Idris Raghib Bey's tuning

At the university library, I came across a book titled _Kitab al-musiqi al-sharqi_ -by Muhammad Kamil al-Khula'i. In the chapter on scales, it has a couple of tuning systems, one of them a 24-note scale of Egyptian music theorist Idris Raghib Bey, each note given in thousandths of a string-length. The scale is listed in the Scala archive as "bey-r.scl".

Several of the notes are JI intervals. The others are more obscure and I'm trying to figure out if they're just approximations or some type of temperament. I'll post the first few notes:

yakah: 0.00 cents (1/1)
nim qaba hisar: 54.52
qaba hisar: 123.78
tik qaba hisar (shuri): 167.08
ashiran: 203.91 (9/8)
nim ajam ashiran: 257.09
ajam ashiran: 301.85
iraq: 369.09
nim kawasht (rahawi): 432.37
kawasht: 463.76
rast: 498.05 (4/3)

Obviously it's not anything near 24-equal. Testing a couple ajnas (tetrachords), rast looks like [1/1 9/8 27/22 4/3], but ajam has a pretty wide major third, more like [1/1 9/8 9/7 4/3]. Ajam ashiran is about a cent flat of Persian wusta (81/68), incidentally.

Where can I get more info on this tuning and the theorist?

hi Danny,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@s...> wrote:

> At the university library, I came across a book titled
> _Kitab al-musiqi al-sharqi_ -by Muhammad Kamil al-Khula'i.
> In the chapter on scales, it has a couple of tuning systems,
> one of them a 24-note scale of Egyptian music theorist
> Idris Raghib Bey, each note given in thousandths of a
> string-length. The scale is listed in the Scala archive
> as "bey-r.scl".
>
> Several of the notes are JI intervals. The others are more
> obscure and I'm trying to figure out if they're just
> approximations or some type of temperament. I'll post the
> first few notes:
>
> yakah: 0.00 cents (1/1)
> nim qaba hisar: 54.52
> qaba hisar: 123.78
> tik qaba hisar (shuri): 167.08
> ashiran: 203.91 (9/8)
> nim ajam ashiran: 257.09
> ajam ashiran: 301.85
> iraq: 369.09
> nim kawasht (rahawi): 432.37
> kawasht: 463.76
> rast: 498.05 (4/3)
>
> Obviously it's not anything near 24-equal. Testing a couple
> ajnas (tetrachords), rast looks like [1/1 9/8 27/22 4/3],
> but ajam has a pretty wide major third, more like
> [1/1 9/8 9/7 4/3]. Ajam ashiran is about a cent flat
> of Persian wusta (81/68), incidentally.
>
> Where can I get more info on this tuning and the theorist?

i think it would be useful to have the scale described
in thousandths of a string length, as in al-Khula's book,
and also to have the complete scale rather than just
the first part of it.

al-Khula'i's book was written in 1904.

Idris Raghib Bey was an Egyptian music theorist -- and
be careful not to confuse him with Rauf Yekta Bey, who
was an important Turkish theorist.

according to the Scala scale archive, Bey's scale is
described on p. 40 of Rodolphe d'Erlanger 1949, volume 5
of _La musique arabe_ (Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner,
Paris):

Vol. 5: Essai de codification des règles usuelles
de la musique arabe moderne.
Book 1: "L'échelle générale des sons mélodiques employés
en musique arabe moderne",
Book 2: "Le système modal de la musique arabe moderne."

some relevant links i found:

http://trumpet.sdsu.edu/M345/Arab_Music2.html
http://www.kairarecords.com/oudpage/theory.htm

the full citation for d'Erlanger is here:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/doc/bib.html#B

-monz

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

> i think it would be useful to have the scale described
> in thousandths of a string length, as in al-Khula's book,
> and also to have the complete scale rather than just
> the first part of it.

actually, if Bey's scale exhibits tetrachordal similarity
(as i suspect it does), then what you posted is OK because
it's the complete bottom tetrachord.

you're correct that it doesn't even remotely resemble
24-edo. however, among the smaller-cardinality EDOs,
36-edo gives a fairly decent approximation.

-monz

Aha! Did someone say 36-edo? Figures...

By the way Monz, `Bey` means monsieur in Turkish. It's an honorary title bestowed upon the intellectual and influential gentlemen. When referring to a person who has no specific surname (a much common practice in the Ottoman era), you should use the name without the title.

Cordially,
Ozan
----- Original Message -----
From: monz
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 10 Mart 2005 Perşembe 22:42
Subject: [tuning] Re: Idris Raghib Bey's tuning

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

> i think it would be useful to have the scale described
> in thousandths of a string length, as in al-Khula's book,
> and also to have the complete scale rather than just
> the first part of it.

actually, if Bey's scale exhibits tetrachordal similarity
(as i suspect it does), then what you posted is OK because
it's the complete bottom tetrachord.

you're correct that it doesn't even remotely resemble
24-edo. however, among the smaller-cardinality EDOs,
36-edo gives a fairly decent approximation.

-monz

From: "monz":

> i think it would be useful to have the scale described
> in thousandths of a string length, as in al-Khula's book,
> and also to have the complete scale rather than just
> the first part of it.

and in the next message:

> actually, if Bey's scale exhibits tetrachordal similarity
> (as i suspect it does), then what you posted is OK because
> it's the complete bottom tetrachord.

I just checked the cents-value of the scale and I don't really see any tetrachordal similarity, so I better post the whole list.

The lower octave lists the notes from yak�h (low G) to naw� (middle G). The author listed the notes from high to low, but I'll list from low to high.

1. yak�h: 1000
2. n�m qab� his�r: 969
3. qab� his�r: 931
4. t�k qab� his�r (sh�r�): 908
5. ash�r�n: 888
6. n�m ajam ash�r�n: 862
7. ajam ash�r�n: 840
8. ir�q: 808
9. n�m kawasht (rah�w�): 779
10. kawasht: 765
11. r�st: 750
12. n�m z�rk�lah: 726
13. z�rk�lah: 705
14. t�k z�rk�lah: 686
15. d�g�h: 666
16. n�m kurd� (nah�wand): 642
17. kurd�: 627
18. s�k�h: 604.5
19. n�m b�salik: 581
20. b�salik (ushaq): 571
21. jah�rk�h: 563
22. n�m hij�z: 549
23. hij�z: 537
24. t�k hij�z (sab�): 520
1. naw�: 500

(I've also seen the notes between ir�q and r�st named kawasht and t�k kawasht instead of above.)

I've read the two links you sent, but thanks. I'll see if they got d'Erlanger at the library.

> you're correct that it doesn't even remotely resemble
> 24-edo. however, among the smaller-cardinality EDOs,
> 36-edo gives a fairly decent approximation.

Or maybe 72-edo, since a few of the notes are close to x50 cents.

hi Danny,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@s...> wrote:

> I just checked the cents-value of the scale and I don't
> really see any tetrachordal similarity, so I better post
> the whole list.
>
> The lower octave lists the notes from yakâh (low G) to
> nawâ (middle G). The author listed the notes from high
> to low, but I'll list from low to high.
>
> 1. yakâh: 1000
> 2. nîm qabâ hisâr: 969
> 3. qabâ hisâr: 931
> 4. tîk qabâ hisâr (shûrî): 908
> 5. ashîrân: 888
> 6. nîm ajam ashîrân: 862
> 7. ajam ashîrân: 840
> 8. irâq: 808
> 9. nîm kawasht (rahâwî): 779
> 10. kawasht: 765
> 11. râst: 750
> 12. nîm zîrkûlah: 726
> 13. zîrkûlah: 705
> 14. tîk zîrkûlah: 686
> 15. dûgâh: 666
> 16. nîm kurdî (nahâwand): 642
> 17. kurdî: 627
> 18. sîkâh: 604.5
> 19. nîm bûsalik: 581
> 20. bûsalik (ushaq): 571
> 21. jahârkâh: 563
> 22. nîm hijâz: 549
> 23. hijâz: 537
> 24. tîk hijâz (sabâ): 520
> 1. nawâ: 500

thanks!

i'm particularly intrigued by these notes:

. sîkâh, because he went thru the trouble of providing
a decimal place, as if 1000/604 and 1000/605 are not
accurate enough to place that pitch. i looked thru my
"huge list of 11-limit intervals", and the one i found
which seems likely and comes very close to it is
847/512 ratio = 2,3,5,7,11-monzo [-9 0, 0 1 2> .
why would that ratio be so important that it is the
only one in the scale which required a decimal place?

. dûgâh, because it's very close to the 3/2 ratio,
but 3/2 would be exactly 666&2/3 thousandths, and if
he went thru the trouble of adding .5 to sîkâh then
why wouldn't he use a decimal place here as well?
i.e., ~666.7 or at the very least ~666.5 . if he was
rounding to the nearest integer then it should be 667
instead of 666.

. ashîrân, for similar reasons: ashîrân is extremely
close to 9/8, which would be a value of 888&8/9 (or ~888.9)
thousandths, which rounds up to 889 instead of 888.

. jahârkâh, for similar reasons: jahârkâh is extremely
close to 16/9, which would be a value of exactly 562.5
thousandths. so if a decimal place was necessary for
sîkâh, then why not here?

i also measured the thousandths for the ratios on my
Arab Lute page, and none of them match either.

http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/arablute/arablute.htm

i too would like to know more about this tuning.

> > you're correct that it doesn't even remotely resemble
> > 24-edo. however, among the smaller-cardinality EDOs,
> > 36-edo gives a fairly decent approximation.
>
> Or maybe 72-edo, since a few of the notes are close to x50 cents.

i looked at 72-edo, but concluded that it wasn't a very good
approximation, because right off the bat, the very first two
degrees after the 1:1 (nîm qabâ hisâr and qabâ hisâr) are
basically midway between two 72-edo degrees.

when i saw that, i took a look at 144-edo, but again, there
were a lot of notes that fell between the 144-edo degrees.

of course, the amount of absolute error keeps diminishing
as the cardinality of the EDO increases, but the point is
that if there are many notes lying between two EDO degrees,
then that EDO is not a good approximation of the tuning.

-monz

With the Rast as 1/1, `perde segah` becomes 2541/2048 according to Monz's approximation of Idris Raghib Bey's calculation, and the Huzzam scale with the tonic on this perde would be based on these intervals:

Rast: 1/1 0.000 unison, perfect prime
Dugah: 9/8 203.910 major whole tone
Segah: 2541/2048 373.417 (TONIC)
Chargah: 4/3 498.045 perfect fourth
Neva: 3/2 701.955 perfect fifth
Huseyni 847/512 871.462
Evdj: 7623/4096 1075.372
Gerdaniye: 2/1 1200.000 octave

Notice the similarity of this scale with Zarlino's diatonic gamut.

----- Original Message -----
From: monz
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 11 Mart 2005 Cuma 14:48
Subject: [tuning] Re: Idris Raghib Bey's tuning

hi Danny,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@s...> wrote:

> I just checked the cents-value of the scale and I don't
> really see any tetrachordal similarity, so I better post
> the whole list.
>
> The lower octave lists the notes from yakâh (low G) to
> nawâ (middle G). The author listed the notes from high
> to low, but I'll list from low to high.
>
> 1. yakâh: 1000
> 2. nîm qabâ hisâr: 969
> 3. qabâ hisâr: 931
> 4. tîk qabâ hisâr (shûrî): 908
> 5. ashîrân: 888
> 6. nîm ajam ashîrân: 862
> 7. ajam ashîrân: 840
> 8. irâq: 808
> 9. nîm kawasht (rahâwî): 779
> 10. kawasht: 765
> 11. râst: 750
> 12. nîm zîrkûlah: 726
> 13. zîrkûlah: 705
> 14. tîk zîrkûlah: 686
> 15. dûgâh: 666
> 16. nîm kurdî (nahâwand): 642
> 17. kurdî: 627
> 18. sîkâh: 604.5
> 19. nîm bûsalik: 581
> 20. bûsalik (ushaq): 571
> 21. jahârkâh: 563
> 22. nîm hijâz: 549
> 23. hijâz: 537
> 24. tîk hijâz (sabâ): 520
> 1. nawâ: 500

thanks!

i'm particularly intrigued by these notes:

. sîkâh, because he went thru the trouble of providing
a decimal place, as if 1000/604 and 1000/605 are not
accurate enough to place that pitch. i looked thru my
"huge list of 11-limit intervals", and the one i found
which seems likely and comes very close to it is
847/512 ratio = 2,3,5,7,11-monzo [-9 0, 0 1 2> .
why would that ratio be so important that it is the
only one in the scale which required a decimal place?

. dûgâh, because it's very close to the 3/2 ratio,
but 3/2 would be exactly 666&2/3 thousandths, and if
he went thru the trouble of adding .5 to sîkâh then
why wouldn't he use a decimal place here as well?
i.e., ~666.7 or at the very least ~666.5 . if he was
rounding to the nearest integer then it should be 667
instead of 666.

. ashîrân, for similar reasons: ashîrân is extremely
close to 9/8, which would be a value of 888&8/9 (or ~888.9)
thousandths, which rounds up to 889 instead of 888.

. jahârkâh, for similar reasons: jahârkâh is extremely
close to 16/9, which would be a value of exactly 562.5
thousandths. so if a decimal place was necessary for
sîkâh, then why not here?

i also measured the thousandths for the ratios on my
Arab Lute page, and none of them match either.

http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/arablute/arablute.htm

i too would like to know more about this tuning.

> > you're correct that it doesn't even remotely resemble
> > 24-edo. however, among the smaller-cardinality EDOs,
> > 36-edo gives a fairly decent approximation.
>
> Or maybe 72-edo, since a few of the notes are close to x50 cents.

i looked at 72-edo, but concluded that it wasn't a very good
approximation, because right off the bat, the very first two
degrees after the 1:1 (nîm qabâ hisâr and qabâ hisâr) are
basically midway between two 72-edo degrees.

when i saw that, i took a look at 144-edo, but again, there
were a lot of notes that fell between the 144-edo degrees.

of course, the amount of absolute error keeps diminishing
as the cardinality of the EDO increases, but the point is
that if there are many notes lying between two EDO degrees,
then that EDO is not a good approximation of the tuning.

-monz

From: "monz":

> . s�k�h, because he went thru the trouble of providing
> a decimal place, as if 1000/604 and 1000/605 are not
> accurate enough to place that pitch. i looked thru my
> "huge list of 11-limit intervals", and the one i found
> which seems likely and comes very close to it is
> 847/512 ratio = 2,3,5,7,11-monzo [-9 0, 0 1 2> .
> why would that ratio be so important that it is the
> only one in the scale which required a decimal place?

[snipped comments on why dugah is shown as 666 instead of 667 or 666.5 and ajam as 888 instead of 889, etc.]

The note given for sikah is the only one listed using a decimal point, and like you said, he didn't round up on the others. I think it's safe to assume dugah is 3/2, ashiran is 9/8 and jaharkah is 16/9, despite the unrounded numbers.

That seems the be the only symmetry in the tuning, other than the distance between yakah (low G) and qaba hisar (A-flat) being the same as the distance between hijaz (F-sharp/G-flat) and nawa (high G) being almost the same, about 123.5 cents. But why those two intervals and not anything else?

It's also not a very transposeable scale. I tested another tetrachord, Hijaz, and for dugah (D), I got something close to [1/1 16/15 5/4 4/3], but for ajam (A), the third note was too high. I don't think this tuning is intended for full-octave maqamat.

> i also measured the thousandths for the ratios on my
> Arab Lute page, and none of them match either.
>
> http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/arablute/arablute.htm

That's a new page right? Been a while since I read the Tuning Encyclopaedia, but I'm glad you added the article. I do have a question about Zalzal's choice of 54/49 for rather than 12/11 for mujannab, but that's for another time.

You should also add al-Farabi's fretting system. He included four minor seconds and three major seconds, including Zalzal's recommended ratios. Taken from http://www.chrysalis-foundation.org/Al-Farabi's_'Uds.htm (ignore that part about tuning the top four courses of an oud to Eb-Bb-F-C; Arabic ouds normally tune C-G-D-A and Turkish tuning is D-A-E-B):

Mutlaq (open string): 1/1
Mujannab (near index finger): 256/243, 18/17, 162/149, 54/49
Sabb�ba (far index finger): 9/8
Wust� (middle finger): 32/27, 81/68, 27/22
Binsir (ring finger): 81/64
Khinsir (little finger): 4/3

The 17-limit and 149-limit (!) intervals added by al-Farabi are derived from arithmetic means of string lengths: 18/17 from 1/1 and 9/8, 162/149 from 1/1 and 81/68 (Persian wusta), and 81/68 from 9/8 and 81/64.

> i too would like to know more about this tuning.

Me too. I still need to read d'Erlanger's work, and whatever else I can find. My knowledge of Arabic is pretty limited, but I'm in the process of learning the language.

From: Ozan Yarman

> With the Rast as 1/1, `perde segah` becomes 2541/2048 according to Monz's > approximation of Idris Raghib Bey's calculation, and the Huzzam scale with > the tonic on this perde would be based on these intervals:
>
> Rast: 1/1 0.000 unison, perfect prime
> Dugah: 9/8 203.910 major whole tone
> Segah: 2541/2048 373.417 (TONIC)
> Chargah: 4/3 498.045 perfect fourth
> Neva: 3/2 701.955 perfect fifth
> Huseyni 847/512 871.462
> Evdj: 7623/4096 1075.372
> Gerdaniye: 2/1 1200.000 octave
>
> Notice the similarity of this scale with Zarlino's diatonic gamut.

I see the similarity... but Segah, Huseyni and Evdj (it's Evi� in Turkish orthography, right?) are all 13 cents flat of Zarlino's 5-limit ratios, more than half a comma. After reading al-Farabi's tuning and how he came up with 18/17 for a minor second, maybe Raghib Bey averaged two just ratios. Or more likely it's some sort of cryptic temperament.

hi Danny (and Ozan),

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@s...> wrote:

> <snip>
>
> After reading al-Farabi's tuning and how he came up with
> 18/17 for a minor second, maybe Raghib Bey averaged two
> just ratios. Or more likely it's some sort of cryptic
> temperament.

aha! ... i think you might be on the right track, Danny.

i've calculated the matrix of arithmetic means for the
entire scale, and sure enough, there are a some values
which are exactly the arithmetic mean between two others,
and many which are within .5 cent of an arithmetic mean,
many others which are within 1 cent of an arithmetic mean,
and many other which are within 2 cents of an arithmetic
mean.

i'll try to post something on this tomorrow.

-monz

oops ... my bad ...

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

> hi Danny (and Ozan),
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@s...>
wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> >
> > After reading al-Farabi's tuning and how he came up with
> > 18/17 for a minor second, maybe Raghib Bey averaged two
> > just ratios. Or more likely it's some sort of cryptic
> > temperament.
>
>
> aha! ... i think you might be on the right track, Danny.
>
> i've calculated the matrix of arithmetic means for the
> entire scale, and sure enough, there are a some values
> which are exactly the arithmetic mean between two others,
> and many which are within .5 cent of an arithmetic mean,
> many others which are within 1 cent of an arithmetic mean,
> and many other which are within 2 cents of an arithmetic
> mean.
>
> i'll try to post something on this tomorrow.

of course, everywhere here where it says "cent" or "cents",
it should be "thousandth of a string length". sorry.

-monz

From: "monz":

> aha! ... i think you might be on the right track, Danny.
>
> i've calculated the matrix of arithmetic means for the
> entire scale, and sure enough, there are a some values
> which are exactly the arithmetic mean between two others,
> and many which are within .5 cent of an arithmetic mean,
> many others which are within 1 cent of an arithmetic mean,
> and many other which are within 2 cents of an arithmetic
> mean.
>
> i'll try to post something on this tomorrow.

I'll give you a head start:

The note tik qaba hisar (string length 908) is probably Zalzal's mujannab, since 49/54 = 0.9074. (But why did he round up on this one?). Ajam ashiran (840) is Zalzal's wusta, as 68/81 = 0.8395.

And now I know why sikah is 604.5: 49/54 * 2/3 = 49/81 = 0.6049.

The rest is going to take a little work.

From: "Daniel A. Wier":

> The note tik qaba hisar (string length 908) is probably Zalzal's mujannab,
> since 49/54 = 0.9074. (But why did he round up on this one?). Ajam ashiran
> (840) is Zalzal's wusta, as 68/81 = 0.8395.

DUH! I meant Persian wusta, not Zalzal's wusta. Also, 49/54 ~ 0.9074 and 68/81 ~ 0.8395. Tilde, not equal sign, since it's an approximation. I nitpick, yes, but usually only for my own posts.

Daniel, good point on Idris Raghib Bey tuning! Yes, you got the Turkish
orthography right. Do you know how I can obtain this book (in English)?

Cheers,
Ozan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@sbcglobal.net>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 12 Mart 2005 Cumartesi 11:10
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Idris Raghib Bey's tuning

>
> From: Ozan Yarman
>
> > With the Rast as 1/1, `perde segah` becomes 2541/2048 according to
Monz's
> > approximation of Idris Raghib Bey's calculation, and the Huzzam scale
with
> > the tonic on this perde would be based on these intervals:
> >
> > Rast: 1/1 0.000 unison, perfect prime
> > Dugah: 9/8 203.910 major whole tone
> > Segah: 2541/2048 373.417 (TONIC)
> > Chargah: 4/3 498.045 perfect fourth
> > Neva: 3/2 701.955 perfect fifth
> > Huseyni 847/512 871.462
> > Evdj: 7623/4096 1075.372
> > Gerdaniye: 2/1 1200.000 octave
> >
> > Notice the similarity of this scale with Zarlino's diatonic gamut.
>
> I see the similarity... but Segah, Huseyni and Evdj (it's Evi� in Turkish
> orthography, right?) are all 13 cents flat of Zarlino's 5-limit ratios,
more
> than half a comma. After reading al-Farabi's tuning and how he came up
with
> 18/17 for a minor second, maybe Raghib Bey averaged two just ratios. Or
more
> likely it's some sort of cryptic temperament.
>
>

hi Danny,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@s...> wrote:

> From: "monz":
>
> > aha! ... i think you might be on the right track, Danny.
> >
> > i've calculated the matrix of arithmetic means for the
> > entire scale, and sure enough, there are a some values
> > which are exactly the arithmetic mean between two others,
> > and many which are within .5 cent of an arithmetic mean,
> > many others which are within 1 cent of an arithmetic mean,
> > and many other which are within 2 cents of an arithmetic
> > mean.
> >
> > i'll try to post something on this tomorrow.
>
> I'll give you a head start:
>
> The note tik qaba hisar (string length 908) is probably
> Zalzal's mujannab, since 49/54 = 0.9074. (But why did he
> round up on this one?). Ajam ashiran (840) is Zalzal's wusta,
> as 68/81 = 0.8395.
>
> And now I know why sikah is 604.5: 49/54 * 2/3 = 49/81 = 0.6049.
>
> The rest is going to take a little work.

i've calculated all the arithmetic means between all
pitches in the scale, and i can see that they certainly
played a role in the creation of Bey's tuning. evidently
he had to temper many of them because some means were very
close to others.

i'll try to post some of this later today ... i'm very
busy and don't have a lot of time to play with it, but
things like this have a way of usurping my interest.

-monz

From: "Ozan Yarman":

> Daniel, good point on Idris Raghib Bey tuning! Yes, you got the Turkish
> orthography right. Do you know how I can obtain this book (in English)?
>
> Cheers,
> Ozan

The al-Khula'i book I came across in the library is in Arabic. Baron Rodolphe d'Erlanger's six-volume _La musique arabe_, which contains this scale, is in French. I'm not aware of any English translation of either.

From: "monz":

> i've calculated all the arithmetic means between all
> pitches in the scale, and i can see that they certainly
> played a role in the creation of Bey's tuning. evidently
> he had to temper many of them because some means were very
> close to others.

Which might explain why some of the notes are only a few thousands of a string length from a just interval - Iraq (B half-flat), for instance, is given a length of 0.808, but 196/243 (Zalzal's mujannab plus a major second) = 0.8066. That's only 3 cents difference, so maybe it's a math error.

> i'll try to post some of this later today ... i'm very
> busy and don't have a lot of time to play with it, but
> things like this have a way of usurping my interest.

No rush; I'm just curious. I'm going to Houston tomorrow for family business, so I won't be able to do much for at least a day.

It would be a most valuable contribution to music theory if someone were to
translate these into English.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@sbcglobal.net>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 13 Mart 2005 Pazar 2:18
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Idris Raghib Bey's tuning

>
> From: "Ozan Yarman":
>
> > Daniel, good point on Idris Raghib Bey tuning! Yes, you got the Turkish
> > orthography right. Do you know how I can obtain this book (in English)?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ozan
>
> The al-Khula'i book I came across in the library is in Arabic. Baron
> Rodolphe d'Erlanger's six-volume _La musique arabe_, which contains this
> scale, is in French. I'm not aware of any English translation of either.
>
>

From: "Ozan Yarman":

> It would be a most valuable contribution to music theory if someone were > to
> translate these into English.

That is so true. Right now I'm particularly interested in Kamil al-Khula'i's book, since, according to http://tonalsoft.com/enc/quarter-tone.htm:

"In 1905-6 the Kitab al-musiqa al-sharqi ('The book of eastern music') by Kamil al-Khula'i (1879-1938) established the equidistance of quartertones in the octave. This scale of 24 quarter-tones was the subject of fierce discussion at the Congress of Cairo in 1932, where the participants divided into two opposing camps; the Egyptians supported the division of the octave into 24 equal quarters, while the Turks (represented by [Rauf] Yekta Bey) and the Syro-Lebanese (Sabra and Tawfiq al-Sabbagh) rejected the system of equal division."

"In 1959 and 1964 the Egyptians organized two symposia to settle the differences of opinion arising from the controversy at the 1932 Congress over the equidistance of quarter-tones. The aim of these symposia was to establish the principle of equal temperament on the basis of the quarter-tone and give official sanction to its teaching."

[from: New Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, entry on "Arabic Music", 6(ii) Theory p.812]

If that really is the book that can be credited (or blamed) for the adoption of 24-TET by Egypt and other Arab countries, then it has to be pretty important in modern ethnomusicological studies. And one of my main topics of interest happens to be what the Turks and Syro-Lebanese recommend instead of 24-equal.

I happen to be learning Arabic on my own. Once I got a good command of the language, I should try and translate it myself, but it might take a while. And there may be an English or French or other translation out there already.

hi Danny and Ozan,

OK, i've finally finished my quickie analysis of the
arithmetic means in Bey's scale, and put up a graphic
on the tuning_files list:

/tuning/files/monz/Bey-
scale_matrix-of-arithmetic-means.gif

(delete line break, or use instead:)

http://tinyurl.com/66fbl

wish i had time to pursue it further, but it looks clear
to me that Bey (or al-Khula'i?) used arithmetic means to
find many of the "ideal" pitches, and then tempered them
within 2 or 3 thousandths of a string-length. anyway,
anyone else who wants to look into it, now has the data.

-monz

The 1932 Cairo Congress is the summit of sectarianism in Maqam Music
tradition in the Middle East. Blame it on the crooked nationalism imported
from the West that still plagues us today. Rauf Yekta was the pioneer of the
nationalization of `Turkish Maqam Music` back then. Chauvanism against being
blotted out by imperialist superpowers was the order of the day, and being
the first official musicologist of Turkey, Yekta adopted a peculiar
supremacist attitude of his own, where he went to the ends of the earth to
prove that Maqam Musicians played the exact SAME intervals as demanded by
pure Western (human) ears.

Unfortunately for him, his efforts were never enough to swerve Republican
state policy from prohibiting Maqam Music heritage from public institutions
(let alone convince his Western contemporaries of the superiority of Turkish
Art Music over 12-tone temperament). That was due to the fact that Maqam
Music was perceived to be old-fashioned, out-dated, obsolete and immoral,
aside from being dangerous. No doubt, Eastern ears did not buy the nonsense
that `all humans naturally want to hear the same stuff`. A systematical
reform of the hearing organ therefore was the chief method of Modernizing
(Westernizing) the primitives... or so the state decreed.

Rauf Yekta's cry to this outrage was simply: `This is a homicide!`. The ban
on Maqam Music education in the only conservatory in entire Turkey during
the late 1920s was the start of the mortal clash between Alla Turca and Alla
Franca that still prevails in some circles. Ever hear of ear-washing?
Imagine a medium where two knowledgable musicians educated in two different
cultures accuse each other of inferior hearing... It is a relief that
arabesque and pop infiltrated these lands long before that.

The 24-tone Yekta scale (right next to Raghib Bey's scala file) is the
solution proposed by Yekta to invalidate the argument that Maqam Music
cannot be polyphonalized. Imagine his grief when it became apparent that the
state did not recognize such a thing as microtonal polyhpony despite the
fact that such great pioneers as Charles Ives and Bela Bartok were very much
alive by then!

It's a pity that Yekta could not implement the reform he had in mind. From
the way the Cairo Congress ended, it is evident that he could not convince
the Arabs either. Instead, his followers Arel and Ezgi used his example to
tear the final links to the authentic Middle Eastern maqam culture. In their
reckless zeal, the triumvirate delivered a fatal blow to the very life
source of this tradition.

We can only take pride in sustaining a comatose music today. Most of what is
composed new in the name of Maqam Music is probably garbage.

Cordially,
Ozan Yarman

----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@sbcglobal.net>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 13 Mart 2005 Pazar 16:47
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Idris Raghib Bey's tuning

>
> From: "Ozan Yarman":
>
> > It would be a most valuable contribution to music theory if someone were
> > to
> > translate these into English.
>
> That is so true. Right now I'm particularly interested in Kamil
al-Khula'i's
> book, since, according to http://tonalsoft.com/enc/quarter-tone.htm:
>
> "In 1905-6 the Kitab al-musiqa al-sharqi ('The book of eastern music') by
> Kamil al-Khula'i (1879-1938) established the equidistance of quartertones
in
> the octave. This scale of 24 quarter-tones was the subject of fierce
> discussion at the Congress of Cairo in 1932, where the participants
divided
> into two opposing camps; the Egyptians supported the division of the
octave
> into 24 equal quarters, while the Turks (represented by [Rauf] Yekta Bey)
> and the Syro-Lebanese (Sabra and Tawfiq al-Sabbagh) rejected the system of
> equal division."
>
> "In 1959 and 1964 the Egyptians organized two symposia to settle the
> differences of opinion arising from the controversy at the 1932 Congress
> over the equidistance of quarter-tones. The aim of these symposia was to
> establish the principle of equal temperament on the basis of the
> quarter-tone and give official sanction to its teaching."
>
> [from: New Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, entry on "Arabic
> Music", 6(ii) Theory p.812]
>
> If that really is the book that can be credited (or blamed) for the
adoption
> of 24-TET by Egypt and other Arab countries, then it has to be pretty
> important in modern ethnomusicological studies. And one of my main topics
of
> interest happens to be what the Turks and Syro-Lebanese recommend instead
of
> 24-equal.
>
> I happen to be learning Arabic on my own. Once I got a good command of the
> language, I should try and translate it myself, but it might take a while.
> And there may be an English or French or other translation out there
> already.
>

I can't really comment much on this, since I don't really know all about the politics behind Cairo 1932 (or much of anything about it besides the whole 24-TET thing). You said something about people considering polyphony with maqam music impossible. I've always wondered what J. S. Bach might've written had he been Ottoman rather than German. I think he could've written full four-part fugues in all the maqamat.

The thought of 53-tone music in serialism has to be pretty daunting, however. I wonder if Sch�nberg ever thought of trying.

I was reading Habib Hassan Touma's _Music of the Arabs_ yesterday; he's kinda of the opinion that all music written after 1900 is trash (but he talks a lot about Umm Kalthoum).

But I'm a n00b in the area of Middle Eastern music; my main area of expertise is in Western styles like rock, jazz and blues. And classical if I'm in the right mood.

----- Original Message ----- From: "Ozan Yarman":

> The 1932 Cairo Congress is the summit of sectarianism in Maqam Music
> tradition in the Middle East. Blame it on the crooked nationalism imported
> from the West that still plagues us today. Rauf Yekta was the pioneer of > the
> nationalization of `Turkish Maqam Music` back then. Chauvanism against > being
> blotted out by imperialist superpowers was the order of the day, and being
> the first official musicologist of Turkey, Yekta adopted a peculiar
> supremacist attitude of his own, where he went to the ends of the earth to
> prove that Maqam Musicians played the exact SAME intervals as demanded by
> pure Western (human) ears.

hi Danny,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@s...> wrote:

> The thought of 53-tone music in serialism has to be
> pretty daunting, however. I wonder if Schönberg ever
> thought of trying.

i doubt it. one of his students, Robert Neumann, explained
a bit about 53-edo to Schoenberg, and Schoenberg wrote about
it in the original (1911) edition of his _Harmonielehre_.

but at that point he had already rejected the idea of
microtonality for his own work, feeling that the new way
he was using 12-edo (which is now called "free atonality",
but which Schoenberg himself always thought of as
"pantonality") -- forcing it to imply 11-limit JI, albeit
with a "floating" or "suspended" tonal center -- gave
sufficient new freedom for him to explore his sonic ideas
and be able to write down what he heard in his head.

in the 1911 edition of _Harmonielehre_ Schoenberg does,
however, speak very favorably about what he saw as the
certainty of use of microtonality in future music. because
of this, i'm convinced that Schoenberg's primary reason for
not accepting microtonality for his own work was simply a
matter of his survival as a composer -- he had already
run up against a great deal of negative criticism from
both the newspaper critics and the concert-going public,
and by citing the "lack of properly tuned instruments"
in his book, he implies that he doesn't want to do anything
*else* to discourage the performance of his works.

what i find very telling is that in the revised 3rd edition
of _Harmonielehre_, published in 1922 -- very shortly after
Schoenberg publicly presented his 12-tone serial method --
the 12-tone scale is presented as a much more well-established
entity in itself, and the few places where Schoenberg revised
his text to any important degree mostly concern statements
he had made earlier about microtonality, downplaying the
stronger tone with which he had written about it earlier.

Schoenberg's long footnote, with a diagram and further
explanatory material by me, not taking Neumann's suggestion
of 53-edo very seriously, is presented here (near the bottom):

tonalsoft.com/monzo/schoenberg/harm/ch-4.htm

and how interesting that you posed this idea just now,
because i was just adding two lattice diagrams to the
bottom of my page "Searching for Schoenberg's Pantonality":

http://tonalsoft.com/monzo/schoenberg/harm/1911-1922.htm

and had just been reading my work on Neumann. weird ...

-monz

i realized that i should have changed the subject line
on this, so i'm reposting it ... apologies for the wasted
bandwidth ...

-monz

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@t...> wrote:
>
> hi Danny,
>
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@s...>
wrote:
>
> > The thought of 53-tone music in serialism has to be
> > pretty daunting, however. I wonder if Schönberg ever
> > thought of trying.
>
>
> i doubt it. one of his students, Robert Neumann, explained
> a bit about 53-edo to Schoenberg, and Schoenberg wrote about
> it in the original (1911) edition of his _Harmonielehre_.
>
> but at that point he had already rejected the idea of
> microtonality for his own work, feeling that the new way
> he was using 12-edo (which is now called "free atonality",
> but which Schoenberg himself always thought of as
> "pantonality") -- forcing it to imply 11-limit JI, albeit
> with a "floating" or "suspended" tonal center -- gave
> sufficient new freedom for him to explore his sonic ideas
> and be able to write down what he heard in his head.
>
> in the 1911 edition of _Harmonielehre_ Schoenberg does,
> however, speak very favorably about what he saw as the
> certainty of use of microtonality in future music. because
> of this, i'm convinced that Schoenberg's primary reason for
> not accepting microtonality for his own work was simply a
> matter of his survival as a composer -- he had already
> run up against a great deal of negative criticism from
> both the newspaper critics and the concert-going public,
> and by citing the "lack of properly tuned instruments"
> in his book, he implies that he doesn't want to do anything
> *else* to discourage the performance of his works.
>
> what i find very telling is that in the revised 3rd edition
> of _Harmonielehre_, published in 1922 -- very shortly after
> Schoenberg publicly presented his 12-tone serial method --
> the 12-tone scale is presented as a much more well-established
> entity in itself, and the few places where Schoenberg revised
> his text to any important degree mostly concern statements
> he had made earlier about microtonality, downplaying the
> stronger tone with which he had written about it earlier.
>
> Schoenberg's long footnote, with a diagram and further
> explanatory material by me, not taking Neumann's suggestion
> of 53-edo very seriously, is presented here (near the bottom):
>
> tonalsoft.com/monzo/schoenberg/harm/ch-4.htm
>
>
> and how interesting that you posed this idea just now,
> because i was just adding two lattice diagrams to the
> bottom of my page "Searching for Schoenberg's Pantonality":
>
> http://tonalsoft.com/monzo/schoenberg/harm/1911-1922.htm
>
>
> and had just been reading my work on Neumann. weird ...
>
>
>
> -monz

Being a graduate pianist from the Brussels Royal Conservatory, I confess
that I have little understanding whatsoever of the maqam culture aside from
what I learned as an amateur researcher. My advocation of this lost treasure
is based on my selfish interest in maqam music gems and my fascination with
microtonal music more than anything else.

Yes! Bach would have written 6-part microtonal ricercar fugues had he been
acquainted with the maqam culture. I wish he were around to put some people
in their place c.1920. But then again, the theory of microtonal polyphony
(where such intervals as 12/11 and 13/12 are frequently employed) was not
acknowledged. He might have retreated to his cubicle for one or two decades
in order to develop a style before attempting anything in a rush.

Habib Hassan is quite succinct, but I don't agree that all maqam music after
1900 is trash. I reserve the term for those who have no understanding of or
respect for the tradition. That goes double for the revisionists.

We have here Saadettin Kaynak and Zeki Muren and their contemporaries who
were just as much celebrated as Ummu Gulsum. However, the percentage of
refined artists dropped to an all-time low after the 1960s.

Cordially,
Ozan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel A. Wier" <dawiertx@sbcglobal.net>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 15 Mart 2005 Sal� 12:24
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Idris Raghib Bey's tuning

>
> I can't really comment much on this, since I don't really know all about
the
> politics behind Cairo 1932 (or much of anything about it besides the whole
> 24-TET thing). You said something about people considering polyphony with
> maqam music impossible. I've always wondered what J. S. Bach might've
> written had he been Ottoman rather than German. I think he could've
written
> full four-part fugues in all the maqamat.
>
> The thought of 53-tone music in serialism has to be pretty daunting,
> however. I wonder if Sch�nberg ever thought of trying.
>
> I was reading Habib Hassan Touma's _Music of the Arabs_ yesterday; he's
> kinda of the opinion that all music written after 1900 is trash (but he
> talks a lot about Umm Kalthoum).
>
> But I'm a n00b in the area of Middle Eastern music; my main area of
> expertise is in Western styles like rock, jazz and blues. And classical if
> I'm in the right mood.
>