retunings

Gene,

Can we get a better piece than the Mozart concerto for
the temperament comparisons? Either the Handel or the
Scarlatti would be good. Or maybe instead of giving
the whole concerto, just the final movement.

And can we get a 12-equal version of the Handel? I tried
filtering out pitch bends, and simply deleting the Scala
bend track with Cakewalk, but it resulted in a timbral
change in the file on playback...

I've been listening to the pelogic Scarlatti; I still
think it sounds cool. The superpythagorean version is
also cool, if predictable.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:

> I've been listening to the pelogic Scarlatti; I still
> think it sounds cool. The superpythagorean version is
> also cool, if predictable.

The superpythagoren is a bit of a kick. One thing I've concluded by
playing around with this stuff is that in many ways, the idea put
forward by Eytan and all the other equality purists really has the
matter backwards. It's a practical solution, but not musically
optimal; equality as such is boring and lifeless, and some
differentiation is a good idea on aesthetic grounds. I've been
wondering how this applies to general temperament theory; the idea
gives me a bit of a headache. How many things are out there, for
varied base temperaments and number of scale degrees, which are
analogous to the grail temperament, for instance? Yipe!

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> Gene,
>
> Can we get a better piece than the Mozart concerto for
> the temperament comparisons? Either the Handel or the
> Scarlatti would be good. Or maybe instead of giving
> the whole concerto, just the final movement.

What are you looking for? Something short? What era?

> And can we get a 12-equal version of the Handel?

I put up the original of this and some others in the grail folder on
tuning_files. My grail examples were tuned with the 1/1 set to C, and
I found when I tried to move it I would sometimes get problems I
didn't have before. Apparently a piece to be used for a lot of
different tuning examples should be robust, but I was even having
problems with Franck, which is just piano & flute, so I'm not sure wha
makes something robust.

Anyway you can now listen to a Bach Prelude & Fugue in F# with the 1/1
on both C and F#.

Carl wrote:
>I tried
>filtering out pitch bends, and simply deleting the Scala
>bend track with Cakewalk, but it resulted in a timbral
>change in the file on playback...

Why not try retuning it to 12-tET with Scala, good
chance that'll work. Before do SET PITCH_BEND OFF.

Manuel

>> Can we get a better piece than the Mozart concerto for
>> the temperament comparisons? Either the Handel or the
>> Scarlatti would be good. Or maybe instead of giving
>> the whole concerto, just the final movement.
>
>What are you looking for? Something short?

Something shorter and tighter (chamber or keyboard work).

>What era?

Anything. I said the Scarlatti or Handel would be fine,
and you saw what sort of stuff I picked for the shootout.

>My grail examples were tuned with the 1/1 set to C, and
>I found when I tried to move it I would sometimes get
>problems I didn't have before.

What sort of problems?

>Apparently a piece to be used for a lot of different
>tuning examples should be robust,

You mean robust against midi retuning gliches, or robust
against weird harmonic/melodic distortion? It seems the
latter could only mean the tuning you're trying isn't
right, as opposed to some fault in the music.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:

> >My grail examples were tuned with the 1/1 set to C, and
> >I found when I tried to move it I would sometimes get
> >problems I didn't have before.
>
> What sort of problems?

Dropped notes; weird percussion. Exactly the problems I often had, but
didn't with these examples, so I used them. However, when I changed
the 1/1 it turned out they can appear.

> >Apparently a piece to be used for a lot of different
> >tuning examples should be robust,
>
> You mean robust against midi retuning gliches, or robust
> against weird harmonic/melodic distortion?

The former.

>>My grail examples were tuned with the 1/1 set to C, and
>>I found when I tried to move it I would sometimes get
>>problems I didn't have before.

Well, I don't hear any problems. What I hear is the Bach
sounding great in C, which calls for congratulations.

When I first started playing with tunings, I retuned lots
of midi files with the Justonic Pitch Palette, which still
has one up on Scala in that you could switch tunings while
playing. I developed a tuning based on 9/7 and 13/11 3rds,
which isn't usable in all keys, alas.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> >>My grail examples were tuned with the 1/1 set to C, and
> >>I found when I tried to move it I would sometimes get
> >>problems I didn't have before.
>
> Well, I don't hear any problems. What I hear is the Bach
> sounding great in C, which calls for congratulations.

Thanks. I used the Bach because I didn't have any problems with it,
and was wondering if Bach, on his "well tempered" clavier, expected F#
to sound a little different. I could leave the 1/1 at C, and go
through the whole of Book I, or II, but that wouldn't exactly be the
short & simple comparison you were looking for. I may do it anyway. :)

>> >>My grail examples were tuned with the 1/1 set to C, and
>> >>I found when I tried to move it I would sometimes get
>> >>problems I didn't have before.
>>
>> Well, I don't hear any problems. What I hear is the Bach
>> sounding great in C, which calls for congratulations.
>
>Thanks. I used the Bach because I didn't have any problems with it,
>and was wondering if Bach, on his "well tempered" clavier, expected
>F# to sound a little different.

My guess is that he did.

I'm thinking the rms version sounds better on C. You?

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:

> I'm thinking the rms version sounds better on C. You?

I liked the "locked in" effect of the pure 9/7, but presumably on
average rms is a little better.

Just to be sure given Gene's notoriety for not reading
fine manuals; before retuning Sankey's Scarlatti, you
didn't forget to do "set pitch_bend off" didn't you?
Because it's on by default.

Manuel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Manuel Op de Coul"
<manuel.op.de.coul@e...> wrote:
>
> Just to be sure given Gene's notoriety for not reading
> fine manuals; before retuning Sankey's Scarlatti, you
> didn't forget to do "set pitch_bend off" didn't you?
> Because it's on by default.

I'd be willing to read the manual if there was one to read; I've been
thinking of suggesting that you write one, but I didn't want to go
over my quota on suggesting things.

I tried a retuning of K520 both ways, which pitch bend off and pitch
bend on; the pitch bends came out exactly the same.