the dicussion on 11EDO recently.

11 approximates to a lot in JI, and that is highly relevant to the question of why it is very musical.

--- In tuning@y..., "emotionaljourney22" <paul@s...> wrote:

> why don't we give julia some breathing room so that we may have, if
> nothing else, a post-mortem on her article (if it is as stillborn as
> you suggest). maybe we can all learn something -- as it is, i fear we
> may have lost her altogher.

Maybe for the new century we ought to redefine the notion of "thesis defense" to include a public, internet discussion, with the thesis itself available online. Mostly, this would still be a formality, but in some cases it could get interesting and might help keep the academic world just a tiny bit less ingrown. The idea that someone outside of the department has to sign off on your thesis and your qualifying exam is in practice a joke, but preventing departments from becoming ingrown is the idea behind it. It seems to me now we've got something else we could try.