Audio realization of Bull-'Ut Re Mi Fa Sol La'

Hey,

I resuscitated my old pet-project -- Bull's 'Ut Re MI Fa Sol La' in 19-equal,
and got further along in it tonight...I think in a week I could complete it.

http://www.dividebypi.com/audio/bull_ut_re.ogg

Software and platform info:

*Gentoo Linux
*fluidsynth, using 'Campbell's Harpsichord' soundfont (corrected and retuned
version)
* my own 'et_compose', written in Python, a 'midi file compiler' for writing
in arbitrary n-tets and a healthy alternative to writing Scala *.seq files,
which has the following advantage over Scala's format:
1) I can write polyphonically and *see* the lines over each other, so I know
harmonically and contrapuntally what's going on, and
2) I implemented a 'humanize' function, using Gaussian distribution curves,
that, given the right parameter, will make subtle micro-temporal adjustments
in the output midi file, giving a dynamic and lifelike performance to the
file that would otherwise suffer from being stale and too precise.

The latter I think I used to good effect in the OGG sample above...I tried
about 10 different values until I found one I think is just right for this
performance...just barely audible, but present and interesting. The result
is, I think, when paired with the excellent harpsichord soundfont, nothing
short of ear-candy !!!

Enjoy!
--
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.dividebypi.com
http://www.akjmusic.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson" <akjmicro@c...>
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I resuscitated my old pet-project -- Bull's 'Ut Re MI Fa Sol La' in
19-equal,
> and got further along in it tonight...I think in a week I could
complete it.
>
> http://www.dividebypi.com/audio/bull_ut_re.ogg

this is great too!
i love the way 19edo can sound so "normal" when
the right sets of notes are used, but then also
sound so weird and warped with other sets.

can you do another which uses a 19-tone subset of 31edo,
based on the same generator chain?

actually, could someone who has the score please post
the chain of 5ths which are notated in this piece?
perhaps it's more than 19.

-monz

On Friday 27 August 2004 05:11 am, monz wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson" <akjmicro@c...>
>
> wrote:
> > Hey,
> >
> > I resuscitated my old pet-project -- Bull's 'Ut Re MI Fa Sol La' in
>
> 19-equal,
>
> > and got further along in it tonight...I think in a week I could
>
> complete it.
>
> > http://www.dividebypi.com/audio/bull_ut_re.ogg
>
> this is great too!
> i love the way 19edo can sound so "normal" when
> the right sets of notes are used, but then also
> sound so weird and warped with other sets.

How true that is....

> can you do another which uses a 19-tone subset of 31edo,
> based on the same generator chain?

Hmm...gimme a year !!!!

> actually, could someone who has the score please post
> the chain of 5ths which are notated in this piece?
> perhaps it's more than 19.

I don't think there are....I'll do this later today...It shouldn't take long.
BTW, I should redo a part of this piece....an alternate rendering where the
enharmonic modulation (at 0:47 in the ogg file) uses the xenharmonics of 19 a
bit more--the chord at that moment (m.11, 2nd whole note of the Dover FWB
score, page 183) is actually A-Db-E. I made the choice I did because I wanted
to keep the hexachord the tonal center of gravity, and 'interpret' the
surrounding pitches as consonantly as possible. That is, the last statement
ended on B, and this moment the hexachord starts on Db.
You can hear that I actually made the A and E that surround this actually be
Bbb and Fb to make it less jarring. But it's also sort of a 'stay awake'
moment, so I'll redo this and see what you all think.....it's sort of a
little bite in the middle of the gorgeous voice leading !

-Aaron.

Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.dividebypi.com
http://www.akjmusic.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson" <akjmicro@c...>

/tuning/topicId_55905.html#55905

wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I resuscitated my old pet-project -- Bull's 'Ut Re MI Fa Sol La' in
19-equal,
> and got further along in it tonight...I think in a week I could
complete it.
>
> http://www.dividebypi.com/audio/bull_ut_re.ogg
>
> Software and platform info:
>
> *Gentoo Linux
> *fluidsynth, using 'Campbell's Harpsichord' soundfont (corrected
and retuned
> version)
> * my own 'et_compose', written in Python, a 'midi file compiler'
for writing
> in arbitrary n-tets and a healthy alternative to writing Scala
*.seq files,
> which has the following advantage over Scala's format:
> 1) I can write polyphonically and *see* the lines over each
other, so I know
> harmonically and contrapuntally what's going on, and
> 2) I implemented a 'humanize' function, using Gaussian
distribution curves,
> that, given the right parameter, will make subtle micro-temporal
adjustments
> in the output midi file, giving a dynamic and lifelike performance
to the
> file that would otherwise suffer from being stale and too precise.
>
> The latter I think I used to good effect in the OGG sample
above...I tried
> about 10 different values until I found one I think is just right
for this
> performance...just barely audible, but present and interesting. The
result
> is, I think, when paired with the excellent harpsichord soundfont,
nothing
> short of ear-candy !!!
>
> Enjoy!
> --
> Aaron Krister Johnson
> http://www.dividebypi.com
> http://www.akjmusic.com

***This is very nice! Bully for you! Is this in 19-tET?? Anyway,
it gets a little strange around 50 seconds in. I wonder what's going
on there? Very interesting, though...

J. Pehrson

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson" <akjmicro@c...>

/tuning/topicId_55905.html#55914

> I don't think there are....I'll do this later today...It shouldn't
take long.
> BTW, I should redo a part of this piece....an alternate rendering
where the
> enharmonic modulation (at 0:47 in the ogg file) uses the
xenharmonics of 19 a
> bit more--the chord at that moment (m.11, 2nd whole note of the
Dover FWB
> score, page 183) is actually A-Db-E. I made the choice I did
because I wanted
> to keep the hexachord the tonal center of gravity, and 'interpret'
the
> surrounding pitches as consonantly as possible. That is, the last
statement
> ended on B, and this moment the hexachord starts on Db.
> You can hear that I actually made the A and E that surround this
actually be
> Bbb and Fb to make it less jarring. But it's also sort of a 'stay
awake'
> moment, so I'll redo this and see what you all think.....it's sort
of a
> little bite in the middle of the gorgeous voice leading !
>

***This seems to have answered my question about 50 seconds in.
Bully again I say!

J. Pehrson

!!! Update !!!

I have completed my John Bull 'Ut Re Mi Fa Sol La' realization a couple of
days ago....and am just now posting it. It's nice to be done with a project
that I've been delaying for months!

I left information from my original post a while back (when it was *almost*
done) below for reference.

Here it is (complete version as a .ogg file):
http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bull_ut_re.ogg

As an incomplete mp3 file:
http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bull_ut_re.mp3

Enjoy!

Yes, I'm posting it complete only as an .ogg file. This is not to alienate
listeners, lose audience, etc, but because I believe in maximal fidelity in
sound for a compressed format, and I don't believe in sacrificing that to the
degree that I can help it. It is clearer to me than ever after doing
extensive comparisons and research over the last couple of days that .ogg
files are superior to .mp3s, in spite of the arguments for the ubiquitousness
of .mp3. Nevertheless, I give a sample of the last minute and a half or so of
the realization as an mp3; hopefully, if any of you stalwart mp3 users are
intrigued enough, you will join the revolution, and update your listening
situation to include .ogg capability.

For those of you who missed the ogg/mp3 debate, I had a relevant post about
directly comparing their implementation, at least at it occurs on the linux
platform. I included a 'snippet.wav' example, compressed to both mp3 and ogg,
and the results speak for themselves. The article is archived here:

/makemicromusic/topicId_7608.html#7608

Best,
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.akjmusic.com
http://www.dividebypi.com

On Thursday 26 August 2004 10:41 pm, Aaron K. Johnson wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I resuscitated my old pet-project -- Bull's 'Ut Re MI Fa Sol La' in
> 19-equal, and got further along in it tonight...I think in a week I could
> complete it.
>
> http://www.dividebypi.com/audio/bull_ut_re.ogg
>
> Software and platform info:
>
> *Gentoo Linux
> *fluidsynth, using 'Campbell's Harpsichord' soundfont (corrected and
> retuned version)
> * my own 'et_compose', written in Python, a 'midi file compiler' for
> writing in arbitrary n-tets and a healthy alternative to writing Scala
> *.seq files, which has the following advantage over Scala's format:
> 1) I can write polyphonically and *see* the lines over each other, so I
> know harmonically and contrapuntally what's going on, and
> 2) I implemented a 'humanize' function, using Gaussian distribution
> curves, that, given the right parameter, will make subtle micro-temporal
> adjustments in the output midi file, giving a dynamic and lifelike
> performance to the file that would otherwise suffer from being stale and
> too precise.
>
> The latter I think I used to good effect in the OGG sample above...I tried
> about 10 different values until I found one I think is just right for this
> performance...just barely audible, but present and interesting. The result
> is, I think, when paired with the excellent harpsichord soundfont, nothing
> short of ear-candy !!!
>
> Enjoy!

>I left information from my original post a while back (when it
>was *almost* done) below for reference.
>
>Here it is (complete version as a .ogg file):
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bull_ut_re.ogg

Sweetness!

Say, wasn't there a spot with two valid meantone realizations?
You first did the excerpt one way, then again another way. I
don't think I ever heard it the another way. Anyway, which way
is this? I'm guessing the new way. Was it around 0:45-46, or
what'z going on there?

Word,

-Carl

On Wednesday 29 September 2004 06:48 pm, Carl Lumma wrote:
> >I left information from my original post a while back (when it
> >was *almost* done) below for reference.
> >
> >Here it is (complete version as a .ogg file):
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bull_ut_re.ogg
>
> Sweetness!
>
> Say, wasn't there a spot with two valid meantone realizations?
> You first did the excerpt one way, then again another way. I
> don't think I ever heard it the another way. Anyway, which way
> is this? I'm guessing the new way. Was it around 0:45-46, or
> what'z going on there?

Right....the piece is based on a rising, then falling hexachord, which itself
is usually transposed a whole step (3/19 of an octave in this realization)
each time it appears. The spot in question, at 0:45-46, is a chord spelled
A-Db-E. The Db is the cantus firmus hexachord, which arrives from B, and thus
breaks the usual pattern of rising by 3/19 oct, and this time rises by a
diminished third (4/19 oct). I chose to 'correct' the spelling of the chord
at that moment to reflect a more consonant triadic basis, so in this version,
you are actually hearing Bbb-Db-Fb. I reasoned that there would be no purpose
to have such a strange moment of utter dissonance in the realization in
19-equal, because it would stand out as happening one and only once, and
would ruin the organic flow of the harmonic language, which is otherwise so
consistent. So, I therefore retract my earlier optional reading of A-Db-Fb
as being how that would be literally be interpreted in the 19-equal
context....

I now think I buy the argument that this piece is written for proto-Kirnberger
temperament (i.e. the empirically probable Elizabethan tuning that was
Kirnberger before Kirnberger wrote about it--read Davitt Moroney's liner
notes to his fabulous Byrd recording for more info), even though I think it
works in 19-equa, and the experiment was a "success".

Best,
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.akjmusic.com
http://www.dividebypi.com

>Right....the piece is based on a rising, then falling hexachord, which
>itself is usually transposed a whole step (3/19 of an octave in this
>realization) each time it appears. The spot in question, at 0:45-46,
>is a chord spelled A-Db-E. The Db is the cantus firmus hexachord, which
>arrives from B, and thus breaks the usual pattern of rising by 3/19 oct,
>and this time rises by a diminished third (4/19 oct). I chose to
>'correct' the spelling of the chord at that moment to reflect a more
>consonant triadic basis, so in this version, you are actually hearing
>Bbb-Db-Fb. I reasoned that there would be no purpose to have such a
>strange moment of utter dissonance in the realization in 19-equal,
>because it would stand out as happening one and only once, and would
>ruin the organic flow of the harmonic language, which is otherwise so
>consistent. So, I therefore retract my earlier optional reading of
>A-Db-Fb as being how that would be literally be interpreted in the
>19-equal context....

Is the A-Db-Fb version still up on your site somewhere, for comparison?

-Carl

On Thursday 30 September 2004 12:57 am, Carl Lumma wrote:
> >Right....the piece is based on a rising, then falling hexachord, which
> >itself is usually transposed a whole step (3/19 of an octave in this
> >realization) each time it appears. The spot in question, at 0:45-46,
> >is a chord spelled A-Db-E. The Db is the cantus firmus hexachord, which
> >arrives from B, and thus breaks the usual pattern of rising by 3/19 oct,
> >and this time rises by a diminished third (4/19 oct). I chose to
> >'correct' the spelling of the chord at that moment to reflect a more
> >consonant triadic basis, so in this version, you are actually hearing
> >Bbb-Db-Fb. I reasoned that there would be no purpose to have such a
> >strange moment of utter dissonance in the realization in 19-equal,
> >because it would stand out as happening one and only once, and would
> >ruin the organic flow of the harmonic language, which is otherwise so
> >consistent. So, I therefore retract my earlier optional reading of
> >A-Db-Fb as being how that would be literally be interpreted in the
> >19-equal context....
>
> Is the A-Db-Fb version still up on your site somewhere, for comparison?

Oops...I meant A-Db-E....and no it's not now up. When I get a moment, I'll do
an alternate partial realization up to that point, and let you know, but I
should let you know I have other more interesting obligations and interests
on my plate, so don't hate me if I don't ever get round to it ;)

Best,
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.akjmusic.com
http://www.dividebypi.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson" <akjmicro@c...>
wrote:
> I now think I buy the argument that this piece is written for
proto-Kirnberger
> temperament (i.e. the empirically probable Elizabethan tuning that
was
> Kirnberger before Kirnberger wrote about it--read Davitt Moroney's
liner
> notes to his fabulous Byrd recording for more info), even though I
think it
> works in 19-equa, and the experiment was a "success".

Or something similar. There are lots of other ways to make 12 notes
circulate reasonably, in between any strict meantone and that
particular proto-Kirnberger (or whatever one wants to call it)
layout. That just happens to be one of the simpler ones. There's
nothing prohibiting 17th century musicians (including Bull himself)
from having done something more irregular or more subtle. The
expectation of a *regular* layout on harpsichords is a modern one,
and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with 17th century
practices. Maybe they tuned something regular, and maybe they
didn't. Maybe it was different on different occasions.

Brad Lehman