Re: JI and the listening composer - reply to Paul 2

emotionaljourney22 wrote:

i can't blame you for wanting to tune a steel-string instrument very
justly. i've had the same experience which is leading to the

> construction of the shrutar (which i've discussed quite a bit). but
> you can only take this reasoning so far -- struck steel strings have
> slightly inharmonic partials!
>
>
> yes, i've had the same experience with 22. not on the classical
> guitar though . . . have you tried 22-equal on any other instruments?

Only synths and samplers. Now I find your experience with 22 very interesting and of musical
value. That's the sort of observation I file away for later use.

>
> if you end up going with a ji philosophy and approach, i couldn't be
> happier. i'd like to see you give 72 a fair chance, though, since it
> will be far more comprehensible to western-trained musicians, in
> addition to the "super-ji" (paraphrasing pehrson) possibilities which
> have already been discussed to death here.

I'm not finished with 72 - in fact, I've hardly begun. To my mind also, 72 is more accessible to
conventionally trained musicians and has some history behind it, adding to its usefulness in
getting music performed.

Best Wishes

>