"hear or tune beyond commas." + note on Microtonal notation.

>
> Subject: The irony of Harrison's comma mistaken identity
>
>
> As I understand it Lou Harrison and many other integer frequency ratio
> advocates, have yet to be able to hear or tune beyond commas, and this
> simple arithmetic "nonsense".

>Perhaps Mr. Lucy can explain what it means to "hear or tune beyond commas."

In response to Mr. Doty's question:
I mean what I said.

From my experiments and research over the part fifteen or more years; I have come to the conclusion that outrageous as what John 'Longitude' Harrison said:
1. It seems that his system works both musically, and physically.
2. The method which he used, derived from pi, to select intervals for melody, and harmony, are a "better" paradigm than integer frequency ratios for mapping musical intervals.
3. If you wish to explore the benefits, and details, visit our site at one of the url's below.

"hear or tune beyond commas." suggests that those who refuse to consider any intervals other that whole number ratios, are artificially restricting the possibilities.

This may be a suitable occasion to attempt to explain by an analogy.

This concept comes from Book VII of Plato's Republic, and is my analogy (not John Harrison's)

Imagine that you are holding a coiled spring between a light source and a wall.
A shadow is cast on the wall by the spring.
There are positions to which you can move the spring so that it will cast a shadow on the wall, which resembles a sine wave.

You could measure the shadow, and map the topology of the shadow.

or you could map the topology of the spring.

I am suggesting that the advocates of whole number ratios, are mapping the "shadow"; whereas John 'Longitude' Harrison was mapping the "spring".

Notation (in response to query in same tuning digest):

It is possible to notate meantone tuning systems using conventional notation with multiple sharps and flats.

I appreciate that there are many shortcomings in the conventional notation system. (e.g. no direct connection between duration and stave length, need for key signature indication, etc. etc.)

The best recent alternative notation system that I have seen was designed by Bill and Anne Collins, and uses closer lines on the stave for the "small" intervals (E to F) and (B to C).

Some people enjoy chasing shadows.

Have fun!

Charles Lucy - lucy@harmonics.com (LucyScaleDevelopments)
------------ Promoting global harmony through LucyTuning -------
for information on LucyTuning go to:
http://www.harmonics.com/lucy/
for Lucytuned Lullabies go to http://www.lucytune.com
or http://www.lucytune.co.uk or http://www.lullabies.co.uk

Mr. Lucy,

--- In tuning@y..., Charles Lucy <lucy@h...> wrote:
>> As I understand it Lou Harrison and many other integer frequency
>> ratio advocates, have yet to be able to hear or tune beyond
>> commas...

You attempted to explain away this comment with the following:

> I mean what I said.
>
> "hear or tune beyond commas." suggests that those who refuse to
> consider any intervals other that whole number ratios, are
> artificially restricting the possibilities.

That is not what your first statement indicates in plain English. "Have yet to be able to hear..." most definitely posits that it is an incapability, and not a decision (as you frame it) to hear or utilize pitches/harmonies outside of integer ratios. Choosing to restrict one's compositional materials is a valid choice - you prefer LucyTuning (Universal Trademarks apply), some prefer 72EDO (and feel it 'near just enough for just'), and others utilize integer ratios (JI and other similar systems). None of these choices are, by any reasonable standard, a *bad* choice.

You cannot, of course, offer any material to support such a claim for someone like Lou Harrison (i.e. that he uses the materials he does because he cannot hear anything beyond those materials). That people don't choose to follow a path that you do, and that you propose, is one thing; to suggest that they somehow lack the understanding, capability, or acumen to do so is more than a bit silly.

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@y..., Charles Lucy <lucy@h...> wrote:
> 1. It seems that his system works both musically, and physically.
> 2. The method which he used, derived from pi, to select intervals for
> melody, and harmony, are a "better" paradigm than integer frequency
> ratios for mapping musical intervals.

It works because it is meantone, which involves the comma 81/80. The
Lucy fifth of 600+300/pi cents is indistinguishable in practice from
3/10-comma meantone (one one hundredth of a cent difference.) Lucy tuning on 19 tones would give a wolf less than 21 cents flat, by the way.