problem with Sims notation

Well, let's talk *practicalities* now. On the basis of my personal
experience, the Sims notation is problematic for performers in its
indications of the *quartertones.* It's hard to remember
these "dopey" symbols...

The Sagittal symbols for quartertones, basic arrows, are much
better. I was always stopping in rehearsal with the performers
saying for quartertones: "Now which way does this one go again??"
With the Sagittal it's all clear.

Monzo's HEWM for 72-tET is better yet. The notation is *very*
distinct and the little plusses and minuses are great for the small
syntonic comma...

However, I'm reluctant to adopt HEWM, since it seems as though
Sagittal is even *more* comprehensive and has more thinking behind
it. (Monz, this may be wrong... you may contradict me here...)

But, in any case, I'm about ready for a switch, if I can find
something satisfactory.

As I mentioned, my association with the Boston microtonalists is
marginal at best and my music is quite a bit different from their
directions, for the most part, so I have no particular necessity to
be associated with them notationally...

J. Pehrson

hi Joe,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:

> Well, let's talk *practicalities* now. On the basis of
> my personal experience, the Sims notation is problematic
> for performers in its indications of the *quartertones.*
> It's hard to remember these "dopey" symbols...
> The Sagittal symbols for quartertones, basic arrows, are
> much better. I was always stopping in rehearsal with the
> performers saying for quartertones: "Now which way does
> this one go again??" With the Sagittal it's all clear.

i've agreed with that all along.

> Monzo's HEWM for 72-tET is better yet. The notation is *very*
> distinct and the little plusses and minuses are great for the
> small syntonic comma...

i'm glad to see that you've become such a convert, Joe! :)

> However, I'm reluctant to adopt HEWM, since it seems as though
> Sagittal is even *more* comprehensive and has more thinking
> behind it. (Monz, this may be wrong... you may contradict
> me here...)

oh no, i think you're right about that. i've thought a lot
about musical notation over the years, and have invented
several different new notations. but i do believe that
Dave and George have invested an enormous amount of work
over the last couple of years in developing sagittal. and
sagittal is much more comprehensive in its ability to include
many different notations with the same symbols.

my HEWM started life as a JI notation which was specifically
intended to be an improvement on Johnston notation. when
72edo become popular around here two years ago, i adopted
that as an easier method for any limit up to 11.

the main difference between the two versions is that
JI-HEWM is exact, with every pair of symbols representing
one prime-factor above 5, whereas 72edo-HEWM uses the
accidentals as approximations quantized to 72edo.

i never made any attempt to have HEWM work in, say,
19edo, 31edo, or 53edo, or any fraction-of-a-comma meantones.

> But, in any case, I'm about ready for a switch, if I can find
> something satisfactory.

after i become more familiar with sagittal, i may also
decide that it is superior to HEWM for JI and 72edo.
(or i may not) but for all other cases, i'm already certain
that it's the best comprehensive microtonal notational system.

> As I mentioned, my association with the Boston microtonalists
> is marginal at best and my music is quite a bit different
> from their directions, for the most part, so I have no
> particular necessity to be associated with them notationally...

that's good to know! and it sure sounds like a switch in
your thinking. you used the "weight" of use by the Boston
community as part of your argument against HEWM in the past.
glad to have you with me now! now let's convince *them*
that HEWM is better! ;-)

-monz

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_47609.html#47616

> that's good to know! and it sure sounds like a switch in
> your thinking. you used the "weight" of use by the Boston
> community as part of your argument against HEWM in the past.
> glad to have you with me now! now let's convince *them*
> that HEWM is better! ;-)
>
>
>
> -monz

***Well, they're a minority of a minority. I've run into some
players who know Sims but most don't. So what difference does it
make if I give them something else that's *better...*??

JP