Fwd: Re: universal notation

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Keenan" <d.keenan@b...> wrote:
--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "stephenszpak" <stephen_szpak@h...> wrote:
>
> Coming up with a one size fits all approach may be the
> best idea, but then again there is Esperanto. Proposed in 1887, it
> was supposed to be the universal spoken and written language. Dr.
> L. L. Zamenhof took parts of several languages and made one. Does
> anyone you know speak Esperanto?

Hi Stephen,

I actually learned some Esperanto as a child, but not having anyone
else to speak or listen, read or write it to, it soon fell into disuse.

I don't believe this is a good analogy for what we're doing here.
Because we're representing not whole words with meaning with our
accidentals, but rather individual sounds, a better analogy would be
to a character set that is used across multiple languages. Remember
the Roman alphabet (also called the Latin alphabet). You're looking at
it now. And so are speakers of French, German, Italian, Spanish, and
30 or 40 other unrelated languages. And in the other half of the world
Chinese characters were similarly successful in being used for
multiple unrelated languages.

NOTE: UPPER CASE LETTERS DON'T MEAN I'M SHOUTING.

I DON'T KNOW HOW UNIVERSAL NOTATION CAN EXIST IF THE OCTAVE CAN
BE DIVIDED UP A INFINITE NUMBER OF WAYS. IF IT CAN BE DONE I CERTAINLY
WON'T COMPLAIN. MY ONLY CONTRIBUTION TO MICROTONALITY WILL
PROBABLY BE MY 24 TONE NON-EDO SCALE. IF SOME FORM OF UNIVERSAL
NOTATION CAN'T DEAL WITH IT THAT WOULD BE A DISSAPOINTMENT.

AS FOR 'A CHARACTER SET THAT IS USED ACROSS MUTIPLE LANGUAGES' ,
IT'S TRUE THAT POLISH FOR INSTANCE HAS THE ENGLISH CHARATER SET, I
BELIEVE, YET SOUNDS EXIST IN POLISH WHICH DON'T IN ENGLISH. THAT
RAVIOLI-LIKE POLISH FOOD NAMED PERIOGGIS (SPELLING?) AREN'T PRONOUNCED
WITH A "PER" SOUND AS THE FIRST SYLLABLE. THE SOUND OF THE FIRST
SYLLABLE IS SOMETHING LIKE "PYHA" . A SOUND THAT DOESN'T EXIST IN
ENGLISH. I WISH I COULD TAKE THE ANALOGY FURTHER. MAYBE SOMEONE
ELSE COULD.

But I have used the term "lingua franca" myself in reference to the
sagittal system, and so a better analogy here would be to English,
which is (for better or worse) becoming many people's second language,
in some cases purely for the purpose of communicating with others for
whom English is a second language.

> My idea is to have software (any programmers out there) that
> would take a 4 digit microprinted number next to a note. [look at
> a new 20 dollar bill, go to the right of the lower left number'20'
> to see "The United States of America..." to see how small and
> unobtrusive microprinting can be.] The microprinting would be read
> by the software and converted to the composers own format. The 4
> digit number would be the number of cents up from the tonic that
> the note in question is.

Such numbers would not have to be printed anywhere but simply stored
invisibly by the program. You can already do this sort of thing with
Finale and Sibelius. When you put a symbol on the staff, the index of
the symbol in the symbol-table is what is actually stored. Then you
can edit the symbol-table so that a different symbol appears at that
numbered position and all occurrences in your score will automatically
show the new symbol. But of course these programs aren't shareware.
They do however have free downloadable demo versions that can't save
or print.

I STILL FEEL THE NUMBERS SHOULD BE MICROPRINTED. I HAVE SHEET MUSIC
FROM WHEN I WAS A TEENANGER IN THE 70'S. ARE THESE SOFTWARE
PROGRAMS REALLY GOING TO BE AROUND IN THE 20'S AND 30'S? BESIDES THAT
IF SOMEONE HAS A SHEET OF PAPER SHEET MUSIC AND GOES TO SOMEONE ELSES
HOUSE, THAT MUSIC WITH THE MICROPRINTING COULD BE SCANNED INTO THEIR
COMPUTER WITH FINALE OR SIBELIUS OR WHATEVER AND THER'YE OFF AND
RUNNING. OTHERWISE IT'S USELESS.

ABOUT ALL WE CAN AGREE ON HERE IS THE STANDARDS OF:

1) WHERE EACH OCTAVE STARTS AND ENDS
2) THAT THERE ARE 1200 CENTS IN AN OCTAVE

SINCE WE HAVE THESE AS THE ONLY STANDARDS (I ASSUME) I THINK WE
SHOULD USE THEM INSTEAD OF HAGGLING OVER NOTATION AND STAFF LINES.
IF SOME PEOPLE, EVEN 90% EVENTUALLY COME TO ACCEPT SOME FORM OF
UNIVERSAL NOTATION ,THE REMAINING PEOPLE COULD STILL, AT LEAST IN
THEORY HAVE SOME FORM OF FUTURE SOFTWARE CONVERT TO THEIR NOTATION,
OR THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
I REALIZE THAT IF THIS SOFTWARE DOESN'T CURRENTLY EXIST IT CAN'T BE
USED. YET CONSIDERING WHAT SOFTWARE IN ALL ITS FORMS TODAY CAN DO
I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT READING "2-0400", AND THE SOFTWARE SAYING TO ITSELF
THIS IS "OCTAVE 2 NOTE E" IS A HARD THING. WHAT WOULD BE HARD IS TO
CHANGE FORMATS. THAT IS, NOTATION THAT IN ONE PERSON'S 15 EDO FORMAT
HAS NO EXTERNALS MARKS OF ANY SORT (uncertain of proper terminology) TO
SOME OTHER FORMAT. ADOPTING UNIVERSAL OCTAVE/NOTE [2-0400] MICRO-
PRINTING COULD OR MIGHT PROVIDE THE IMPETUS FOR SUCH SOFTWARE TO BE
DEVELOPED OVER TIME.

> Over time (50 years?) I would think one or two standards for 15 EDO >(and all other EDO's) would emerge on their own just because some are >logical and most aren't.

Two _have_ emerged. Chain-of-best-fifths with additional accidentals
for one degree up or down, and notation relative to 12-ET with either
cents or additional accidentals for fifth-tones and tenth-tones.

I, DUE TO MY EXTREMELY LIMITED UNDERSTANDING OF THE PREVIOUS
PARAGRAPH CAN'T RESPOND TO ITS SPECIFICS. HOWEVER, I THINK WHAT I
HAVE IN MIND CURRENTLY FOR A 15 EDO STAFF IS DIFFERENT. REGARDLESS,
YOU'RE MAKING THE ASSUMPTION THAT SINCE 2 STANDARDS CURRENTLY
EXIST NO ONE COULD EVER COME UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER THAT
WOULD DISPLACE THEM BOTH.
--- End forwarded message ---

Thanks for your input Dave (Stephen Szpak)

_________________________________________________________________
Worried about inbox overload? Get MSN Extra Storage now! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Szpak" <stephen_szpak@h...> wrote:
> NOTE: UPPER CASE LETTERS DON'T MEAN I'M SHOUTING.

Stephen,

Please do a web search on "netiquette all uppercase" and read a few of
the items that come up.

You might also try "netiquette quoting".

> I DON'T KNOW HOW UNIVERSAL NOTATION CAN EXIST IF THE OCTAVE CAN
> BE DIVIDED UP A INFINITE NUMBER OF WAYS. IF IT CAN BE DONE I
> CERTAINLY
> WON'T COMPLAIN.

It's because most humans can't distinguish pitch differences smaller
than about half a cent in most musical contexts. And the vast bulk of
us fall by the wayside much sooner than that.

> MY ONLY CONTRIBUTION TO MICROTONALITY WILL
> PROBABLY BE MY 24 TONE NON-EDO SCALE. IF SOME FORM OF UNIVERSAL
> NOTATION CAN'T DEAL WITH IT THAT WOULD BE A DISSAPOINTMENT.

Who knows what else you may contribute in future. In the Sagittal
system your scale would be dealt with most simply by using the
right-barb down accidental, which represents the 55-comma (55/54)
down. Relative to 12-ET this corresponds to lowering the pitch by
approximately 38 cents. You would simply state on your score that in
this case it represents 39.12 cents. It looks something like this (if
you join the lines up).

|
| /
|/

If I use the single ASCII character "k" to represent it here, your
scale could be notated

C C#k C# Dk D Ebk Eb Fk F F#k F# Gk G G#k G# Ak A Bbk Bb Bk B Ck

with all the usual enharmonic alternatives.

If you don't want more than one accidental against any note you could
use the complementary double-shaft-left-barb-up symbol to indicate
raising by your 60.88 cents.

/|
/||
||

If I temporarily use "}" to represent this in text, your scale could
be notated

C C} C# Dk D D} Eb Fk F F} F# Gk G G} G# Ak A A} Bb Bk B Ck

> I STILL FEEL THE NUMBERS SHOULD BE MICROPRINTED.

OK. Well that's four times now. :-) And the third time I even agreed
with you. You must have missed that.

> YOU'RE MAKING THE ASSUMPTION THAT SINCE 2 STANDARDS CURRENTLY
> EXIST NO ONE COULD EVER COME UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER THAT
> WOULD DISPLACE THEM BOTH.

I am making no such assumption.

Regards,
-- Dave Keenan

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Keenan" <d.keenan@b...> wrote:

Oops! I can't count. I left out Ek and E. Should have been:

> |
> | /
> |/
>
> If I use the single ASCII character "k" to represent it here, your
> scale could be notated
>
> C C#k C# Dk D Ebk Eb Ek E Fk F F#k F# Gk G G#k G# Ak A Bbk Bb Bk B Ck
>
> with all the usual enharmonic alternatives.
>
> If you don't want more than one accidental against any note you could
> use the complementary double-shaft-left-barb-up symbol to indicate
> raising by your 60.88 cents.
>
> /|
> /||
> ||
>
> If I temporarily use "}" to represent this in text, your scale could
> be notated
>
> C C} C# Dk D D} Eb Ek E Fk F F} F# Gk G G} G# Ak A A} Bb Bk B Ck

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Keenan" <d.keenan@b...> wrote:
--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Keenan" <d.keenan@b...> wrote:

Oops! I can't count. I left out Ek and E. Should have been:

>|
>| /
>|/
>
>If I use the single ASCII character "k" to represent it here, your
>scale could be notated
>
>C C#k C# Dk D Ebk Eb Ek E Fk F F#k F# Gk G G#k G# Ak A Bbk Bb Bk B Ck
>
>with all the usual enharmonic alternatives.
>
>If you don't want more than one accidental against any note you could
>use the complementary double-shaft-left-barb-up symbol to indicate
>raising by your 60.88 cents.
>
> /|
>/||
> ||
>
>If I temporarily use "}" to represent this in text, your scale could
>be notated
>
>C C} C# Dk D D} Eb Ek E Fk F F} F# Gk G G} G# Ak A A} Bb Bk B Ck
--- End forwarded message ---

Stephen Szpak writes:
Hi Dave Keenan

I guess this is for me since I see 60.88 cents in there. If you say this works, that good enough
for me. My notation, for myself, is this:
# # # # # # # # #
C Cx C#Cx D Dx D Dx E Ex F Fx F Fx G Gx G Gx A Ax A Ax B Bx (C)

It's getting late but this is probably right. Of course it's not universal. In fact it's bascially
like what Ivan Vyshnegradski did. The reason I didn't use his terminology of semisharp
and sesquisharp was it was too hard to say in my head over and over. Technically, with
the "new" notes boosted 60.88 cents and not 50.00 cents it would be invalid anyway.

Since this is a 24 note scale I would suggest the standard staff.

So you're saying that someone would know that:

C-E-G-Ax

( in my terminology)

would know in your terminology (I won't try to duplicate it here)

that they should play a C major triad with a harmonic 7th?

Stephen Szpak

_________________________________________________________________
Take advantage of our limited-time introductory offer for dial-up Internet access. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup