Subject: Subject: Re: to Joe Pehrson

> Hello Joe!

My objection to the use of the tern is that it implies that practitioners of JI try to impose it on others. In Case of Fact I have
seen more insistence of the contrary on this list. This list has done more to censor JI practitioners than any single entity . Just look
at how many of them post. They have all been driven off. It seems its OK to attack what JI people do and let what ever the ET crowd do
and say without any reflection. Yes doty is wrong but so is serialism. It doesn't work and that it has to run to microtones to cover up
the fact that it have fail and caused more damage to music in general than any JI person has. I can see it has provided nothing more
than one more thing for academia to "talk " about.
I really don't enjoy being on this list.

>
>
> From: "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@rcn.com>
> Subject: Subject: Re: to Joe Pehrson
>
> --- In tuning@y..., "dkeenanuqnetau" <d.keenan@u...> wrote:
>
> /tuning/topicId_38531.html#38542
>
>
> > Having read David Doty's excellent recent post to this list
> on "False reification" I cannot call him a JI Fundamentalist, but the
> following earlier claim by him remains on the JIN website.
>
> > See http://www.dnai.com/~jinetwk/
>
> > "The simple-ratio intervals upon which Just Intonation is based are
> > the fundamental constituents of melody and harmony. They are what
> the human auditory system recognizes as consonance, if it ever has
> the opportunity to hear them in a musical context."
>
> > You see, he has said they are _THE_fundamental_ constituents, not
> only of harmony (where he could perhaps be forgiven the slight
> hyperbole) but also of melody (where I think Julia is entitled to be
> a little annoyed, if not outraged).
>
> ***I'm sorry for continuing to inject a but of humor on this list,
> but I find this absolutely *hilarious.* We're "looking for"
> JI "Fundamentalism" and Doty uses the term "fundamental."
>
> Well, *I* found it funny...
>
> > And here's Kyle Gann from
> > http://home.earthlink.net/~kgann/tuning.html#tune4
> >
>
> ***Yes, and this is, of course, the famous "eating red meat" quote.
> I try to stay away from that...
>
> JP
>
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

--- In tuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_38557.html#38557

> > Hello Joe!
>
> My objection to the use of the tern is that it implies that
practitioners of JI try to impose it on others. In Case of Fact I have
> seen more insistence of the contrary on this list. This list has
done more to censor JI practitioners than any single entity . Just
look
> at how many of them post. They have all been driven off. It seems
its OK to attack what JI people do and let what ever the ET crowd do
> and say without any reflection. Yes doty is wrong but so is
serialism. It doesn't work and that it has to run to microtones to
cover up
> the fact that it have fail and caused more damage to music in
general than any JI person has. I can see it has provided nothing more
> than one more thing for academia to "talk " about.
> I really don't enjoy being on this list.
>

***Hi Kraig!

I think you've hit on something very important here, the
phrase, "impose it on others..." That's the thing that bothers *me*
the most, too... even if it is by *inference....* i.e. "this is the
*right* way...

Otherwise, I'm all for the most variety possible. Hey, somebody
could even manage to write a great piece in a really *terrible*
system or tuning of choice... (by somebody's definition...)

Joe

--- In tuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
> > Hello Joe!
>
> My objection to the use of the tern is that it implies that
practitioners of JI try to impose it on others. In Case of Fact I have
> seen more insistence of the contrary on this list. This list has
done more to censor JI practitioners than any single entity . Just
look
> at how many of them post. They have all been driven off. It seems
its OK to attack what JI people do and let what ever the ET crowd do
> and say without any reflection. Yes doty is wrong but so is
serialism. It doesn't work and that it has to run to microtones to
cover up
> the fact that it have fail and caused more damage to music in
general than any JI person has. I can see it has provided nothing more
> than one more thing for academia to "talk " about.
> I really don't enjoy being on this list.

Kraig, this perception of yours doesn't make any sense to me. Compared
to Julia Werntz's position, this is an almost entirely JI-oriented
list! Even those on this list who are into ETs (and what about those
of us in between who are into linear and planar temperaments including
microtemperaments) do so in order to approximate JI intervals. Only
Dan Stearns comes to mind as extolling the virtues of certain ETs as
interesting regardless of JI or approximations, and he is certainly
not hostile to JI.

I don't think the occasional hostilities (_very_ occasional compared
to other lists) have ever been a JI vs. ET thing, more usually a maths
and science versus numerology and magic thing. We spawned new lists
for both of these, but this list still exists so I guess it is
supposed to foster dialog between these camps. My guess is that it's
the nature of the medium. The math/science types are simply more
inclined to _write_.

> You dismiss this without having heard it!

To Argue the JI is not consonant is contrary to my own experience and thousands of others. Even Derreg recognized it was more consonant
and the argument has always been too consonant. If not why would we use it. Because some one told us so? yes every one who hears JI does
so because of some belief in low integer ratios.
BUT consonance does not mean something is better music otherwise music on a single harmonic series would be the best there was. Just
as the most complex is the not best.
I find the statements on the other side of the coin just as outrageous, but don't label them fanatics.
Also DIVISION is good. Who wants every thing to be one big homogenous whole.
If java and bali got along better we would be poorer in diversity, which homogenousness touches upon by only it little shallow
escapades. NO the greater the division, the more the musics will develop in opposite direction. The great thing about the music on this
globes is that we have a myriad of unreconcilable musical systems.
With all the "infinite possibilities" charted now within western music, it totally amazes me at what does not and possibly never will
happen coming from that tradition, that is already here on the globe. Yes the division might be best served by removing myself which is
once again coming close.

>
> From: "dkeenanuqnetau" <d.keenan@uq.net.au>
> Subject: Subject: Re: to Joe Pehrson
>
>
> What patent nonsense. I personally find that Brahm's lullaby, for
> example, is very soothing in 12-equal. If it is more so in JI, the
> difference is extremely small.
>
> Do you see what I (and Julia) mean?
>
> I suppose that some JI proponents feel they need to make such
> outrageous statements against non-JI tunings to try to counteract the
> huge amount of ignorance and inertia working against acceptance of JI.
> But I hope we can all see now that they really don't help the cause at
> all. They just lead to further reactions in the opposite direction
> like those of Julia's dissertation.
>
> Perhaps the time is ripe for a little reconciliation. And a little
> recognition that there is a hell of a lot of middle ground between
> strict JI and 12-equal. We should be building bridges not fortifying
> bunkers. 72-ET is a marvelous bridge.
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

Kraig, I agree that diversity is good, but not division in the sense
of mistrust and feeling the need to exaggerate the flaws in the other
guy's ideas. I feel both Doty and Gann on one side and Werntz on the
other have been guilty of this (although perhaps this is out of
ignorance). And I probably have been too. Sorry.

Hi Everyone,

Wow! finally a message I can "sort of" understand and reply to.

Most of my frustrations are simple ones like, "why does the musical
alphabet start on "c"? I received my answer on this group. Thanks.

As a struggling JI enthusiast (still in the JI boot camp)I often ask
myself what drives me to want to stay up late at night reading and
studying tuning theory. I did lousy in math while a young skippy in
school and yet everything with regards to JI theory is starting
to "click".

Maybe its a result of when I first heard a pure interval on my
Hammond Organ (sounding a single note and humming and interval until
it sounded perfect). That was the coolest thing I ever heard! I
forget who, but someone on this list told me to try it.

That's what makes this group one of the coolest groups in the world!
SUPPORT !!!!

I too have often thought, what sounds the best 12tET, or JI or 31tET
51, etc. etc. and finally came to the conclusion WHO CARES !! THEY
ALL SOUND GOOD! In the right hands, any of these tuning can sound
awesome! I look at different tunings like a clump of clay, just
waiting to be molded by the right artist.

I was confused earlier on and at times I still am when I read tuning
professionals trashing 12tET. Its not the perfect tuning but guess
what? Its probably the most widely used successful tuning in the
world. Agree? Does that make it the right tuning?? Of course not!

I tripped across Kyle Gann's web page a few years ago and that also
started me on my journey.

Its the support of all the "expert" members on this page that breed
the study of tuning theory into new ethusiasts like myself. Its also
a sad thing when supportive members leave the group.

The most "historical" message ever posted on this group in my opinion
was message number 28074

It reads.......

"Linda and I are fine, although I can see out my window right at this
moment the billowing smoke that was once the World Trade Center.

Fortunately neither of us was in lower Manhattan at the time.

Naturally, we're keeping pretty much at home at the moment.

Hopefully there will be better days ahead... but I remain
unconvinced... Joseph Pehrson -end-

Joe, I'm really glad you and your wife were safe that day.

Regards
Wally
http://members.aol.com/duanelives/

--- In tuning@y..., "electricwally77" <earth7@o...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_38557.html#38570

>
> The most "historical" message ever posted on this group in my
opinion
> was message number 28074
>
> It reads.......
>
> "Linda and I are fine, although I can see out my window right at
this
> moment the billowing smoke that was once the World Trade Center.
>
> Fortunately neither of us was in lower Manhattan at the time.
>
> Naturally, we're keeping pretty much at home at the moment.
>
> Hopefully there will be better days ahead... but I remain
> unconvinced... Joseph Pehrson -end-
>
> Joe, I'm really glad you and your wife were safe that day.
>
> Regards
> Wally
> http://members.aol.com/duanelives/

***Thanks so much, Wally, for your response, and I'm flattered that
you can *understand* my posts on this list. This certainly must
speak to the clarity and sophistication of them... :)

My wife, Linda, was actually employed for a couple of days on the
107th floor of Tower Two, six months before the incident. No one
lived who was on that floor. Any more on metatuning, where we put
non-tuning material:

/metatuning/

Joe Pehrson