the middle earth of Erlich's paper path

Well, I have to say I've been enjoying Part one, of Paul Erlich's
wonderful new paper "A Middle Path..."

I'm assuming this is the only part that has been written yet?
Otherwise, I'm missing quite a bit...

But, overall, I think that the writing is extremely clear, and Paul
has obviously endeavored to do that...

Quite frankly, I think any additional math could be placed in an
appendix, for those interested. There were still some math things
that were a little beyond my background, but not many... and most of
it can be pretty much figured out.

I'll have some more specific questions as I study it further, but I
think it marks a new level in clarity of Erlich writing to date...

Joseph Pehrson

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

> Well, I have to say I've been enjoying Part one, of Paul Erlich's
> wonderful new paper "A Middle Path..."

Even without the horagrams? Well, you've probably seen most of those
already, yes?

> I'm assuming this is the only part that has been written yet?

Not even. Let's say 75% written, and the other parts are unbegun. The
other parts will address things like 11-limit (which is where, for
some xenharmonicists, things begin to get interesting), no-2s (like
Bohlen-Pierce) systems, 3-dimensional temperaments, etc.

> Otherwise, I'm missing quite a bit...
>
> But, overall, I think that the writing is extremely clear, and Paul
> has obviously endeavored to do that...

Phew! I'm glad you're having an easier time with this than with the
22 paper! Then again, much of this new paper was discussed and
developed already on the list, where you had lots of opportunity to
ask questions, and of course to *be a crucial catalyst* yourself! It
might not exist if it weren't for you . . .

> I'll have some more specific questions as I study it further, but I
> think it marks a new level in clarity of Erlich writing to date...

Thanks. Let's get it to an even higher level of clarity, as we go
from draft to final edition, in the next few days. Shall we?

Appreciatively,
Paul

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

/tuning/topicId_54106.html#54107

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...>
wrote:
>
> > Well, I have to say I've been enjoying Part one, of Paul Erlich's
> > wonderful new paper "A Middle Path..."
>
> Even without the horagrams? Well, you've probably seen most of
those
> already, yes?
>

***Yes, sure... so I had a bit of a "heads up..."

> > I'm assuming this is the only part that has been written yet?
>
> Not even. Let's say 75% written, and the other parts are unbegun.
The
> other parts will address things like 11-limit (which is where, for
> some xenharmonicists, things begin to get interesting), no-2s (like
> Bohlen-Pierce) systems, 3-dimensional temperaments, etc.
>
> > Otherwise, I'm missing quite a bit...
> >
> > But, overall, I think that the writing is extremely clear, and
Paul
> > has obviously endeavored to do that...
>
> Phew! I'm glad you're having an easier time with this than with the
> 22 paper! Then again, much of this new paper was discussed and
> developed already on the list, where you had lots of opportunity to
> ask questions, and of course to *be a crucial catalyst* yourself!
It
> might not exist if it weren't for you . . .
>

***Thanks, Paul! Quite frankly, though, I believe that you discuss
fundamentals to a great enough extent that even a layman, or a non-
microtonal musician (there *are* a few of those... :) without the
background could understand it. That's crucial, of course, since one
can't expect that all of the readers have been following the Tuning
List... :)

> > I'll have some more specific questions as I study it further, but
I
> > think it marks a new level in clarity of Erlich writing to date...
>
> Thanks. Let's get it to an even higher level of clarity, as we go
> from draft to final edition, in the next few days. Shall we?
>

***Yes, I plan to study it further, but oh-oh... I just discovered
the new Sagittal website... !!!

JP