Usefully searching the tuning archives

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 21:21:57, Paul Erlich wrote:

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Jean Lawton
<mlkofmusic@y...> wrote:

>> Surely it has occurred to many of you that it
>> might prove useful & informative to collect
>> all the digests of this forum in a single
>> compressed rapidly searchable file.

>It only takes a few minutes to search all of it using
the search
>feature on the list's website.

"It is the librarian's training and expertise in
information
selection, value-added evaluation and comparison, and
efficient presentation of information that is most
needed
regarding the Internet."
Hal. P. Kirkwood, Jr. Beyond evaluation: a model
for co-operative evaluation of Internet resources,
in Online, 22(4), July/August 1998

"The Web is not a huge book written by multiple
authors. There is no
definitive table of contents for the Web and no
definitive index.
To some it seems more like a giant reference
collection.

"While it is true that many fine reference materials
are available
on the Web, it is not an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias
have subject
experts writing refereed articles that pass through
editors and
style guides before publication. The Web has these
same experts,
and many non-experts, creating non-refereed webpages
on a vast
array of topics at a vast range of quality and depth.
Some people
consider the Web to be a digital library full of
materials of
varying quality and format.

"The Web is not one large digital library. Libraries
have
trained professionals who carefully evaluate, select,
organize, and index materials from credible sources."

from
http://www.oit.umd.edu/units/web/literacy/

A google search on the terms "value added search
database internet"
turns up 999,000 adverts for pay services. If google
alone
suffices to usefully search raw information archived
willy-
nilly on the internet, why do 999,000 "value added"
pay search
services exist?

Let me be specific: wouldn't it would be useful to be
able to
rapidly fuzzy-search keywords and keyphrases on the
50,000 messages in this tuning list? How about
searching for
homonyms? How about searching for "words related to"?
How
about searching for antonyms of [keyword]? Or, if we
wish
to get ambitious, how about tables of contents:
"Search all
messages on CPS tunings"; "search all messages about
keyboard mappings"; "search all messages about Indian
tunings"...and so forth. I do not believe google
permits
such fuzzy logic or semantic searches. Please correct
me if I err.

The argument that google alone suffices to usefully
search
50,000 separate messages boils down to the claim that
entirely disorganized information is as useful as
organized information. In view of the widespread
adoption of the Dewey Decimal
and the Library of Congress systems for organizing
infomration, are you absolutely
sure you wish to make that claim?

________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html

>"While it is true that many fine reference materials
>are available on the Web, it is not an encyclopedia.

True; it's far better than an encyclopedia.

>"The Web is not one large digital library. Libraries
>have trained professionals who carefully evaluate, select,
>organize, and index materials from credible sources."

Whatevuh.

>If google alone suffices to usefully search raw information
>archived willy-nilly on the internet, why do 999,000
>"value added" pay search services exist?

Because there's a sucker born every minute.

>Let me be specific: wouldn't it would be useful to be
>able to rapidly fuzzy-search keywords and keyphrases on the
>50,000 messages in this tuning list?

Yes, it sure would.

>The argument that google alone suffices to usefully
>search 50,000 separate messages

And where did you see that argument?

>boils down to the claim that entirely disorganized
>information is as useful as organized information.

Keyword search works. Get over it.

>In view of the widespread
>adoption of the Dewey Decimal
>and the Library of Congress systems for organizing
>infomration, are you absolutely
>sure you wish to make that claim?

Again, who made this claim?

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Jean Lawton <mlkofmusic@y...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51880

> The argument that google alone suffices to usefully
> search
> 50,000 separate messages boils down to the claim that
> entirely disorganized information is as useful as
> organized information. In view of the widespread
> adoption of the Dewey Decimal
> and the Library of Congress systems for organizing
> infomration, are you absolutely
> sure you wish to make that claim?
>

***We're not talking about using Google to search the Internet for
Tuning concerns; we're talking about searching this Tuning List
*archive* for tuning concerns. Most of us have a pretty good idea
who knows what around here and whose judgements to trust....

J. Pehrson

Jean,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Jean Lawton <mlkofmusic@y...> wrote:
> Let me be specific: wouldn't it would be useful to be
> able to
> rapidly fuzzy-search keywords and keyphrases on the
> 50,000 messages in this tuning list?

...and the rest. FWIW, I happen to believe you are completely correct in this. The search functionality built into the Google archives is slow and limited, but that doesn't even address the situation of having this information in a non-online version. Having this archive as a database of knowledge sitting on a laptop, pda, or non-net-wired box would (of course) be a boon.

Do not hold your breath. There seems to be a near pathological fear of presenting information in a cogent, easy to use format in any of the tuning subject areas, with the sole exception of Joe Monzo's dictionary of tuning terms. One must again pubicly thank Joe for being the only person in the years of the list to pull together (to actually work at it!) many different threads and create a useful tool for the benefit of the tuning-interested. There are a couple of other sites that are related to ancillary information (synths, collections of links), but outside of a couple of papers this community is more interested in posting an ongoing journal than ever stopping to collate a section of information into anything more useful than that.

Cheers,
Jon

Jean (and list),

I've got a rep with some of the folks on the list as being relentlessly negative. But I'm not above re-examinging things I have written and seeing what can be improved.

There are also some explanations of recent discoveries in tuning from the list on Gene Ward Smith's site:

http://www.xenharmony.org/

As to your original question about searching the archives, nothing changes in my mind currently. But while the following might (of necessity) involve the tuning list owner (who is usually absent), it might be great for someone to alter the "home page" of the group to include links to the "Top 10" sites for basic information on what has gone down on the list over the years. Links to Monz' dictionary for starters, to Gene's site, Graham Breed, John Starrett, John Loffink, and anyone else that people think has produced some kind of documentation regarding the many discussions and discoveries from the tuning list, dating all the way back to the Mills days in the late 90's.

When we were all much younger...

Cheers,
Jon

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

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51888

>
> As to your original question about searching the archives, nothing
changes in my mind currently. But while the following might (of
necessity) involve the tuning list owner (who is usually absent), it
might be great for someone to alter the "home page" of the group to
include links to the "Top 10" sites for basic information on what has
gone down on the list over the years. Links to Monz' dictionary for
starters, to Gene's site, Graham Breed, John Starrett, John Loffink,
and anyone else that people think has produced some kind of
documentation regarding the many discussions and discoveries from the
tuning list, dating all the way back to the Mills days in the late
90's.
>

***This is apparently something that only Mark Nowinsky can do...

J. Pehrson

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

> ***This is apparently something that only Mark Nowinsky can do...

I'll do it on tuning math, but can we come to a consensus of sorts as
to what urls should be included?

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

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51890

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...>
wrote:
>
> > ***This is apparently something that only Mark Nowinsky can do...
>
> I'll do it on tuning math, but can we come to a consensus of sorts
as
> to what urls should be included?

***It's "Nowitsky"... sorry

Well, *my* votes so far:

Monzo dictionary
http://tonalsoft.com/enc/

John Starrett big site (unless he's moved it – he's been
hard to
reach of late)
http://www-math.cudenver.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html

Kyle Gann on the History of Tuning
http://www.kylegann.com/histune.html

Kyle Gann on Just Intonation
http://www.kylegann.com/tuning.html

Loffink synthesizers
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com/

Johnny Reinhard's AFMM
http://www.afmm.org/

Corporeal Meadows
http://www.corporeal.com/cm_main.html

Keenan Blackjack/Miracle resource
http://www.uq.net.au/~zzdkeena/Music/Miracle/

Just Intonation Network
http://www.justintonation.net/

Paul Erlilch "Forms of Tonality"
http://www.lumma.org/tuning/erlich/

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

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51892

>> Paul Erlilch "Forms of Tonality"

***Good one... :)

JP

Joe,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> Well, *my* votes so far:
>
> John Starrett big site (unless he's moved it – he's been
> hard to
> reach of late)
> http://www-math.cudenver.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html

Yes, he did move it, with announcements to the list(s):
http://www.nmt.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html

I think any complete list should also contain a link to Bill Sethares' work=
in acoustics, tuning, and music:
http://eceserv0.ece.wisc.edu/~sethares/

Graham Breed keeps his microtonal stuff on his (somewhat) new domain:
http://x31eq.com/

Both the Wilson archive:
http://www.anaphoria.com/wilson.html

...and the main Anaphoria site are important:
http://www.anaphoria.com/

Lastly:
> Keenan Blackjack/Miracle resource
> http://www.uq.net.au/~zzdkeena/Music/Miracle/

I thought Dave moved his site, something to do with "big pond"? Dave?

Cheers,
Jon

>> Keenan Blackjack/Miracle resource
>> http://www.uq.net.au/~zzdkeena/Music/Miracle/
>
>I thought Dave moved his site, something to do with "big pond"?

Yup, and it's best to link to the whole Music part, not
just Miracle.

My list would go...

portal
http://www.nmt.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html

theory
http://www.tonalsoft.com/enc/
http://lumma.org/tuning/erlich/
http://x31eq.com/
http://www.xenharmony.org/
http://dkeenan.com/Music/

orgs
http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/english/
http://www.xentonic.org/
http://www.justintonation.net/
http://www.corporeal.com/

instruments
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com/
http://www.hermode.com/
http://microtones.com/

...Not only Gann, Sethares and Grady, but Canright, Bohlen
Fortuin, Miller, deLaubenfels, Rodgers, Scott and many
others have fantastic sites. But I think rather than include
them all on the main page they could be better linked to from
a site like John's.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> > Keenan Blackjack/Miracle resource
> > http://www.uq.net.au/~zzdkeena/Music/Miracle/
>
> I thought Dave moved his site, something to do with "big pond"? Dave?

Yes. It's at

http://dkeenan.com/Music/Miracle/

or more generally

http://dkeenan.com/Music/

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> it might be great for someone to alter the "home page" of the group
>to include links to the "Top 10" sites for basic information on what
>has gone down on the list over the years. Links to Monz' dictionary
>for starters, to Gene's site, Graham Breed, John Starrett, John
>Loffink, and anyone else that people think has produced some kind of
>documentation regarding the many discussions and discoveries from
>the tuning list, dating all the way back to the Mills days in the
>late 90's.

I guess you never checked out
/tuning/links

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "wallyesterpaulrus" <paul@s...> wrote:
> I guess you never checked out
> /tuning/links

I must have: I put one of the links there myself! But I had *not* visited there in a long while. The page *does* point out one aspect: if someone doesn't stay on top of things like this, links get out of date, and miscellaneous stuff starts building up (since there is no heirarchy to it, I'd be hard pressed to point to that page as a "start here" for a newcomer).

But it is a resource, that is for sure.

Cheers,
Jon

P.S. My computer went down when I was looking at it about 1/2 hour ago, and when I looked again I _swear_ there were links that had been removed - did you do that? or someone else? I wanted to try out that sports betting site...

>P.S. My computer went down when I was looking at it about 1/2 hour ago,
>and when I looked again I _swear_ there were links that had been
>removed - did you do that? or someone else? I wanted to try out that
>sports betting site...

Um, that would be me. :)

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> >P.S. My computer went down when I was looking at it about 1/2 hour
ago,
> >and when I looked again I _swear_ there were links that had been
> >removed - did you do that? or someone else? I wanted to try out
that
> >sports betting site...
>
> Um, that would be me. :)
>
> -Carl

While you're at it, it might be worthwhile for you to update the
outdated links to Monz, Dave, and John S. on that page . . .

>While you're at it, it might be worthwhile for you to update the
>outdated links to Monz, Dave, and John S. on that page . . .

While I'm at that, what ever happened to all the files you wanted
to delete but couldn't?

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> >While you're at it, it might be worthwhile for you to update the
> >outdated links to Monz, Dave, and John S. on that page . . .
>
> While I'm at that, what ever happened to all the files you wanted
> to delete but couldn't?
>
> -Carl

OK, let's start. Can you move the .mpgs here:

/tuning/files/perlich/

to tuning-files (say a folder labeled oldtuning/perlich or anything
along those lines)? Or, if you prefer, let me download them and then
just delete them.

>OK, let's start. Can you move the .mpgs here:
>
>/tuning/files/perlich/
>
>to tuning-files (say a folder labeled oldtuning/perlich or anything
>along those lines)? Or, if you prefer, let me download them and
>then just delete them.

It isn't easy to move them -- I have to download them, delete them,
and then upload them to tuning_files, where they will appear to
have been 'created' by me.

I assume "paulerlich" is the account you can't access -- forgot
your password? Have you tried Yahoo's password recovery process?

I remember there being large bmps due to you, but I don't see
them now. I do see...

() enttriad.jpg, figure11.gif, triads.jpg and triad100.jpg
in the group's root directory. I *can* easily move these
to /perlich if you want.

() jerry10.wav in perlich/wav is large.

-Carl

Carl, go ahead and delete the .mpgs -- I have them on my hard drive.

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

> I assume "paulerlich" is the account you can't access

I can delete some of those files but not others. Same for other
accounts.

> -- forgot
> your password?

No, that's not the problem.

> () enttriad.jpg, figure11.gif, triads.jpg and triad100.jpg
> in the group's root directory. I *can* easily move these
> to /perlich if you want.

Don't move figure11.gif, since a lot of posts link to it where it is.
You can delete the rest.

> () jerry10.wav in perlich/wav is large.

Okay -- does *anyone* hear a pitch go *down* here? ;) Delete this
eventually.

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

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51908

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "wallyesterpaulrus" <paul@s...>
wrote:
> > I guess you never checked out
> > /tuning/links
>
> I must have: I put one of the links there myself! But I had *not*
visited there in a long while. The page *does* point out one aspect:
if someone doesn't stay on top of things like this, links get out of
date, and miscellaneous stuff starts building up (since there is no
heirarchy to it, I'd be hard pressed to point to that page as
a "start here" for a newcomer).
>
> But it is a resource, that is for sure.
>
> Cheers,
> Jon
>
> P.S. My computer went down when I was looking at it about 1/2 hour
ago, and when I looked again I _swear_ there were links that had been
removed - did you do that? or someone else? I wanted to try out that
sports betting site...

***Maybe there could be a *link* on the HOME page pointing to the
*LINKS* page... a link to the links. Seriously, though...

Otherwise I never really looked at that part of the forum...

JP

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "wallyesterpaulrus" <paul@s...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51914

> Carl, go ahead and delete the .mpgs -- I have them on my hard drive.
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
>
> > I assume "paulerlich" is the account you can't access
>
> I can delete some of those files but not others. Same for other
> accounts.
>
> > -- forgot
> > your password?
>
> No, that's not the problem.
>
> > () enttriad.jpg, figure11.gif, triads.jpg and triad100.jpg
> > in the group's root directory. I *can* easily move these
> > to /perlich if you want.
>
> Don't move figure11.gif, since a lot of posts link to it where it
is.
> You can delete the rest.
>
> > () jerry10.wav in perlich/wav is large.
>
> Okay -- does *anyone* hear a pitch go *down* here? ;) Delete this
> eventually.

***Well, it goes *up* doesn't it?? Isn't that the "high third..." :)

JP

>***Maybe there could be a *link* on the HOME page pointing to the
>*LINKS* page... a link to the links. Seriously, though...

There IS.

>Otherwise I never really looked at that part of the forum...

Well maybe you should start... especially since keeping it free
of spam is one of a moderator's duties.

-Carl

on 1/17/04 3:11 PM, Carl Lumma <ekin@lumma.org> wrote:

>>> Keenan Blackjack/Miracle resource
>>> http://www.uq.net.au/~zzdkeena/Music/Miracle/
>>
>> I thought Dave moved his site, something to do with "big pond"?
>
> Yup, and it's best to link to the whole Music part, not
> just Miracle.
>
> My list would go...
>
> portal
> http://www.nmt.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html
>
> theory
> http://www.tonalsoft.com/enc/
> http://lumma.org/tuning/erlich/
> http://x31eq.com/
> http://www.xenharmony.org/
> http://dkeenan.com/Music/
>
> orgs
> http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/english/
> http://www.xentonic.org/
> http://www.justintonation.net/
> http://www.corporeal.com/
>
> instruments
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com/
> http://www.hermode.com/
> http://microtones.com/

A quick scan revealed that many of Carl's and JP's offered links are not
present on the Alternate Tunings links page. Should they be? Maybe someone
who can do this wants to update that page?

-Kurt

>> I assume "paulerlich" is the account you can't access
>
>I can delete some of those files but not others. Same for other
>accounts.
>
>> -- forgot
>> your password?
>
>No, that's not the problem.

Weird.

>> () enttriad.jpg, figure11.gif, triads.jpg and triad100.jpg
>> in the group's root directory. I *can* easily move these
>> to /perlich if you want.
>
>Don't move figure11.gif, since a lot of posts link to it where it is.
>You can delete the rest.

Done.

>> () jerry10.wav in perlich/wav is large.
>
>Okay -- does *anyone* hear a pitch go *down* here? ;) Delete this
>eventually.

Um, no, and ok.

-Carl

>> My list would go...
>>
>> portal
>> http://www.nmt.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html
>>
>> theory
>> http://www.tonalsoft.com/enc/
>> http://lumma.org/tuning/erlich/
>> http://x31eq.com/
>> http://www.xenharmony.org/
>> http://dkeenan.com/Music/
>>
>> orgs
>> http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/english/
>> http://www.xentonic.org/
>> http://www.justintonation.net/
>> http://www.corporeal.com/
>>
>> instruments
>> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com/
>> http://www.hermode.com/
>> http://microtones.com/
>
>A quick scan revealed that many of Carl's and JP's offered links
>are not present on the Alternate Tunings links page. Should they
>be? Maybe someone who can do this wants to update that page?

Any list member can do it, but I'm about to go in there for
maintenance anyway, so I'll do it.

-Carl

on 1/17/04 10:32 PM, Carl Lumma <ekin@lumma.org> wrote:

>>> My list would go...
>>>
>>> portal
>>> http://www.nmt.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html
>>>
>>> theory
>>> http://www.tonalsoft.com/enc/
>>> http://lumma.org/tuning/erlich/
>>> http://x31eq.com/
>>> http://www.xenharmony.org/
>>> http://dkeenan.com/Music/
>>>
>>> orgs
>>> http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/english/
>>> http://www.xentonic.org/
>>> http://www.justintonation.net/
>>> http://www.corporeal.com/
>>>
>>> instruments
>>> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com/
>>> http://www.hermode.com/
>>> http://microtones.com/
>>
>> A quick scan revealed that many of Carl's and JP's offered links
>> are not present on the Alternate Tunings links page. Should they
>> be? Maybe someone who can do this wants to update that page?
>
> Any list member can do it, but I'm about to go in there for
> maintenance anyway, so I'll do it.

Thanks.

> -Carl

>Thanks.
>
>> -Carl

Please, Kurt, please trim your replies.

Thanks,

-Carl

on 1/17/04 10:46 PM, Carl Lumma <ekin@lumma.org> wrote:

> Please, Kurt, please trim your replies.

Actually it is something that I am usually mindful of, but obviously
sometimes I forget before I click send. However, I like to not get too
complex about the process of trimming and I'd rather leave extra than trim
too much, and that's what I also want other people to do in messages I read.
And I also don't want to take a lot of time by trimming very carefully,
which seems to be the only alternative to trimming too little or risking
trimming too much.

It still remains true that your messages are almost the only ones that make
me work a lot harder going back to find the context that you trimmed out.
We have discussed privately the differences of strategy that lead to this.
I would be curious how other people on this list feel about it, and will try
to adjust my strategy here based on that input. This is of course off-topic
but there is nowhere like here to solicit an opinion about what people want
here.

-Kurt

>It still remains true that your messages are almost the only ones that
>make me work a lot harder going back to find the context that you
>trimmed out.

That's a separate issue. One may reply above or below text*, but one
should NEVER leave un-replied-to block below his comments. This is
quite standard usenet and e-mail practice worldwide.

* Replying above should be used exceedingly sparingly -- only in
rare cases where you must quote an entire message yet only have
a few words to say about its general point.

-Carl

on 1/17/04 11:37 PM, Carl Lumma <ekin@lumma.org> wrote:

>> It still remains true that your messages are almost the only ones that
>> make me work a lot harder going back to find the context that you
>> trimmed out.
>
> That's a separate issue. One may reply above or below text*, but one
> should NEVER leave un-replied-to block below his comments. This is
> quite standard usenet and e-mail practice worldwide.

Ok, it is a knee-jerk thing for me to leave just a quoted signature below my
last reply line. In spite of knowing that I keep doing this it has been
hard for me to notice when I do it, but I'll work on it, and maybe I'll
improve quickly now. ;)

If there is something besides a signature below my reply but *most* of the
quoted message is *above*, I tend to feel compelled to add a small fraction
to the message length by leaving the rest of the message below my reply.
The alternative of truncating an almost complete message seems to go against
my grain, and probably causes me problems in the same way it caused
Beethoven problems to not complete forms! But I'll keep your feedback in
mind.

-Kurt

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

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51919

> >***Maybe there could be a *link* on the HOME page pointing to the
> >*LINKS* page... a link to the links. Seriously, though...
>
> There IS.
>

###Well, it's on the *side frame* just like in the other views...
Hmmmmm. Maybe just a short sentence in the description like, "we
also have all these sexy tuning links if you bother to click the link
link..."

> >Otherwise I never really looked at that part of the forum...
>
> Well maybe you should start... especially since keeping it free
> of spam is one of a moderator's duties.
>
> -Carl

***Good point. Well, it seems pretty clean now. I wonder if it had
*ever* been winnowed out before...

JP

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Bigler <kkb@b...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51926

> on 1/17/04 10:46 PM, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
>
> > Please, Kurt, please trim your replies.
>
> Actually it is something that I am usually mindful of, but obviously
> sometimes I forget before I click send. However, I like to not get
too
> complex about the process of trimming and I'd rather leave extra
than trim
> too much, and that's what I also want other people to do in
messages I read.
> And I also don't want to take a lot of time by trimming very
carefully,
> which seems to be the only alternative to trimming too little or
risking
> trimming too much.
>
> It still remains true that your messages are almost the only ones
that make
> me work a lot harder going back to find the context that you
trimmed out.
> We have discussed privately the differences of strategy that lead
to this.
> I would be curious how other people on this list feel about it, and
will try
> to adjust my strategy here based on that input. This is of course
off-topic
> but there is nowhere like here to solicit an opinion about what
people want
> here.
>
> -Kurt

***I've, personally, only been bothered by czhang, who doesn't seem
to get the czhang of it... and my friend Stephen the newbie... (I
can't seem to remember his last name right now...)

JP

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

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51927

> * Replying above should be... [snippy]

***If anybody notices, I always include a *link* to the previous post
in my posts... less is more...

JP

>***Good point. Well, it seems pretty clean now. I wonder if it had
>*ever* been winnowed out before...

Yup, I had done it once before, and announced that I had to the
list.

-Carl

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

> portal
> http://www.nmt.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html

This is getting awfully out of date. I'm awaiting the day I get to be
on it.

> theory
> http://www.tonalsoft.com/enc/
> http://lumma.org/tuning/erlich/

Is there anything on
http://www-math.cudenver.edu/~jstarret/Erlich.html
not on this page?

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

> portal
> http://www.nmt.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html

This is getting awfully out of date. I'm awaiting the day I get to be
on it.

> theory
> http://www.tonalsoft.com/enc/
> http://lumma.org/tuning/erlich/

Is there anything on
http://www-math.cudenver.edu/~jstarret/Erlich.html
not on this page?

>> http://lumma.org/tuning/erlich/
>
>Is there anything on
>http://www-math.cudenver.edu/~jstarret/Erlich.html
>not on this page?

Even a cursory examination (to quote Partch) would
show this.

-Carl

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

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51953

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
>
> > portal
> > http://www.nmt.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html
>
> This is getting awfully out of date. I'm awaiting the day I get to
be
> on it.
>

***Hi Gene,

Why, of course you deserve to be. The "problem" is more that John
Starrett has been "out of the loop" for a while. He, apparently,
took a job teaching *MATH* :) and hasn't resurfaced. I've written to
him to no avail.

Anybody else ever hear from him anymore??

JP

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "wallyesterpaulrus" <paul@s...>
wrote:
>
> /tuning/topicId_51880.html#51914
>
> > Carl, go ahead and delete the .mpgs -- I have them on my hard
drive.
> >
> > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> >
> > > I assume "paulerlich" is the account you can't access
> >
> > I can delete some of those files but not others. Same for other
> > accounts.
> >
> > > -- forgot
> > > your password?
> >
> > No, that's not the problem.
> >
> > > () enttriad.jpg, figure11.gif, triads.jpg and triad100.jpg
> > > in the group's root directory. I *can* easily move these
> > > to /perlich if you want.
> >
> > Don't move figure11.gif, since a lot of posts link to it where it
> is.
> > You can delete the rest.
> >
> > > () jerry10.wav in perlich/wav is large.
> >
> > Okay -- does *anyone* hear a pitch go *down* here? ;) Delete this
> > eventually.
>
>
> ***Well, it goes *up* doesn't it??

Yup!

> Isn't that the "high third..." :)

It goes from JI to 12-equal.

But I think Jerry claims, on his website, that *you* initially heard
it go down . . .

on 1/18/04 6:19 AM, Joseph Pehrson <jpehrson@rcn.com> wrote:

> ***If anybody notices, I always include a *link* to the previous post
> in my posts... less is more...
>
> JP

This reminds me again of the issue that message number appears to be
unavailable in the email-based interface. But I wonder if this is something
that the moderator might have some control over - the ability to add a
header field with the message number? The message number has occasional
other uses, but having a field in the email would be useful, and would allow
people who subscribe via email to create message links by hand easily, i.e.
by slapping the message number after:

/tuning/message/

Probably even better if a header field could be added containing the entire
message link.

Otherwise it is of course possible to get this by using the web interface
occasionally, and finding the same message to get the message number or the
link. But this can be awkward, especially when there is a desire to refer
to messages that are a bit in the past.

-Kurt

>This reminds me again of the issue that message number appears to be
>unavailable in the email-based interface. But I wonder if this is
>something that the moderator might have some control over - the
>ability to add a header field with the message number?

I don't have the ability to do things like this, but I doubt Yahoo
supports this particular behavior anyway.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "wallyesterpaulrus" <paul@s...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51960

> > ***Well, it goes *up* doesn't it??
>
> Yup!
>
> > Isn't that the "high third..." :)
>
> It goes from JI to 12-equal.
>
> But I think Jerry claims, on his website, that *you* initially
heard
> it go down . . .

***Hmmm. Well, the exercise was some time ago, but if I remember
correctly, it seemed like the just third was higher than it *should*
be when played in a triadic context. But, it still was always lower
than 12-equal.

I believe that was my conclusion, but if Jerry want's to believe
otherwise to support his "claims..." I can't really stop him... :)

JP

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Bigler <kkb@b...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51975
>
> Otherwise it is of course possible to get this by using the web
interface
> occasionally, and finding the same message to get the message
number or the
> link. But this can be awkward, especially when there is a desire
to refer
> to messages that are a bit in the past.
>
> -Kurt

***Right... I'm really only including the link for those persons
accessing the list via the Web, which is how *I* personally do it...

Joseph

on 1/19/04 7:58 AM, Joseph Pehrson <jpehrson@rcn.com> wrote:

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Bigler <kkb@b...> wrote:
>
> /tuning/topicId_51880.html#51975
>>
>> Otherwise it is of course possible to get this by using the web
> interface
>> occasionally, and finding the same message to get the message
> number or the
>> link. But this can be awkward, especially when there is a desire
> to refer
>> to messages that are a bit in the past.
>>
>> -Kurt
>
>
> ***Right... I'm really only including the link for those persons
> accessing the list via the Web, which is how *I* personally do it...
>
> Joseph

Just FYI, the issue here was that the web link is hard to *create* for those
who don't use the web interface. A link *received* is good for most
everyone I would imagine. I use the email interface normally but web links
work fine on the side.

-Kurt

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Bigler <kkb@b...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_51880.html#51991

> on 1/19/04 7:58 AM, Joseph Pehrson <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
>
> > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Bigler <kkb@b...> wrote:
> >
> > /tuning/topicId_51880.html#51975
> >>
> >> Otherwise it is of course possible to get this by using the web
> > interface
> >> occasionally, and finding the same message to get the message
> > number or the
> >> link. But this can be awkward, especially when there is a desire
> > to refer
> >> to messages that are a bit in the past.
> >>
> >> -Kurt
> >
> >
> > ***Right... I'm really only including the link for those persons
> > accessing the list via the Web, which is how *I* personally do
it...
> >
> > Joseph
>
> Just FYI, the issue here was that the web link is hard to *create*
for those
> who don't use the web interface. A link *received* is good for most
> everyone I would imagine. I use the email interface normally but
web links
> work fine on the side.
>
> -Kurt

***Oh... thanks, Kurt... that *is* valuable news, particularly since
I don't get the list via email.

But, how do the people receiving it by email use the post numbers?
Are the emails numbered??

Thanks!

Joseph

on 1/19/04 9:31 PM, Joseph Pehrson <jpehrson@rcn.com> wrote:

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Bigler <kkb@b...> wrote:
>
> /tuning/topicId_51880.html#51991
>
>> on 1/19/04 7:58 AM, Joseph Pehrson <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
>>
>>> ***Right... I'm really only including the link for those persons
>>> accessing the list via the Web, which is how *I* personally do
> it...
>>>
>>> Joseph
>>
>> Just FYI, the issue here was that the web link is hard to *create*
> for those
>> who don't use the web interface. A link *received* is good for most
>> everyone I would imagine. I use the email interface normally but
> web links
>> work fine on the side.
>>
>> -Kurt
>
>
> ***Oh... thanks, Kurt... that *is* valuable news, particularly since
> I don't get the list via email.
>
> But, how do the people receiving it by email use the post numbers?
> Are the emails numbered??
>
> Thanks!
>
> Joseph

They don't use the post numbers. They click on the link and instantly have
the referred-to message displayed as a web page. There is no problem with
using web on the side even if email is the primary medium. It works fine,
especially for refering to messages that you weren't going to reply to
anyway. If you want to reply to a linked message but want to do it via
non-web email then you have to find the same message by author/date/time in
your email.

-Kurt