from makemicromusic

Without boring you all with the details, you might
like to listen to this short chord progression, in
various tunings...

http://lumma.org/zip/Sssnake.zip (just a few K)

Cheers!

-Carl

Carl,

Re your
/tuning/topicId_45195.html#45195
From: Carl Lumma <ekin@l...>
Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 12:39 pm
Subject: from makemicromusic
post:

I have now heard all of the .mid files in your
http://lumma.org/zip/Sssnake.zip offering. I had hoped that your
sssnake.txt file would offer some expanded explanation as to just
what you were presenting in each of those .MID files

sssnake.mid
sssnake-12et.mid
sssnake-10-9.mid
sssnake-alaska2.mid
and sssnake-alaska5.mid

I am less interested in the objective, mathematical details of each
tuning than I am in knowing just what I subjectively should listen
for in each file and what the advantages and disadvantages of each
are.

I am new to concerns about various tuning systems, but I approach
these questions more from the viewpoint of a practicing musician and
potential composer of microtonal music that as one intrigued by
arcane aspects of related mathematics.

Thanks for your work! I find these files to be an intriguing set
to ponder in greater detail.

Steve Langford

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "slangford97" <s@T...> wrote:
Carl,
>
> Re your
> /tuning/topicId_45195.html#45195
> From: Carl Lumma <ekin@l...>
> Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 12:39 pm
> Subject: from makemicromusic
> post:

Sorry, for posting twice in a row, but I meant to ask for an
explanation as to the purpose and use of the .SCL and .SEQ files
included in your .ZIP file.

For instance, why are there 5 .MID files but only 3 .SCL files and
only 1 .SEQ file?

I gather that everybody else in this Tuning Group may already know
the answers to such questions. So if you would like to respond to me
only, privately, that would be OK with me.

Thanks again,

Steve Langford

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "slangford97" <s@T...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_45195.html#45200

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "slangford97" <s@T...> wrote:
> Carl,
> >
> > Re your
> > /tuning/topicId_45195.html#45195
> > From: Carl Lumma <ekin@l...>
> > Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 12:39 pm
> > Subject: from makemicromusic
> > post:
>
> Sorry, for posting twice in a row, but I meant to ask for an
> explanation as to the purpose and use of the .SCL and .SEQ files
> included in your .ZIP file.
>
> For instance, why are there 5 .MID files but only 3 .SCL files
and
> only 1 .SEQ file?
>
> I gather that everybody else in this Tuning Group may already
know
> the answers to such questions. So if you would like to respond to
me
> only, privately, that would be OK with me.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Steve Langford

***Hi Steve,

Well, that much is not true, since Carl hasn't really posted much
about his experiment either on MakeMicroMusic or here. My guess is
that some of the information is on Tuning Math which, regrettably, I
haven't been following.

Joe Pehrson

Hey Steve,

>I am less interested in the objective, mathematical details of each
>tuning than I am in knowing just what I subjectively should listen
>for in each file

I listen for the sound of the chords, and the melodic voice-leading
motion. Which is the exact same thing I listen for in any chord
progression. There is no different aesthetic for "microtonal" music!

>and what the advantages and disadvantages of each are.

That's all in the hearing.

> I am new to concerns about various tuning systems, but I approach
>these questions more from the viewpoint of a practicing musician
>and potential composer of microtonal music that as one intrigued by
>arcane aspects of related mathematics.

Good!

> Thanks for your work!

Thanks for listening!

> Sorry, for posting twice in a row, but I meant to ask for an
>explanation as to the purpose and use of the .SCL and .SEQ files
>included in your .ZIP file.

They are formats defined for Scala, freeware tuning software that
is par for the course around here...

http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/scala/

>For instance, why are there 5 .MID files but only 3 .SCL files

I do not include a scl file for 12-equal (-1), and the two
different just tunings use the same scl file (-2).

>and only 1 .SEQ file?

Try reading the seq file!

JP wrote...
>Well, that much is not true, since Carl hasn't really posted much
>about his experiment either on MakeMicroMusic or here. My guess is
>that some of the information is on Tuning Math which, regrettably,
>I haven't been following.

Nope. Everything is on MMM.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> Which is the exact same thing I listen for in any chord
> progression. There is no different aesthetic for "microtonal"
> music!

Unless one wants to write music that isn't based on chord progressions.

Cheers,
Jon

>> Which is the exact same thing I listen for in any chord
>> progression. There is no different aesthetic for "microtonal"
>> music!
>
>Unless one wants to write music that isn't based on chord
>progressions.

Sweet... Jon, how could you possibly come to this conclusion?

I employ no different aesthetic for microtonal music no matter
what kind of music it is.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> Sweet... Jon, how could you possibly come to this conclusion?

It followed directly from your statement.

> I employ no different aesthetic for microtonal music no matter
> what kind of music it is.

Interesting. I wonder if a composer of music for a Javanese shadow play uses the exact same aethetic as a composer of a concerto for viola and orchestra and a composer of an electronic piece based on granular synthesis and spatial sound projection. Just wondering.

Cheers,
Jon

Jon Szanto

I think Carl is only saying that his composing aesthetic is the same
no matter which tuning he uses. That makes sense to me.

Gabor

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> > Sweet... Jon, how could you possibly come to this conclusion?
>
> It followed directly from your statement.
>
> > I employ no different aesthetic for microtonal music no matter
> > what kind of music it is.
>
> Interesting. I wonder if a composer of music for a Javanese shadow
play uses the exact same aethetic as a composer of a concerto for
viola and orchestra and a composer of an electronic piece based on
granular synthesis and spatial sound projection. Just wondering.
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

Gabor,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "alternativetuning" <alternativetuning@y...> wrote:
> I think Carl is only saying that his composing aesthetic is the same
> no matter which tuning he uses. That makes sense to me.

I guess I can wrap myself around that one. I must have been thinking along larger aesthetic lines, which are probably extra-compositional. And to each his own, anyway, though I've found it somewhat unfortunate when composers come to microtonality and just end up writing the same music but with differing intervals. I've always hoped that the wide range of options available with new tunings would lead people to think about *how* they make music differently as well.

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

>I've always hoped that the wide range of options available with new
tunings would lead people to think about *how* they make music
differently as well.

First things first.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...> wrote:
> First things first.

That is only one approach.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
wrote:
> > First things first.
>
> That is only one approach.

So is "let's try something new and groovy, and to hell with the rest
of it". It seems to me that tuning is one thing, and new musical
ideas are another. Obviously there are connections, but why moan if
someone is working with tuning qua tuning?

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...> wrote:
> It seems to me that tuning is one thing, and new musical
> ideas are another.

That is certainly one way to look at it. It may very well explain a lot of things.

> Obviously there are connections, but why moan if
> someone is working with tuning qua tuning?

You know very well that no answer I give to that question would satisfy you, convince you, or (probably) even interest you. So I'll just keep the why to myself.

Jon

>>I think Carl is only saying that his composing aesthetic is the
>>same no matter which tuning he uses. That makes sense to me.
>
>I guess I can wrap myself around that one. I must have been
>thinking along larger aesthetic lines, which are probably extra-
>compositional.

I usually evaluate music in three areas. Sometimes they seem to
naturally distinguish themselves, other times they are entangled.
But I always try to distinguish them, and I think this helps me
understand music better. They are:

() Notes
() Performance
() Artistic vision

Notes are just what you'd see in a score, perhaps even in a
keyboard reduction or unmarked (ie late Bach) score.

Performance turns notes into sound. This is orchestration,
interpretation, production.

If music is art and art is a form of communication, then Artistic
vision is an evaluation of the message. Common errors are "sappy",
"trying too hard", "heavy handed", "overblown", "insincere",
"too dark", "stainless steel" and other failures to "pull it off".

I was thinking about music in this way before I knew about
microtonality, and I can see nothing in microtonality that would
change any of it (except dusting off "too much information").

That's what I meant. What do you (Jon) mean by 'extra-compositional
aesthetic lines'?

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...> wrote:
> > It seems to me that tuning is one thing, and new musical
> > ideas are another.
>
> That is certainly one way to look at it. It may very well explain a
lot of things.

It doesn't explain me. Despite your complaint that I am too
conservative, I use a lot of new ideas. They just don't register with
you as new.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...> wrote:
> It doesn't explain me. Despite your complaint that I am too
> conservative, I use a lot of new ideas. They just don't register with
> you as new.

well, Gene, as always you are correct: i am sure that the problem is with my perception, my musicianship. best wishes on all those new trails you are blazing.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

> well, Gene, as always you are correct: i am sure that the problem
is with my perception, my musicianship. best wishes on all those new
trails you are blazing.

If you don't like the kind of music other people write, why don't you
write your own? Whining and sarcasm are a poor substitute.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...> wrote:
> If you don't like the kind of music other people write, why don't
> you write your own?

Oddly enough, I do.

> Whining and sarcasm are a poor substitute.

This is wild - you are batting 1000! And you got me thinking: for people living in Hawaii, it is still July 1, 2003. The first of July sounds like a great time to say goodbye.

If anyone needs something, just write me privately. I'll keep track of MMM, as I feel kinda responsible since I started that little dog going. Other than that, I think a break is in order.

[click]

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
wrote:

> > If you don't like the kind of music other people write, why don't
> > you write your own?
>
> Oddly enough, I do.

But you don't share it. Would that not be a better way of making your
point that complaining about other people's efforts?