simpler test---which one of these 2 do you like?

...and why?

http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3

(It's the fugue in E major, WTCii)

The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The more 'votes'
are cast, the better.

-A.

Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
> ...and why?
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3
> > (It's the fugue in E major, WTCii)
> > The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The more 'votes'
> are cast, the better.

I thought version A sounded pretty good, but there are parts of B that I like better. I think B has a little more "personality" to it, while A is a little more bland in this key. This fugue seems to me a little more monotonous than most of the others in the set, and it could use some help from the tuning to keep it interesting.

This is a close call, but I'll vote for B on this one.

Hi all,

Herman Miller wrote:
>
> Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
> > ...and why?
> >
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3
> >
> > (It's the fugue in E major, WTCii)
> >
> > The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The
more 'votes' are cast, the better.
>
> I thought version A sounded pretty good, but there are parts of B
that I like better. I think B has a little more "personality" to it,
while A is a little more bland in this key. This fugue seems to me a
little more monotonous than most of the others in the set, and it
could use some help from the tuning to keep it interesting.
>
> This is a close call, but I'll vote for B on this one.

I'll mostly echo Herman's comments, but say it's "peaceful" rather
than "monotonous"; and I feel that the tuning in version A possibly
supports that peacefulness a little better.

You'll find another version ("bwv878fugue_y") on:
http://www.esnips.com/web/Temporarystorage
which I prefer to either.

Regards,
Yahya

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...>
wrote:
>
>
> ...and why?
>
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3
>
> (It's the fugue in E major, WTCii)
>
> The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The more 'votes'
> are cast, the better.
>
> -A.
>

I hear the difference in this case as a difference in timbre, not in
tuning. Neither has enough character, tuningwise, but maybe that's my
mood. :-)

-Cameron Bobro

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Cameron Bobro" <misterbobro@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > ...and why?
> >
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3
> >
> > (It's the fugue in E major, WTCii)
> >
> > The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The more 'votes'
> > are cast, the better.
> >
> > -A.
> >
>
> I hear the difference in this case as a difference in timbre, not in
> tuning. Neither has enough character, tuningwise, but maybe that's my
> mood. :-)
>
> -Cameron Bobro
>

... It is pretty darn difficult to tell the difference!

If forced, I would go marginally for B which seems to me, on this
particular evening, to be more 'normal' in the tonic and more
'interesting' in modulations.

This isn't another 'trick question' where Aaron has picked the two
most-similar-in-E-major temperaments he knows, is it?
(cf. WIII, Young, ET in A major...)

~~~T~~~

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Dent" <stringph@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Cameron Bobro" <misterbobro@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > ...and why?
> > >
> > > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
> > > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3
> > >
> > > (It's the fugue in E major, WTCii)
> > >
> > > The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The more 'votes'
> > > are cast, the better.
> > >
> > > -A.
> > >
> >
> > I hear the difference in this case as a difference in timbre, not in
> > tuning. Neither has enough character, tuningwise, but maybe that's my
> > mood. :-)
> >
> > -Cameron Bobro
> >
>
> ... It is pretty darn difficult to tell the difference!
>
> If forced, I would go marginally for B which seems to me, on this
> particular evening, to be more 'normal' in the tonic and more
> 'interesting' in modulations.
>
> This isn't another 'trick question' where Aaron has picked the two
> most-similar-in-E-major temperaments he knows, is it?
> (cf. WIII, Young, ET in A major...)
>
> ~~~T~~~

No....to me, I hear a difference in overall 'shimmer'. Then again, I
think we know by now that the creator of such test has a cognitive
advantage.

-A.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...>
wrote:
>
>
> ...and why?
>
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3
>
> (It's the fugue in E major, WTCii)
>
> The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The more 'votes'
> are cast, the better.
>
> -A.
>

The difference in this case sounds to me like a difference in timbre,
not in tuning. Not enough character to the tuning, to my taste.

-Cameron Bobro

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Cameron Bobro" <misterbobro@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > ...and why?
> >
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3
> >
> > (It's the fugue in E major, WTCii)
> >
> > The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The more 'votes'
> > are cast, the better.
> >
> > -A.
> >
>
> The difference in this case sounds to me like a difference in timbre,
> not in tuning. Not enough character to the tuning, to my taste.
>
> -Cameron Bobro
>

Well, it *is* the same timbre....I assume you aren't voting for one or
the other because you don't like either?

If you have the means, I'd be interested in hearing a tuning you think
would be acceptable for this music, post an mp3, and don't tell us
what it is!

-A.

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

> The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The more 'votes'
> are cast, the better.

I can't see that this idea makes much sense, as what will be better for
one piece in one key is likely to be worse for another piece in another
key. However, for what it's worth I'll vote b.

> > > > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
> > > > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3

"b" makes it sound like music in sharps. "a" just makes it sound like generic music.

p.s. The timbre on both of these sounds really congested/distorted (and almost unlistenable), to me...not at all like a good healthy harpsichord. Sorry!

Brad Lehman

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

> If you have the means, I'd be interested in hearing a tuning you think
> would be acceptable for this music, post an mp3, and don't tell us
> what it is!

Why don't you post what midi file and (if you used an sf2 font)
soundfont you used.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "yahya_melb" <yahya@...> wrote:
>
>
> You'll find another version ("bwv878fugue_y") on:
> http://www.esnips.com/web/Temporarystorage
> which I prefer to either.
>
> Regards,
> Yahya
>

Sounds OK, but the timbre makes it difficult to determine anything
about the tuning. Each note has a sort of wallow to it (perhaps
imitating slightly detuned harpischord registers??) which obscures
details of tempering.

~~~T~~~

Tom Dent wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "yahya_melb" <yahya@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > You'll find another version ("bwv878fugue_y") on:
> > http://www.esnips.com/web/Temporarystorage
> > which I prefer to either.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yahya
> >
>
> Sounds OK, but the timbre makes it difficult to determine anything
> about the tuning. Each note has a sort of wallow to it (perhaps
> imitating slightly detuned harpischord registers??) which obscures
> details of tempering.

Tom,

You guess well! There is some deliberate detuning going on here.
FWIW, the tunings of a, b and y are, to my ears at least, possibly so
close that I wouldn't get excited enough to systematically prefer one
to another.

Regards,
Yahya

> ...and why?
>
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3
>
> (It's the fugue in E major, WTCii)
>
> The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The
> more 'votes' are cast, the better.

I like the slower (than I'm used to) tempo here. Did you
perform these?

There seems to be something like extreme wow and flutter
going on with the timbre on both files for me. Makes any
tuning comparison difficult.

I guess file A sounds 'wetter' (as in reverb). If you
put a gun to my head, I'd say I like it better.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...>
wrote:
>
> Well, it *is* the same timbre....I assume you aren't voting for
>one or
> the other because you don't like either?

If you want to be a stickler, technically, it's NOT the same timbre,
if the tunings are different. :-)

No I don't like either, but if the rules of the game are to pick
one, I'd pick "b", as it sounds softer to me.

> If you have the means, I'd be interested in hearing a tuning you
>think
> would be acceptable for this music, post an mp3, and don't tell us
> what it is!

You may have hit upon the reason why, for years now, Bach sounds so
much better in my head, from memory, than it does when performed:
never heard an appropriate tuning. All these recent listening tests
are only confirming that. :-D
But I'll give it a shot, if I can find a tuning that I think might
work to my taste.

-Cameron Bobro

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > ...and why?
> >
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3
> >
> > (It's the fugue in E major, WTCii)
> >
> > The idea is, the winner moves on to the next round. The
> > more 'votes' are cast, the better.
>
> I like the slower (than I'm used to) tempo here. Did you
> perform these?

No. I got the MIDI file from Kunst Der Fuge (Gene's tip)

> There seems to be something like extreme wow and flutter
> going on with the timbre on both files for me. Makes any
> tuning comparison difficult.

Try these:

http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.ogg
http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.ogg

'Lame' is not behaving with encoding these (or I couldn't find the
right setting, or mp3s suck, take your pick)

As usual, 'oggenc' performs amazingly well.

> I guess file A sounds 'wetter' (as in reverb). If you
> put a gun to my head, I'd say I like it better.

Let me know if your opinion remains the same...thanks!

-A.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Cameron Bobro" <misterbobro@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Well, it *is* the same timbre....I assume you aren't voting for
> >one or
> > the other because you don't like either?
>
> If you want to be a stickler, technically, it's NOT the same timbre,
> if the tunings are different. :-)

I disagree. I'd just say the timbres are spectrally the same for a
single pitch, but they sound differently when tuned differently,
because the overtones during polyphony/homophony behave diffently.

"Six of one, half-dozen of the other", I suppose.

> No I don't like either, but if the rules of the game are to pick
> one, I'd pick "b", as it sounds softer to me.

Ok....you ought to try the oog files I posted

http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.ogg
http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.ogg

They don't suffer the lousy distortion that the mp3s do. I couldn't,
like I said, get the 'lame' encoder to behave with this particular
file (is it the timbre?). Anyway, in this case, 'lame' lived up to
it's name.

> > If you have the means, I'd be interested in hearing a tuning you
> >think
> > would be acceptable for this music, post an mp3, and don't tell us
> > what it is!
>
> You may have hit upon the reason why, for years now, Bach sounds so
> much better in my head, from memory, than it does when performed:
> never heard an appropriate tuning. All these recent listening tests
> are only confirming that. :-D

This seems like an extreme position, but oh well...

> But I'll give it a shot, if I can find a tuning that I think might
> work to my taste.

Good--I'm eager to hear what you've been talking about all this time!

-A.

> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.ogg
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.ogg
>
> They don't suffer the lousy distortion that the mp3s do. I couldn't,
> like I said, get the 'lame' encoder to behave with this particular
> file (is it the timbre?). Anyway, in this case, 'lame' lived up to
> it's name.

No, there's something wrong with your source files. mp3
cannot produce this kind of distortion.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.ogg
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.ogg
> >
> > They don't suffer the lousy distortion that the mp3s do. I couldn't,
> > like I said, get the 'lame' encoder to behave with this particular
> > file (is it the timbre?). Anyway, in this case, 'lame' lived up to
> > it's name.
>
> No, there's something wrong with your source files. mp3
> cannot produce this kind of distortion.

My listening to the .wav sources, and the .ogg files from them, shows
otherwise. Have a listen yourself to the oggs.

> -Carl
>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.ogg
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.ogg
> >
> > They don't suffer the lousy distortion that the mp3s do. I couldn't,
> > like I said, get the 'lame' encoder to behave with this particular
> > file (is it the timbre?). Anyway, in this case, 'lame' lived up to
> > it's name.
>
> No, there's something wrong with your source files. mp3
> cannot produce this kind of distortion.

I just tried lame -V 0 (high quality VBR) and it worked.

http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.mp3
http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.mp3

-A.

> > No, there's something wrong with your source files. mp3
> > cannot produce this kind of distortion.
>
> My listening to the .wav sources, and the .ogg files from them, shows
> otherwise. Have a listen yourself to the oggs.

If you don't have DC bias in your source files, or aren't
using wave files of a standard sampling rate / bit depth, or
aren't using some weird mu-law wave encoder, I'll be surprised.
What LAME setting are you using?

-Carl

> I just tried lame -V 0 (high quality VBR) and it worked.

What were you using before?

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > I just tried lame -V 0 (high quality VBR) and it worked.
>
> What were you using before?
>

I used --preset-standard. Maybe ther's a bug in the particular version
I have for that setting. No matter--- '-V 0' worked fine, so I'll use
that. The files aren't too big, (just a bit bigger than ogg at -q 5)
and sound fine.

-A.

> > > I just tried lame -V 0 (high quality VBR) and it worked.
> >
> > What were you using before?
>
> I used --preset-standard. Maybe ther's a bug in the particular
version
> I have for that setting. No matter--- '-V 0' worked fine, so I'll
> use that. The files aren't too big, (just a bit bigger than
> ogg at -q 5) and sound fine.
>
> -A.

Weird. -C.

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

> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_a.ogg
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/bwv878fugue_b.ogg

> > > If you have the means, I'd be interested in hearing a tuning you
> > >think
> > > would be acceptable for this music, post an mp3, and don't tell us
> > > what it is!

Since we have oggs above, I'll post an ogg:

http://www.xenharmony.org/mp3/misc/bwv878-gene.ogg

> Since we have oggs above, I'll post an ogg:
>
> http://www.xenharmony.org/mp3/misc/bwv878-gene.ogg

Meantone centered on E?

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > Since we have oggs above, I'll post an ogg:
> >
> > http://www.xenharmony.org/mp3/misc/bwv878-gene.ogg
>
> Meantone centered on E?

Sounds like it too me, too....

I like it (not crazy about the harpsichord font, though)--it's
interesting how it makes Bach sound like English Renaissance (like
Byrd--especially in a fugue like this, which is rather
backward-lloking to begin with)

-A.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > Since we have oggs above, I'll post an ogg:
> >
> > http://www.xenharmony.org/mp3/misc/bwv878-gene.ogg
>
> Meantone centered on E?

Bingo. I "transcribed" it for 31, which turned out not to require any
enharmonic adjustments, so I don't know if I can really count it as a
transcription.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@> wrote:
> >
> > > Since we have oggs above, I'll post an ogg:
> > >
> > > http://www.xenharmony.org/mp3/misc/bwv878-gene.ogg
> >
> > Meantone centered on E?
>
> Sounds like it too me, too....
>
> I like it (not crazy about the harpsichord font, though)--it's
> interesting how it makes Bach sound like English Renaissance (like
> Byrd--especially in a fugue like this, which is rather
> backward-lloking to begin with)

On the other hand, the way Schoenberg's orchestrations are written, he
manages to make Bach sound like a 20th century composer.