new Tuning Dictionary entry: bingo-card lattice

now here's a really useful new entry to
the Tuning Dictionary:

/tuning/files/dict/bingo.htm

(bookmark it and watch it grow...)

-monz
"all roads lead to n^0"

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> now here's a really useful new entry to
> the Tuning Dictionary:
>
> /tuning/files/dict/bingo.htm
>
>
> (bookmark it and watch it grow...)
>
>
>
>
> -monz
> "all roads lead to n^0"

the name "bingo card" was proposed by james mccartney (not me), on
rick tagawa's 72-equal page which used to be in your care.

i seriously doubt he was the first person ever to create one of them,
though.

i would definitely *not* use the bingo card approach for an ET which
could not seriously said to represent the 5-limit consonances --
examples: 11-equal, 13-equal, 14-equal.

for higher-cardinality, and especially for inconsistent, ETs, there
may be more than one appropriate bingo card -- for example, for 40-
equal, you could have the diminished/octatonic bingo card, the
wuerschmidt bingo card, and the meantone bingo card.

17-equal and 20-equal are 5-limit inconsistent and certainly suffer
from at least one of these problems, so i don't necessarily agree
with the way you've presented them. in fact, blackwood's 17-equal
etude uses the tuning contrary to the way you've presented it here --
instead he uses the best approximation to the minor third (6:5), and
thus his representation of the major third ends up being really
large, rather than the neutral third you've pinned it to here.

you might want to look at my last post on 16-equal for some other
ideas for general revisions, no biggie there . . .

otherwise, thanks as always for the great work, monz!

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

> i would definitely *not* use the bingo card approach for an ET which
> could not seriously said to represent the 5-limit consonances --
> examples: 11-equal, 13-equal, 14-equal.

You might make and compare the 11^a 13^b bingo cards for 11 and 13.

> otherwise, thanks as always for the great work, monz!

Now on to 3D Lego cards.

--- In tuning@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...>

> > otherwise, thanks as always for the great work, monz!
>
> Now on to 3D Lego cards.

i second that motion . . . unfortunately excel does not "excel" in
this department . . .

wow, paul, thanks *very* much for these perceptive comments
on my latest work.

i'd love to incorporate additional lattices showing different
bingo-card mappings of inconsistent ETs, as you describe here,
but the Yahoo group is out of space now, and Jonathan and i
are still trying to get together to get the new website account
going (we've both been real busy). so eventually ...

-monz
"all roads lead to n^0"

----- Original Message -----
From: "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@yahoo.com>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 3:06 PM
Subject: [tuning] Re: new Tuning Dictionary entry: bingo-card lattice

> --- In tuning@y..., "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> > now here's a really useful new entry to
> > the Tuning Dictionary:
> >
> > /tuning/files/dict/bingo.htm
> >
> >
> > (bookmark it and watch it grow...)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -monz
> > "all roads lead to n^0"
>
> the name "bingo card" was proposed by james mccartney (not me), on
> rick tagawa's 72-equal page which used to be in your care.
>
> i seriously doubt he was the first person ever to create one of them,
> though.
>
> i would definitely *not* use the bingo card approach for an ET which
> could not seriously said to represent the 5-limit consonances --
> examples: 11-equal, 13-equal, 14-equal.
>
> for higher-cardinality, and especially for inconsistent, ETs, there
> may be more than one appropriate bingo card -- for example, for 40-
> equal, you could have the diminished/octatonic bingo card, the
> wuerschmidt bingo card, and the meantone bingo card.
>
> 17-equal and 20-equal are 5-limit inconsistent and certainly suffer
> from at least one of these problems, so i don't necessarily agree
> with the way you've presented them. in fact, blackwood's 17-equal
> etude uses the tuning contrary to the way you've presented it here --
> instead he uses the best approximation to the minor third (6:5), and
> thus his representation of the major third ends up being really
> large, rather than the neutral third you've pinned it to here.
>
> you might want to look at my last post on 16-equal for some other
> ideas for general revisions, no biggie there . . .
>
> otherwise, thanks as always for the great work, monz!
>
>
>
> You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
> email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@yahoogroups.com - join the tuning group.
> tuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com - unsubscribe from the tuning group.
> tuning-nomail@yahoogroups.com - put your email message delivery on hold
for the tuning group.
> tuning-digest@yahoogroups.com - change your subscription to daily digest
mode.
> tuning-normal@yahoogroups.com - change your subscription to individual
emails.
> tuning-help@yahoogroups.com - receive general help information.
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> wow, paul, thanks *very* much for these perceptive comments
> on my latest work.
>
> i'd love to incorporate additional lattices showing different
> bingo-card mappings of inconsistent ETs, as you describe here,
> but the Yahoo group is out of space now, and Jonathan and i
> are still trying to get together to get the new website account
> going (we've both been real busy). so eventually ...
>
>
> -monz
> "all roads lead to n^0"

why not eliminate the inconsistent ones for now, to free up a little
space . . . luckily you do have space for quite a few of the .gifs
that i promised you in the last message . . .

--- In tuning@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...>

/tuning/topicId_39540.html#39622

>
> for higher-cardinality, and especially for inconsistent, ETs, there
> may be more than one appropriate bingo card -- for example, for 40-
> equal, you could have the diminished/octatonic bingo card, the
> wuerschmidt bingo card, and the meantone bingo card.
>

***You know, the way that 40-tET was "hopping around" on the
consistency graphs would lead me to wonder if maybe this scale would
have *entirely* different overall sounds depending on which intervals
were featured, and how they were combined. Is this a fair
assessment? Has anybody worked much with this scale and, more
importantly, does it sound gooooood...?? :)

J. Pehrosn

--- In tuning@y..., "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...>
>
> /tuning/topicId_39540.html#39622
>
> >
> > for higher-cardinality, and especially for inconsistent, ETs,
there
> > may be more than one appropriate bingo card -- for example, for
40-
> > equal, you could have the diminished/octatonic bingo card, the
> > wuerschmidt bingo card, and the meantone bingo card.
> >
>
> ***You know, the way that 40-tET was "hopping around" on the
> consistency graphs would lead me to wonder if maybe this scale
would
> have *entirely* different overall sounds depending on which
intervals
> were featured, and how they were combined. Is this a fair
> assessment?

yup!

> Has anybody worked much with this scale and,

i bet marc has.

> more
> importantly, does it sound gooooood...?? :)

if you can tolerate fairly large deviations from 5-limit JI, usually
larger than those of 12-equal but sometimes (in the
diminished/octatonic aspect) about the same, then yes, i'm sure it
will sound plenty good to you . . . if you're a stickler for
consistently better accuracy than 12-equal, then i'm afraid it gets
consigned to the dust-bin . . . i prefer the former view myself!

hi Joe,

> From: "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@rcn.com>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 12:39 PM
> Subject: [tuning] Re: new Tuning Dictionary entry: bingo-card lattice
>
>
> --- In tuning@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...>
>
> /tuning/topicId_39540.html#39622
>
> >
> > for higher-cardinality, and especially for inconsistent, ETs, there
> > may be more than one appropriate bingo card -- for example, for 40-
> > equal, you could have the diminished/octatonic bingo card, the
> > wuerschmidt bingo card, and the meantone bingo card.
> >
>
> ***You know, the way that 40-tET was "hopping around" on the
> consistency graphs would lead me to wonder if maybe this scale would
> have *entirely* different overall sounds depending on which intervals
> were featured, and how they were combined. Is this a fair
> assessment? Has anybody worked much with this scale and, more
> importantly, does it sound gooooood...?? :)
>
> J. Pehrosn

the only reason i put 40edo on my bingo-card-lattice page was
because i've been listening a lot lately (because of my work
on the bingo page) to Herman Miller's wonderful retunings
of Ravel's _Pavane for a dead princess_, and one of my favorites
is the one in 40edo. i wanted to compare it with what i already
had for the other EDOs.

http://www.io.com/~hmiller/music/pavane.html

but i'm not sure exactly which intervals Herman featured,
so my lattice might not represent what he did. i'd have to
tear apart the MIDI file to see exactly which subset of
40edo he used ... and i'm already working on it, but i've
started with 64edo because that is my most favorite version
of the _Pavane_.

-monz
"all roads lead to n^0"