Composing and scoring in the microtonal style.......

Hello Everyone!!

I am new to the group! I am very
interested in the just intonation,
experimental tunings, and the microtonal
style! I have been composing for over 17
years in the "well tempered" 12 tone style.
I write alot of my music by notation on
staff paper. Is there a way to compose by
notation in the microtonal style? Is there a
system of composing in the microtonal or
just intonation styles? Are there any websites
I can see a score of microtonal compositions?
I have never seen any written scores in these
kind of methods!

Thank You!!
Joel Hickman

In a message dated 9/14/02 1:40:01 PM Central Daylight Time,
joelhickman_1999@yahoo.com writes:

> I am very
> interested in the just intonation,
> experimental tunings, and the microtonal
> style!

I devised a just-temperament scale for my organ I posted here. It uses only
two markings different from Equal temperament tuning--"7" for a harmonic 7th
and "0" for a note in the ET 00 series. These markings are only used when on
a split digital. There's also a "-" for notes in the just major third 386
series. But since none occur on the split digitals, the mark isn't used on my
organ scores. However, it would need to be used in vocal or string-instrument
scores, or for any other instrument without fixed pitches.

Is there a way to compose by>
> notation in the microtonal style? Is there a
> system of composing in the microtonal or
> just intonation styles?

Various composers have devised various just or microtonal notation systems.
But mine with only two markings for keyboard instruments, and oen more for
voice and non-fixed-pich instruments is the simplest.

Are there any websites>
> I can see a score of microtonal compositions?
>
> Joel Hickman
>
I have my <A HREF="/JustIntonationOrganSchool/">Just Intonation Organ eSchool</A> which details my just-temperament
tuning and my just-temperament organ. But no scores are posted. As a one-page
music socre is over 1 MB memory. And Yahoo! only allows uploads or
attachments up to 1 MB.

Sincerely,
Pauline W. Phillips, Moderator, <A HREF="/JohannusOrgansSchool ">Johannus Organs eSchool</A>
Johannus Orgelbouw, Holland, builds pipe, pipe-digital, digital-sampled
organs.
Moderator, <A HREF="/JustIntonationOrganSchool/">Just Intonation Organ eSchool</A>

--- In tuning@y..., "Joel " <joelhickman_1999@y...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_39004.html#39004

> Hello Everyone!!
>
> I am new to the group! I am very
> interested in the just intonation,
> experimental tunings, and the microtonal
> style! I have been composing for over 17
> years in the "well tempered" 12 tone style.
> I write alot of my music by notation on
> staff paper. Is there a way to compose by
> notation in the microtonal style? Is there a
> system of composing in the microtonal or
> just intonation styles? Are there any websites
> I can see a score of microtonal compositions?
> I have never seen any written scores in these
> kind of methods!
>
> Thank You!!
> Joel Hickman

***Hello Joel!

Well, there are *many* ways of going about this, but one of the
*easiest* is to compose in 72-equal, which uses your 12-equal scale
that you are "used" to as a base. In fact, 72-equal is actually 6
different 12-equal scales transposed from one another by just
intonation intervals! The 72 scales only deviate from just intervals
by two or three cents, so they are virtually just.

(I realize there is some dispute in how just is just, but let's stay
out of that for one moment...)

Anyway, all you have to do is use your "regular" 12-equal scale with
the following "deviations" to make 72!:

1/12th of a whole tone up and down

1/6th of a whole tone up and down

and the "usual" quartertones between your 12-equal pitches.

That's it! Presto, "instant" microtonality! (This will elicit snide
commentary from the cognocenti...)

I highly recommend it as the way to go.

More information on the notation can be found here:

https://www.mindeartheart.org/micro.html

And Joe Monzo, as usual, has detailed commentary on it in his famous
dictionary:

http://tonalsoft.com/enc/number/72edo.aspx

Good luck! And don't hesitate to ask questions!

Joe Pehrson

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@rcn.com>

> The 72 scales only deviate from just intervals
> by two or three cents, so they are virtually just.
>
> (I realize there is some dispute in how just is just, but let's stay
> out of that for one moment...)

Nope. They're not really just.

* David Beardsley
* http://biink.com
* http://mp3.com/davidbeardsley

--- In tuning@y..., David Beardsley <davidbeardsley@b...> wrote:

> Nope. They're not really just.

How would you rate my notation system, which uses the five lines and four spaces of the musical staff to represent 9-equal, and sharp and flat symbols to give ennealimmal? It is accurate to 1/5 of a cent in the 9-limit, and can easily be extended with that accuracy to the 11-limit. I think it is in effect just, and since it can be noted using normal musical software it might have value if people could be convinced to learn it (which would be the hard part!)

Dave Keenan and George Secor are in the midst of developing the notation system to end all notation systems on tuning-math, incidentally.

hi Joel,

> From: "Joel " <joelhickman_1999@yahoo.com>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2002 11:39 AM
> Subject: [tuning] Composing and scoring in the microtonal style.......
>
>
> Hello Everyone!!
>
> I am new to the group! I am very
> interested in the just intonation,
> experimental tunings, and the microtonal
> style! I have been composing for over 17
> years in the "well tempered" 12 tone style.
> I write alot of my music by notation on
> staff paper. Is there a way to compose by
> notation in the microtonal style? Is there a
> system of composing in the microtonal or
> just intonation styles? Are there any websites
> I can see a score of microtonal compositions?
> I have never seen any written scores in these
> kind of methods!
>
> Thank You!!
> Joel Hickman

here's a webpage i made of Harry Partch's "The Intruder"
from _17 Lyrics by Li-Po", with an mp3 of Partch's own
performance (voice and adapted viola) in his 11-limit
JI tuning, and my "JustMusic" prime-factor notation
score of the piece:
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/partch/intruder/intruder.htm

-monz
"all roads lead to n^0"

Gene Ward Smith wrote:

> Dave Keenan and George Secor are in the midst of developing the notation system to end all notation systems on tuning-math, incidentally.

This is excellent news Gene and I look forward to the results as I'm planning a set of 22 tet compositions for next year.

I hope that non-mathematicial musicians will find the final results easy to use and understand.

Regards

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
>
>
> Gene Ward Smith wrote:
>
> > Dave Keenan and George Secor are in the midst of developing the
notation system to end all notation systems on tuning-math,
incidentally.

This has been going on for so long that at times I've wondered
whether there would ever be any end to our project. Much of the time
has been spent going over all sorts of details and investigating many
different alternative approaches so that we wouldn't be in a
situation where we were constantly making changes to it after we had
made it available for general use. It's just about ready to be
presented here on the main tuning list, so be watching for this
within the next several weeks.

> This is excellent news Gene and I look forward to the results as
I'm planning a set of 22 tet compositions for next year.
>
> I hope that non-mathematicial musicians will find the final results
easy to use and understand.

While the complete notation is very complicated (and hence very
powerful -- there are around 25 different symbols to alter a note,
not counting the direction of alteration and combinations of these
symbols with sharps and flats), only a fraction of its resources will
be needed for most applications. For example, 22-ET requires only
one new symbol (out of those 25), 72-ET requires three new ones, and
217-ET requires twelve. A 15-odd-limit tonality diamond in just
intonation requires either 8 or 12 of these new symbols (depending on
whether you are using the double or single-symbol option; the latter
uses the same twelve symbols as 217-ET). The remaining symbols are
used for JI above the 15-odd limit or for some of the more obscure
and/or larger numbered ETs.

One guiding principle that we have followed is that, even though the
notation can get very complicated, it should never make it more
difficult to do the simpler things. It isn't necessary to delve into
the underlying mathematics of the notation in order to use it.
However, those who do so will immediately notice that the appearance
of the symbols is closely correlated with the occurrence of prime
numbers in the just intervals (or tempered approximations thereof)
being represented.

I hope that this answers most of your immediate questions.

And thanks, Gene, for mentioning this; your timing was excellent.

--George

George,

--- In tuning@y..., "gdsecor" <gdsecor@y...> wrote:
> This has been going on for so long that at times I've wondered
> whether there would ever be any end to our project.

Since they say "all good things must come to an end", and you are anticipating winding up, it must be a good notation!

> It's just about ready to be presented here on the main tuning
> list, so be watching for this within the next several weeks.

I would like to suggest something that, even if it were to delay the announcement a bit, would be worthwhile: please consider presenting a couple of pieces, in differing intonations/temperments, in the notation. I would think a piece in an ET, and a piece in some limit JI (maybe a 43-note piece of Partch's) that would realistically show how music would be read could go far into knowing how workable this solution will be, and how enthusiatically it can be promoted.

I've followed, at a distance, your's and Dave's developments, and it appears that you wish it to not only be a notation for analysis but also for performing. Please use illustrative examples of performable music(s), and let performers see what they are up against!

I hope that this is a helpful suggestion, and it isn't meant to impede your progress at all - looking forward to the fruits of your labo(u)rs...

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@y..., "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> George,
>
> --- In tuning@y..., "gdsecor" <gdsecor@y...> wrote:
> > This has been going on for so long that at times I've wondered
> > whether there would ever be any end to our project.
>
> Since they say "all good things must come to an end", and you are
anticipating winding up, it must be a good notation!

Actually this isn't the end of the effort. We're just finishing this
phase of the project so that we can now present it on the tuning list
for your evaluation.

> > It's just about ready to be presented here on the main tuning
> > list, so be watching for this within the next several weeks.
>
> I would like to suggest something that, even if it were to delay
the announcement a bit, would be worthwhile: please consider
presenting a couple of pieces, in differing intonations/temperments,
in the notation. I would think a piece in an ET, and a piece in some
limit JI (maybe a 43-note piece of Partch's) that would realistically
show how music would be read could go far into knowing how workable
this solution will be, and how enthusiatically it can be promoted.

I do intend to present some short examples in the course of the
presentation -- an entire piece would be rather time-consuming, since
I would be doing all of the graphics myself from scratch.

> I've followed, at a distance, your's and Dave's developments, and
it appears that you wish it to not only be a notation for analysis
but also for performing.

Yes, that's correct.

> Please use illustrative examples of performable music(s), and let
performers see what they are up against!

It's going to take some time to present what we've done. How much
will depend on the nature of the questions and comments that ensue.

After we've looked at enough short examples, perhaps we could then
decide on something suitable. A solo instrument with keyboard
accompaniment would show how well the notation works for both
monophonic (traditional, not Partch's meaning) and polyphonic
instruments. Once I do something for one tuning, it would be fairly
simple to modify it to illustrate how the same thing would look in
another tuning -- you may be pleasantly surprised to find how little
they differ.

> I hope that this is a helpful suggestion, and it isn't meant to
impede your progress at all - looking forward to the fruits of your
labo(u)rs...

Very helpful, and I'll be looking forward to hearing reactions,
comments, suggestions, etc. We've tried to cover this from both a
theoretical and practical viewpoint, but we're always open to making
something that's already good even better.

--George

Hello, there, George and Jon and everyone.

To your suggestion, Jon, to test the forthcoming notation system designed
and refined by George and Dave with some actual pieces, I would like to
offer at the appropriate time to post some examples, including pieces,
involving a range of precise integer ratios or their tempered
approximations.

An advantage of getting sample passages or pieces from a range of
people other than the authors of the system is that, as in computer
programming, unexpected "bugs" as well as exciting "undocumented
features" are more likely to come up if a variety of users get
involved in the testing process.

Another advantage of this approach is that it encourages active
participation. For example, I might give a passage or piece in my
usual notation, and then try to get it right in the new system --
inviting feedback from the authors, and possibly also illustrating
typical learning problems or beginner's mistakes.

Given the variety of styles and interval preferences in our group,
this kind of "beta testing" might at once reveal some interesting
aspects of the system, and engage us actively in using it while also
showing us something about our musical diversity.

Most appreciatively,

Margo Schulter
mschulter@value.net

--- In tuning@y..., "M. Schulter" <MSCHULTER@V...> wrote:
> Hello, there, George and Jon and everyone.
>
> To your suggestion, Jon, to test the forthcoming notation system
designed
> and refined by George and Dave with some actual pieces, I would
like to
> offer at the appropriate time to post some examples, including
pieces,
> involving a range of precise integer ratios or their tempered
> approximations.
>
> An advantage of getting sample passages or pieces from a range of
> people other than the authors of the system is that, as in computer
> programming, unexpected "bugs" as well as exciting "undocumented
> features" are more likely to come up if a variety of users get
> involved in the testing process.
>
> Another advantage of this approach is that it encourages active
> participation. For example, I might give a passage or piece in my
> usual notation, and then try to get it right in the new system --
> inviting feedback from the authors, and possibly also illustrating
> typical learning problems or beginner's mistakes.
>
> Given the variety of styles and interval preferences in our group,
> this kind of "beta testing" might at once reveal some interesting
> aspects of the system, and engage us actively in using it while also
> showing us something about our musical diversity.
>
> Most appreciatively,
>
> Margo Schulter

Thanks for your kind offer to help with this, Margo. I'd like to see
at least a few people involved in an in-depth evaluation of what we
have up to this point.

At times Dave and I have approached particular parts of this project
from very different directions and with differing priorities for
various considerations. So it is remarkable that we have been able
to agree on so many things and understandable that it has taken
several months to settle these issues.

In the process we agreed on some general principles that have helped
us to resolve some difficult situations, when we got bogged down in
differences of opinion about details and needed to look at things
from a broader perspective. Therefore, when I present the notation
here on the tuning list, I think I should cover these general
principles prior to getting into the specifics, because it will allow
everyone to have a better understanding of how we arrived at what we
now have.

--George