Fussin and fightin

Hey guys...as one who has been off the list for a while and returned, I am somewhat disappointed to see the feuding still going on...it seems very similar to when I left. Look, I think most of you guys are very smart and insightful fellers, and there's a lot to be learned here. But, as before, i am a musician interested in tuning theory, and don't really care much about where we dot the i's...not to say technical points aren't important, cause they can be, but practical info about tunings and music is much more useful to me. I just had one student get a 24 tone guitar, and another guy got an oud....these guys may be the next Hendrix, you never know, and I want info that will help them be great artists, if possible. I believe non 12 tunings are the last frontier in western music, and that's why I do it, for the new and mysterious sounds that have not been heard yet...it's a hoot. Anyway, sorry to see the ruckus, hope it all works out...best...Hstick

As one of them lurkers...what he said. I'm interested in beauty and revelation through sound, and while I find the theory fascinating (to a degree), my primary interest in it is as a possible springboard or inspiration for actual musical practice. With all due respect to those from which I hope to learn, and the passions that drive them, squabbling results in a pretty low signal-to-noise ration.

Just my $0.02USD.

- Dave

> Hey guys...as one who has been off the list for a while and returned, I >am somewhat disappointed to see the feuding still going on...it seems very >similar to when I left. Look, I think most of you guys are very smart and >insightful fellers, and there's a lot to be learned here. But, as before, i >am a musician interested in tuning theory, and don't really care much about >where we dot the i's...not to say technical points aren't important, cause >they can be, but practical info about tunings and music is much more useful >to me. I just had one student get a 24 tone guitar, and another guy got an >oud....these guys may be the next Hendrix, you never know, and I want info >that will help them be great artists, if possible. I believe non 12 tunings >are the last frontier in western music, and that's why I do it, for the new >and mysterious sounds that have not been heard yet...it's a hoot. Anyway, >sorry to see the ruckus, hope it all works out...best...Hstick
> >

hi Dave and Neil,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Dave Seidel <dave@s...> wrote:

> As one of them lurkers...what he said. I'm interested
> in beauty and revelation through sound, and while I find
> the theory fascinating (to a degree), my primary interest
> in it is as a possible springboard or inspiration for
> actual musical practice. With all due respect to those
> from which I hope to learn, and the passions that drive
> them, squabbling results in a pretty low signal-to-noise
> ration.
>
> Just my $0.02USD.
>
> - Dave

this is exactly why i'm a big advocate of spawning
smaller, more tightly-focused lists for the handful
of people who want to discuss theoretical issues.

it does get difficult to manage such a proliferation,
but the nice thing is that we can always post short
announcements and summaries here, with links, so that
those on this big list who might be interested can
join in.

despite the fact that i'm usually one of the main
contributors around here to the theoretical arguments,
i do agree with both of you guys that this list should
be a more friendly place with more generalized content.

we can save the squabbling amongst each other for
the smaller lists.

i think maybe it's time we just acknowledge the fact
that we really need a "tuning-theory" list, so there:

/tuning-theory/

-monz

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

> i think maybe it's time we just acknowledge the fact
> that we really need a "tuning-theory" list, so there:
>
> /tuning-theory/

It occurred to me that what we were really doing was tuning
philosophy, but I didn't say so for fear you would start a new list. :)

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

/tuning/topicId_55946.html#55953

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@t...> wrote:
>
> > i think maybe it's time we just acknowledge the fact
> > that we really need a "tuning-theory" list, so there:
> >
> > /tuning-theory/
>
> It occurred to me that what we were really doing was tuning
> philosophy, but I didn't say so for fear you would start a new
list. :)

***Well, there is now currently 1 member of the above list, but I
would presume that it will grow... :)

JP