Musical Objectivity: Four "Tabula Rosas":

1. 12EDO pitch class set (12EDO sub-scale structure) theory

2. Digital audio/synthesis

3. Musical Instrument Digital Interface

4. The Morse-Thue sequence used as a
stylistically neutral contour choice ordering
algorithm

Any of these alone, let alone in combination
are cause for a complete re-valuation of every
aspect of music theory, composition, and
education.

Bill.Flavell at GMail.com

Wow! That is a controversial post! I believe you meant "tabula rasa". A
tabula rasa is [literally, an erased tablet] an empty mind, ready for
its initial impressions, etc.; whereas "tabula rosa" would be a red
tablet.

Do you have any ideas about how these four "tabulae" should, in effect,
erase our minds?

Howard Cornell

________________________________

From: tuning@yahoogroups.com [mailto:tuning@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Bill Flavell
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:47 AM
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [tuning] Musical Objectivity: Four "Tabula Rosas":

1. 12EDO pitch class set (12EDO sub-scale structure) theory

2. Digital audio/synthesis

3. Musical Instrument Digital Interface

4. The Morse-Thue sequence used as a
stylistically neutral contour choice ordering
algorithm

Any of these alone, let alone in combination
are cause for a complete re-valuation of every
aspect of music theory, composition, and
education.

Bill.Flavell at GMail.com

> Wow! That is a controversial post!

Especially since none of it has obvious implications
for alternate tunings. Bill, since this is the
alternate tunings list, can you demonstrate how any
of this is related to alternate tunings?

-Carl

Now, Carl, just imagine the implications of converting all integers used
in describing tuning ratios, to binary numbers, then counting the zeros
AND COMPUTING THE PARITIES. Whew! Whelming....

________________________________

From: tuning@yahoogroups.com [mailto:tuning@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Carl Lumma
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 2:52 PM
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [tuning] Re: Musical Objectivity: Four "Tabula Rosas":

> Wow! That is a controversial post!

Especially since none of it has obvious implications
for alternate tunings. Bill, since this is the
alternate tunings list, can you demonstrate how any
of this is related to alternate tunings?

-Carl

> Now, Carl, just imagine the implications of converting all
> integers used in describing tuning ratios, to binary numbers,
> then counting the zeros AND COMPUTING THE PARITIES. Whew!
> Whelming....

What significance would that have?

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > Wow! That is a controversial post!
>
> Especially since none of it has obvious implications
> for alternate tunings. Bill, since this is the
> alternate tunings list, can you demonstrate how any
> of this is related to alternate tunings?

Sorry, I have to say I'm getting slightly irked having to wade through
all this "neologism spam" to get to posts about tuning issues.

Bill, don't you have a site on Yahoo already to discuss this? If you
only have 3 members, kindly refrain from recruiting people into your
Countour Melody© cult here. Maybe what you are saying is
groundbreaking and all, but it has nothing whatesoever to do with "on
topic" for this list.

Thanks,
Aaron.

Maybe we could emphasize the fact that this list is indeed focusing on
alternate tunings to the exclusion of 12-tET.

Or we could swallow our prejudices and allow room for theoretical
discussions on this particular tuning also despite the hegemony it came to
represent on music education.

Oz.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@dividebypi.com>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 16 Aral�k 2006 Cumartesi 7:18
Subject: [tuning] Stop Already (Re: Musical Objectivity: Four "Tabula
Rosas")

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > Wow! That is a controversial post!
>
> Especially since none of it has obvious implications
> for alternate tunings. Bill, since this is the
> alternate tunings list, can you demonstrate how any
> of this is related to alternate tunings?

Sorry, I have to say I'm getting slightly irked having to wade through
all this "neologism spam" to get to posts about tuning issues.

Bill, don't you have a site on Yahoo already to discuss this? If you
only have 3 members, kindly refrain from recruiting people into your
Countour Melody� cult here. Maybe what you are saying is
groundbreaking and all, but it has nothing whatesoever to do with "on
topic" for this list.

Thanks,
Aaron.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > Now, Carl, just imagine the implications of converting all
> > integers used in describing tuning ratios, to binary numbers,
> > then counting the zeros AND COMPUTING THE PARITIES. Whew!
> > Whelming....
>
> What significance would that have?

None that I can see. If you first take the Minkowski ? function and
then do the partity thing, it might make a little more sense. Them the
parity of the numerator of ?(p/q) is 0 if p-q is odd, and is 1 if p-q
is even (assuming reduction to lowest terms.)

If this thread actually made sense we could move it to tuning-math,
but I'm not sure it does.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Ozan Yarman" <ozanyarman@...> wrote:
>
> Maybe we could emphasize the fact that this list is indeed focusing on
> alternate tunings to the exclusion of 12-tET.

Bill could state what he wants to do with melody theory more
generally; his fixation on 12-et is really quite pointless. But this
whole melody business would be much more interesting if it were
related to actual melodies or techniques for constructing them.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...>
wrote:

> Sorry, I have to say I'm getting slightly irked having to wade
>through all this "neologism spam" to get to posts about tuning issues.

I sympathize, although I find it more entertaining than annoying, and
I never have figured out eactly what "spam" actually means-
"pajara"? "muggles"? "Semimarvelous dwarf" is a wonderful term, I
wonder what it refers to? I did find "magic temperament" and other
things at tonalsoft.

-Cameron Bobro

> Maybe we could emphasize the fact that this list is indeed focusing
> on alternate tunings to the exclusion of 12-tET.
>
> Or we could swallow our prejudices and allow room for theoretical
> discussions on this particular tuning also despite the hegemony it
> came to represent on music education.
>
> Oz.

The point of this list is that there wasn't any place to discuss
tuning theory. There are hundreds of lists available to discuss
regular music theory. Most of them started by Bill. :)

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Cornell III, Howard M"
<howard.m.cornell.iii@...> wrote:
>
> Wow! That is a controversial post! I believe you meant "tabula
rasa". A
> tabula rasa is [literally, an erased tablet] an empty mind, ready for
> its initial impressions, etc.; whereas "tabula rosa" would be a red
> tablet.
>
> Do you have any ideas about how these four "tabulae" should, in
effect,
> erase our minds?

I meant the "clean slate" definition of the
word. My apologies.

Bill.Flavell at GMail.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > Wow! That is a controversial post!
>
> Especially since none of it has obvious implications
> for alternate tunings. Bill, since this is the
> alternate tunings list, can you demonstrate how any
> of this is related to alternate tunings?

Yes, Carl! :)

The generation of melodies is
"cross-tuning-centric", as well as the
implications of digital synthesis.

To say MIDI isn't tuning-related is
ridiculous, since synthesizers are the
only instruments that allow alternative
tunings.

And the Morse-Thue sequence as a contour
choice ordering algorithm is also "cross-tuning"
or "meta-tuning" applicable.

And, last but not least THE GROUP MODERATOR
ALLOWED THE POST THROUGH! Are you second-guessing
him/her? :) LOL ROTFWL

Bill.Flavell at GMail.com

Where else to better discuss meta-theoretical
issues than on this list, which is de-facto
meta-theoretical because it is about alternative
tunings and their rationale.

CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING!

Bill.Flavell at GMail.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@> wrote:
> >
> > > Wow! That is a controversial post!
> >
> > Especially since none of it has obvious implications
> > for alternate tunings. Bill, since this is the
> > alternate tunings list, can you demonstrate how any
> > of this is related to alternate tunings?
>
> Sorry, I have to say I'm getting slightly irked having to wade
through
> all this "neologism spam" to get to posts about tuning issues.
>
> Bill, don't you have a site on Yahoo already to discuss this? If you
> only have 3 members, kindly refrain from recruiting people into your
> Countour Melody© cult here. Maybe what you are saying is
> groundbreaking and all, but it has nothing whatesoever to do
with "on
> topic" for this list.
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron.
>

What I'm saying is that I've made
discoveries that go way beyond even
conventional 12EDO pitch class set
theory, and a lot of it is applicable
to other tunings than 12EDO.

Bill.Flavell at GMail.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Ozan Yarman" <ozanyarman@...> wrote:
>
> Maybe we could emphasize the fact that this list is indeed focusing
on
> alternate tunings to the exclusion of 12-tET.
>
> Or we could swallow our prejudices and allow room for theoretical
> discussions on this particular tuning also despite the hegemony it
came to
> represent on music education.
>
> Oz.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: 16 Aralýk 2006 Cumartesi 7:18
> Subject: [tuning] Stop Already (Re: Musical Objectivity:
Four "Tabula
> Rosas")
>
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@> wrote:
> >
> > > Wow! That is a controversial post!
> >
> > Especially since none of it has obvious implications
> > for alternate tunings. Bill, since this is the
> > alternate tunings list, can you demonstrate how any
> > of this is related to alternate tunings?
>
> Sorry, I have to say I'm getting slightly irked having to wade
through
> all this "neologism spam" to get to posts about tuning issues.
>
> Bill, don't you have a site on Yahoo already to discuss this? If you
> only have 3 members, kindly refrain from recruiting people into your
> Countour Melody© cult here. Maybe what you are saying is
> groundbreaking and all, but it has nothing whatesoever to do
with "on
> topic" for this list.
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron.
>

Thanks for the humor/support, Cameron! :) LOL ROTFWL

Bill.Flavell at GMail.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Cameron Bobro" <misterbobro@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@>
> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I have to say I'm getting slightly irked having to wade
> >through all this "neologism spam" to get to posts about tuning
issues.
>
> I sympathize, although I find it more entertaining than annoying, and
> I never have figured out eactly what "spam" actually means-
> "pajara"? "muggles"? "Semimarvelous dwarf" is a wonderful term, I
> wonder what it refers to? I did find "magic temperament" and other
> things at tonalsoft.
>
> -Cameron Bobro
>

What I am proposing is to generate
melodies in 12EDO and convert them to
scale-step/pitch-class orderings/heirarchizations
of 5,6,7,8,9,10,11, or 12 tones that can
then be translated into other non-12EDO
tunings.

Bill.Flavell at GMail.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Ozan Yarman" <ozanyarman@> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe we could emphasize the fact that this list is indeed
focusing on
> > alternate tunings to the exclusion of 12-tET.
>
> Bill could state what he wants to do with melody theory more
> generally; his fixation on 12-et is really quite pointless. But this
> whole melody business would be much more interesting if it were
> related to actual melodies or techniques for constructing them.
>

Sorry, Carl, but I don't know of any
other list than this one that has any message
traffic and also is by its very nature
"meta-theoretical". In that sense, I consider
this list to be the most important music theory
list on the web in the English language.

Bill.Flavell at GMail.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > Maybe we could emphasize the fact that this list is indeed
focusing
> > on alternate tunings to the exclusion of 12-tET.
> >
> > Or we could swallow our prejudices and allow room for theoretical
> > discussions on this particular tuning also despite the hegemony it
> > came to represent on music education.
> >
> > Oz.
>
> The point of this list is that there wasn't any place to discuss
> tuning theory. There are hundreds of lists available to discuss
> regular music theory. Most of them started by Bill. :)
>
> -Carl
>

> The generation of melodies is
> "cross-tuning-centric", as well as the
> implications of digital synthesis.

Can you give a step-by-step example of how to generate
a melody using your technique and arbitrary intervals?

I take it that it is your intention to replace the
tone row with your "Morse-Thu"-generated melodies?

You said something about serialism maximizing the wrong
thing. Perhaps you could explain in English what it is
that your melodies are supposed to maximize.

> To say MIDI isn't tuning-related is
> ridiculous, since synthesizers are the
> only instruments that allow alternative
> tunings.

This is false.

> And, last but not least THE GROUP MODERATOR
> ALLOWED THE POST THROUGH! Are you second-guessing
> him/her? :) LOL ROTFWL

There's a very hands-off moderation policy on this
group. I was the moderator for a while, now there is
a group of moderators. Unfortunately I'm not sure
which, if any of them even read the list.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Cameron Bobro" <misterbobro@...> wrote:

"Semimarvelous dwarf" is a wonderful term, I
> wonder what it refers to?

Suppose you have a "val", which is to say a linear mapping to primes,
related to an equal temperament--for example, <12 19 28| for 5-limit
12-equal. Then you can start from 1 and proceed though the odd
integers, testing whether that integer, mapped by <12 19 28| and
reduced mod 12, is the first such mod 12 reduction to appear. Then add
that to a set.

In this case, we start with {1}, then 3 maps to 19 which reduces to 7
mod 12, so we have {1,3}. We keep this up until we have all twelve
spots filled, and reduce the result to the octave. The result is the
corresponding "dwarf" scale. In this case, we get

135/128, 9/8, 75/64, 5/4, 675/512, 45/32, 3/2, 25/16, 27/16, 225/128,
15/8, 2

We can choose another mode and still count it as the same scale; one
of these modes is the Ellis Duodene, so the 12-note 5-limit dwarf can
be said to be the Duodene. This easy construction has a marked
tendency to pick interesting scales. The 5-limit scales often work
excellently for 225/224 ("marvel") tempering, and "marvelous dwarf"
etc. refer to particular properties these sometimes have. The posting

/tuning-math/message/11478

explains that.

Cameron Bobro wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...> > wrote:
> >> Sorry, I have to say I'm getting slightly irked having to wade >> through all this "neologism spam" to get to posts about tuning issues.
> > I sympathize, although I find it more entertaining than annoying, and > I never have figured out eactly what "spam" actually means-
> "pajara"? "muggles"? "Semimarvelous dwarf" is a wonderful term, I > wonder what it refers to? I did find "magic temperament" and other > things at tonalsoft. "Spam" refers to an old Monty Python episode involving a restaurant where every item on the menu had Spam in it (multiple times), but the customer wanted something without Spam. Commonly used nowadays to refer to any unwanted junk, more specifically unsolicited commercial messages.

"Pajara" and "muggles" are tricky to find individually (Google returns references to P�jara in the Canary Islands and the Harry Potter novels), but using both words together in the same search turns up a number of links. Taking a look at this page:

http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/sevnames.htm

you can get a good idea why some of us prefer using the names for identifying these temperaments instead of the wedgies. Unless you have a really good memory for numbers!

One of these days I'd like to try something in muggles. That was one of the big list of 114 temperaments that I thought had some potential, but haven't got around to using it yet. The generator mapping is <1, 0, 2, 5], <0, 5, 1, -7] with a TOP tuning of 1203.148011, 379.3931044 (i.e., you can set up a scale in TOP muggles by using the PYTH command in Scala, giving 1203.148011 as the size of the octave and 379.3931044 as the size of the "formal fifth"). As for why it's called "muggles", I think it has something to do with a resemblance to "magic" temperament: magic has a generator mapping of <1, 0, 2, -1] <0, 5, 1, 12] and TOP tuning 1201.276744, 380.7957184 (in the Harry Potter universe, "muggles" are people without the ability to use magic, not to be confused with Louis Armstrong's use of the word "muggles").

Like?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Flavell" <musictheorybill@gmail.com>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 16 Aral�k 2006 Cumartesi 21:04
Subject: [tuning] Stop Already (Re: Musical Objectivity: Four "Tabula
Rosas")

What I'm saying is that I've made
discoveries that go way beyond even
conventional 12EDO pitch class set
theory, and a lot of it is applicable
to other tunings than 12EDO.

Bill.Flavell at GMail.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Ozan Yarman" <ozanyarman@...> wrote:
>
> Maybe we could emphasize the fact that this list is indeed focusing
on
> alternate tunings to the exclusion of 12-tET.
>
> Or we could swallow our prejudices and allow room for theoretical
> discussions on this particular tuning also despite the hegemony it
came to
> represent on music education.
>
> Oz.
>

Thanks- my knowledge of "modulo" includes reading a clock and double
checking math by taking out the 9s, and that's about it, AFAIK.

> 135/128, 9/8, 75/64, 5/4, 675/512, 45/32, 3/2, 25/16, 27/16,
>225/128,
> 15/8, 2

This is interesting because these are familiar intervals, from working
in simple old-fashioned ways, ie "fretting", which is my basic
approach to tuning.

What would get if you did a 23-limit 17 tone scale? :-)

-Cameron Bobro

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Cameron Bobro" <misterbobro@...> wrote:

> What would get if you did a 23-limit 17 tone scale? :-)

First you would need to decide which version of a 23-limit mapping for
17 tones you wanted; tell me and I'll work it out for you. If you take
the "patent val" where you round log2(p) to the nearest integer, you get

[17/16, 35/32, 9/8, 19/16, 5/4, 81/64, 21/16, 11/8, 23/16, 3/2, 49/32,
13/8, 27/16, 7/4, 15/8, 121/64, 2]

Interval sizes range from 121/120 to 15/14, so this isn't very
regular. However you don't need to use complete mappings; in the case
of 17, it would make sense to only use 2, 3, 7, 11, 13 and 23, for
instance. If you do that, you get

[529/512, 69/64, 9/8, 77/64, 39/32, 81/64, 343/256, 11/8, 23/16, 3/2,
49/32, 13/8, 27/16, 7/4, 117/64, 243/128, 2]

Another mode of that is

[24/23, 49/46, 26/23, 27/23, 28/23, 117/92, 243/184, 32/23, 23/16,
3/2, 36/23, 77/46, 39/23, 81/46, 343/184, 44/23, 2]

Restricting things in this way helps the scale to achieve some kind of
regularity; the above scale is irregular enough as it is, with
intervals ranging in size from 78/77 (22 cents) to 77/72 (115 cents)
but that's a bit better.

Very interesting indeed! How did you know that 2,3,7,11,13,23
are the primes that make sense? I know only by listening- my main
tuning has exactly these, and 5, due to 25/24.

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

> However you don't need to use complete mappings; in the case
> of 17, it would make sense to only use 2, 3, 7, 11, 13 and 23, for
> instance. If you do that, you get
>
> [529/512, 69/64, 9/8, 77/64, 39/32, 81/64, 343/256, 11/8, 23/16,
>/2,
> 49/32, 13/8, 27/16, 7/4, 117/64, 243/128, 2]

> Another mode of that is
>
> [24/23, 49/46, 26/23, 27/23, 28/23, 117/92, 243/184, 32/23, 23/16,
> 3/2, 36/23, 77/46, 39/23, 81/46, 343/184, 44/23, 2]

These intervals are very familiar- either present in my big pile of
17 tunings, and/or difference tones from the one I currently use.

Could you try 2,3,5,7,11,13,23? I'm excited to see how it compares
to what I've worked out the hard way, which has all single steps
between about 64 and 76 cents.

-Cameron Bobro

Thanks.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Herman Miller <hmiller@...> wrote:
> "Spam" refers to an old Monty Python episode involving a
restaurant
> where every item on the menu had Spam in it (multiple times), but
the
> customer wanted something without Spam. Commonly used nowadays to
refer
> to any unwanted junk, more specifically unsolicited commercial
messages.
>
> "Pajara" and "muggles" are tricky to find individually (Google
>returns
> references to Pájara in the Canary Islands and the Harry Potter
>novels),
> but using both words together in the same search turns up a number
>of
> links. Taking a look at this page:
>
> http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/sevnames.htm
>
> you can get a good idea why some of us prefer using the names for
> identifying these temperaments instead of the wedgies. Unless you
have a
> really good memory for numbers!
>
> One of these days I'd like to try something in muggles. That was
one of
> the big list of 114 temperaments that I thought had some
potential, but
> haven't got around to using it yet. The generator mapping is <1,
0, 2,
> 5], <0, 5, 1, -7] with a TOP tuning of 1203.148011, 379.3931044
(i.e.,
> you can set up a scale in TOP muggles by using the PYTH command in
> Scala, giving 1203.148011 as the size of the octave and
379.3931044 as
> the size of the "formal fifth"). As for why it's called "muggles",
I
> think it has something to do with a resemblance to "magic"
>temperament:
> magic has a generator mapping of <1, 0, 2, -1] <0, 5, 1, 12] and
>TOP
> tuning 1201.276744, 380.7957184 (in the Harry Potter
universe, "muggles"
> are people without the ability to use magic, not to be confused
>with
> Louis Armstrong's use of the word "muggles").
>