Re: Welcome to tuning@onelist.com

I was on the digest version of this list. I want to be again.

-JMH

At 03:02 PM 12/28/98 -0000, you wrote:
> Welcome to the Alternate Tuning Internet Mailing List!
> (Originally based at Mills College in Oakland, California, USA.)
>
> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> | |_| |_| | |_| |_| |_| | |_|
> | | | | | | | | |
> | 1/1 | 3/2 | 8/5 |21/13|34/21| 13/8| 5/3 | 2/1 |
> |_____|_____|_____|_____|_____|_____|_____|_____|
>
>
>This mailing list is intended for exchanging ideas relevant to alternate
>tunings: just intonation; paratactical tunings; experimental musical
instrument
>design; non-standard equal temperaments; MIDI tuning system exclusive specs;
>concert postings; gamelan tunings and other non-western tunings; historical
>tunings; the experimental tunings of Harry Partch, Lou Harrison, Martin
>Bartlett, James Tenney, and so on; software reports; recordings; books;
research
>sources, etcetera.
>
>To send mail to everyone on the list, send to tuning@onelist.com
>
>There is an associated ftp site (separate from the archives) at:
>ftp://ella.mills.edu/pub/ccm/tuning
>
>Happy retuning!
>
>--Mark Nowitzky
>nowitzky@alum.mit.edu
>
>
>
-------------------------------
John Maxwell Hobbs
jmax@artswire.org
http://www.artswire.org/~jmax

Web Phases - an interactive, web-based composition
http://www.cinemavolta.com/phaseframe.html

Hi,

Can anybody help me creating Just Intonation patches on my Akai S2000 sampler?
Ive tried looking at stuff on the net, but to be honest a lot of the information
goes straight over my head... What im really after is a list of frequencies (in
cents) of how to map a normal 12 tone keyboard to a JI type tuning. I couldnt find
an FAQ so i cant apologise for being a newbie!

Steve

Had to get back on to find out why Starrett page has a forbidden message!

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com

Yes if someone could send john starett email that would be good!.
Glancing over the last day (hoping john had posted but addresses are not in
the archives) I saw the discussion of Partch's 43 tone scale in relations to
the 31 tone diamond and Wilson Mapping onto A 41 tone scale.
The diamond is not a scale and Partch knew and heard that. There were
"gaps" on both sides on the 1/1. You can look at his book (i can't get to it
at the moment) to see how he filled this with Superparticular ratios (a
subject completely lost to the ET perspective). This caused each interval to
be subtended by the same number of steps except when passing over the 11/10
and 10/9 area. HE WAS THINKING ALONG MOS LINES BY EAR!!!!
Wilson Keyboard Layout not only shows how this scale can be placed on
Bosanquet Keyboard but shows how Partch was thinking/hearing in a 41 tone
scale with two variables. This is basic MOS procedure, you can see the same
thing in Dallesandro where two pitches fall on the same key. This leaves the
option up to the artist how he wishes to deal with it (if you want to use the
keyboard)
First of all the you could have the option to place one of the keys down
below which is not ideal. You can have one pitch in one octave and one in the
other. You could which I am sure, would be the only possible option to too
many, if they were close enough you could temper these two pitches. When I
had built the 31 tone marimba by Stephen Smith to encompass the 36 tone
1-3-5-7-9-11 CPS, Certain intervals appeared in only one octave. The harmonic
hexad below and the subharmonic hexad above. there where two intervals in the
middle of the marimba that where separated by 4.5 cents, well considering how
very short decay this instrument was, I split the difference. Wilson left
this Artistic choice up to the artist.
All tuning systems require one to choose the balance between the melodic
and the harmonic. The diamond by itself is incomplete, and Partch filled it
out with his ear in his particular way. It is no way the only solution. I
recomend to every one on this list to take the diamond and place it on the 41
tone keyboard and proceed to fill in the keyboard blanks. These are the
skills i learned real early in working with microtones. Like microtonal 1st
grade. The "filling in of the blanks" gives the artist the ability to define
unique areas of harmonic/melodic push and pull that might be their own.
It is on this balance of harmony and melody that i will still stand
behind the worth of my 12 tone scale Centaur. True you can come up with more
than the tetrads found within this scale, but frankly those solutions ignored
the melodic side of the scale. The proof is in the pudding though, and that
little scale kept me happy for years without exhausting it. Other scales can
do this too, but that is the criterion!
-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com

Kraig Grady wrote,

>I saw the discussion of Partch's 43 tone scale in relations to
>the 31 tone diamond

The diamond only has 29 tones, since 9/6=3/2 and 12/9=4/3.

>I
>recomend to every one on this list to take the diamond and place it on the
41
>tone keyboard and proceed to fill in the keyboard blanks.

Wilson's reduction from 43 to 41 also reduces the diamond from 29 to 27.

"Paul H. Erlich" wrote:

> Kraig Grady wrote,
>
> >I saw the discussion of Partch's 43 tone scale in relations to
> >the 31 tone diamond
>
> The diamond only has 29 tones, since 9/6=3/2 and 12/9=4/3.

2 puns, so what! you are putting me to sleep.

> >I
> >recomend to every one on this list to take the diamond and place it on the
> 41
> >tone keyboard and proceed to fill in the keyboard blanks.

>
> Wilson's reduction from 43 to 41 also reduces the diamond from 29 to 27.

So what! Your periodicity block is an over complex way of dealing with
something that MOS deals with simpler, with more creative freedom, and 20
years before. If you can show me where it produces better musical results I'll
listen, till then. Anyway he is not reducing the 43 to 41. He is showing that
Partch heard the diamond as a 41 tone scale with two variables, depending on
the context. As I said you can find the same practice with all the CPS's and I
believe even Navarro did the same elementary process with his "diamonds".
These are patterns and structures that the "ear" produces, not the pencil!

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com

>> >I saw the discussion of Partch's 43 tone scale in relations to
>> >the 31 tone diamond
>
>> The diamond only has 29 tones, since 9/6=3/2 and 12/9=4/3.

>2 puns, so what! you are putting me to sleep.

Thanks. I was just pointing out an inconsistency in your counting, since in
Partch's 43 tone scale, only 29 tones form the diamond.

>Your periodicity block is an over complex way of dealing with
>something that MOS deals with simpler, with more creative freedom, and 20
>years before. If you can show me where it produces better musical results
I'll
>listen, till then.

Kraig, you're totally missing the point. All I showed is that Partch's scale
(with the same reduction to 41 that Wilson performed) can be understood as a
periodicity block. That entails not only the quasi-MOS properties you're
referring to but many others.

>Anyway he is not reducing the 43 to 41. He is showing that
>Partch heard the diamond as a 41 tone scale with two variables, depending
on
>the context.

That's a better way of putting it, and _exactly_ in agreement with the
periodicity block interpretation.

>These are patterns and structures that the "ear" produces, not the pencil!

Once again, exactly. Both Wilson's concepts and the PB concept are meant to
elucidate the intuitive process of setting up JI scales.