New (concise?) definition of "microtonal music" - see quote - from the programme of the UK MicroFest 2.

">What is microtonal music?
>The most concise definition of microtonal music is music which uses
pitches other than the
>12 equally spaced pitches normally heard in western music or their
very close relations (like
>the ones used in the temperaments of Baroque music such as Meantone
Temperament).
>Such music is not particularly rare. We know that the ancient
Greeks used structured
>intervals as small as a quarter-tone, so do many folk musics from
around the world and
>Indian classical music."

The original is here:

http://www.tonysalinas.com/Flier-UKM2%5B1%5D.pdf

Is this Just and ET snobbery?
Justification for dissonance?
Should Johnny Reinhard’s Manhattan based American Festival of
Microtonal Music, and this tuning list now ban discussion of all
meantone tunings?
Should Johnny rename his excellent organisation?
How does this effect Graham Breed and others who have used the term?

This creates a contradiction with the definition at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microtonal_music

which specifically excludes 24edo.

Do I smell an impending wiki war?;-)

Charles Lucy lucy@lucytune.com

----- Promoting global harmony through LucyTuning -----

For information on LucyTuning go to: http://www.lucytune.com

LucyTuned Lullabies (from around the world):
http://www.lullabies.co.uk

Skype user = lucytune

> This creates a contradiction with the definition at:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microtonal_music
>
> which specifically excludes 24edo.
>
> Do I smell an impending wiki war?;-)

The wiki page is full of badly written nonsense, as far as I can see.

For example the reference to Kuhnau composing a piece 'in meantone'
'in the 1730's'. For one thing, Kuhnau died in the mid-1720's ; for
another, no-one knows what tuning system he used or wanted or would
have expected for a given piece. All we know is what notes he wrote.
(Which include an awful lot of Ab major chords in rather unremarkable
musical contexts.)

And the usual vague hand-waving about the Hurrian hymn...

The wikipedia 'definition' of anything that doesn't include 12-et
breaks down as soon as we consider a piano which is almost but not
quite equal-tempered. Audibly almost identical to 12-et, with
virtually identical musical possibilities, but Wiki tells us it's
microtonal.

And the exclusion of 24-et (also, by implication, 72-et) is nonsensical.

Let me put forward another one:

Microtonal music is music that depends on differences of pitch, or
differences between intervals, smaller than a semitone.

This includes anything you would expect (for example JI depends on the
distinction between a major and a minor tone; chromatic progressions
in meantone depend on the distinction between a diatonic and chromatic
semitone; etc.) - but excludes the slightly-mistuned piano, since no
musical aspect of what you can do with it depends on anything smaller
than a semitone.

It also excludes, say, Gregorian chant, which I think is reasonable,
since the precise tuning properties of diatonic monophonic chanting
are irrelevant to its musical effect.

It is of course somewhat vague and subjective: but then so is the
whole business of composing and performing music. To paraphrase
Einstein, one should be as precise and objective as possible, but not
more.

Comments ?

~~~T~~~

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Dent" <stringph@...> wrote:

> Comments ?

I think it was better before it got improved so much.

SNIP

> Let me put forward another one:
>
> Microtonal music is music that depends on differences of pitch, or
> differences between intervals, smaller than a semitone.
>

I disagree with this definition, because I think microtonal music is based
too on the distinction of pitches by intervals between the tone and the
semitone.

That is why Maqam Music is microtonal; not because it uses steps smaller
than a semitone, but characteristic ones between that and the whole tone.

SNIP

Oz.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Ozan Yarman" <ozanyarman@...> wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> > Let me put forward another one:
> >
> > Microtonal music is music that depends on differences of pitch, or
> > differences between intervals, smaller than a semitone.
> >
>
> I disagree with this definition, because I think microtonal music is
based
> too on the distinction of pitches by intervals between the tone and the
> semitone.

The *difference* between such intervals and a tone is smaller than a
semitone ; therefore the definition still applies, if Maquam uses
semitone and tone steps too.

However I did soon think of a possible true exception: music with
equally spaced intervals all larger than a semitone - 8-et etc.

I think a nice name for this would be macrotonality!!

GWS:
> it was better before it got improved so much

Funny, but I'm not sure what that refers to. The definition of
microtonality, or the webpage?

And what *was* the definition of microtonality back in the days when
people first started talking about it??

"Microtonal music is music made by people who are actively
discontented with 12-et"

??

~~~T~~~

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Dent" <stringph@...> wrote:

> GWS:
> > it was better before it got improved so much
>
> Funny, but I'm not sure what that refers to. The definition of
> microtonality, or the webpage?

The Wikipedia article. It used to be shorter and not so weird.

> The *difference* between such intervals and a tone is smaller than a
> semitone ; therefore the definition still applies, if Maquam uses
> semitone and tone steps too.
>
> However I did soon think of a possible true exception: music with
> equally spaced intervals all larger than a semitone - 8-et etc.
>
> I think a nice name for this would be macrotonality!!

You're not the first person to go through this and suggest
macrotonality at the end. But neither term is really very
descriptive of anything, or should the 100-cent semitone
be elevated to the status of defining two categories for
all music.

There's no sense in making rigid definitions for loose
terms like "microtonal music", but I would suggest "music
involving pitches which are not meant to be drawn from
12-tone equal temperament".

-Carl

A more radical approach to Carl's suggestion is to categorize only
contemporary Western and non-Western tunings as microtonal. Unfortunately,
this would render the 12-tone Western common-practice tradition entirely
non-microtonal, even though meantone temperaments are fundamentally
different than 12-tET. I am not sure that this is desirable.

How about if we define microtonal music as frequenting melodic steps either
"distinctively" smaller or larger than the "equalized" semitone? Such a
distinctiveness would almost certainly include meantone, but not necessarily
the classical well-temperament and quasi-equal settings.

Then again, it might be an option to consider every tuning microtonal at the
expense of legibility!

Oz.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Lumma" <clumma@yahoo.com>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 05 Mart 2007 Pazartesi 0:03
Subject: [tuning] Re: New (concise?) definition of "microtonal music" - see
quote - from the prog

> > The *difference* between such intervals and a tone is smaller than a
> > semitone ; therefore the definition still applies, if Maquam uses
> > semitone and tone steps too.
> >
> > However I did soon think of a possible true exception: music with
> > equally spaced intervals all larger than a semitone - 8-et etc.
> >
> > I think a nice name for this would be macrotonality!!
>
> You're not the first person to go through this and suggest
> macrotonality at the end. But neither term is really very
> descriptive of anything, or should the 100-cent semitone
> be elevated to the status of defining two categories for
> all music.
>
> There's no sense in making rigid definitions for loose
> terms like "microtonal music", but I would suggest "music
> involving pitches which are not meant to be drawn from
> 12-tone equal temperament".
>
> -Carl
>
>

>
>
> > This creates a contradiction with the definition at:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microtonal_music
> >
> > which specifically excludes 24edo.
> >
> > Do I smell an impending wiki war?;-)
>
--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Dent" <stringph@...> wrote:
>
> The wiki page is full of badly written nonsense, as far as I can
see.

This page was recently linked from the article for Shohé Tanaka, but I
can't even guess where the information came from: http://ja.wikipedia.
org/wiki/g0d8-D91;e93

Clark

That wiki page is transparently a toy battleground for some
characters battling for the title of "microtonalist", it is very,
very embarassing.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Ozan Yarman" <ozanyarman@...> wrote:
>
> A more radical approach to Carl's suggestion is to categorize only
> contemporary Western and non-Western tunings as microtonal.
Unfortunately,
> this would render the 12-tone Western common-practice tradition
entirely
> non-microtonal, even though meantone temperaments are fundamentally
> different than 12-tET. I am not sure that this is desirable.
>
> How about if we define microtonal music as frequenting melodic
steps either
> "distinctively" smaller or larger than the "equalized" semitone?
Such a
> distinctiveness would almost certainly include meantone, but not
necessarily
> the classical well-temperament and quasi-equal settings.
>
> Then again, it might be an option to consider every tuning
microtonal at the
> expense of legibility!
>
> Oz.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: 05 Mart 2007 Pazartesi 0:03
> Subject: [tuning] Re: New (concise?) definition of "microtonal
music" - see
> quote - from the prog
>
>
> > > The *difference* between such intervals and a tone is smaller
than a
> > > semitone ; therefore the definition still applies, if Maquam
uses
> > > semitone and tone steps too.
> > >
> > > However I did soon think of a possible true exception: music
with
> > > equally spaced intervals all larger than a semitone - 8-et etc.
> > >
> > > I think a nice name for this would be macrotonality!!
> >
> > You're not the first person to go through this and suggest
> > macrotonality at the end. But neither term is really very
> > descriptive of anything, or should the 100-cent semitone
> > be elevated to the status of defining two categories for
> > all music.
> >
> > There's no sense in making rigid definitions for loose
> > terms like "microtonal music", but I would suggest "music
> > involving pitches which are not meant to be drawn from
> > 12-tone equal temperament".
> >
> > -Carl
> >
> >
>

Hi Carl,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:

> You're not the first person to go through this and suggest
> macrotonality at the end. But neither term is really very
> descriptive of anything, or should the 100-cent semitone
> be elevated to the status of defining two categories for
> all music.
>
> There's no sense in making rigid definitions for loose
> terms like "microtonal music", but I would suggest "music
> involving pitches which are not meant to be drawn from
> 12-tone equal temperament".

It seems to me like you're contradicting yourself, where
first you say that you don't like the idea of elevating the
100-cent semitone "to the status of defining two categories
for all music", then you proceed to do exactly that by
defining "microtonal" as anything other than 12-tET!

I've been thinking about this a bit, and reached the
conclusion that, like it or not, the world of 2007 is
stuck with 12-edo as *the* standard nearly universal
tuning.

I know this is obvious, especially to everyone around here.
But it was really driven home to me when i gave my lecture
"Microtonality in Berlin and Vienna in the early 1900s"
at Microfest 2000. It is clear to me that Schoenberg
grappled for some time with the idea of using microtones,
only to finally decide against them because it become
obvious to him that, as his style changed and his audiences
become more and more polarized regarding his new style
either for (his small cult following) or against (the vast
majority of potential listeners), he was already in
jeopardy of losing his ability to make any kind of a living
as a composer, and it didn't make any sense to further
reduce his odds by composing his music for ensembles of
microtonal instruments which didn't exist. So his decision
to stick with 12-edo was, to him, truly one of survival,
and it was based more on the standardization of instruments
that had been produced since the dawn of the industrial age,
than on anything else.

So with that explanation given, i go along with "microtonal"
as referring to any music which utilizes tunings different
from 12-edo, even if the difference is not very great.

I'll agree that on etymological grounds the word "microtonal"
is probably not the best suited for this usage, but it's
pretty well entrenched by now. For those who really disagree,
there's always "xenharmonic".

-monz
http://tonalsoft.com
Tonescape microtonal music software

> > You're not the first person to go through this and suggest
> > macrotonality at the end. But neither term is really very
> > descriptive of anything, or should the 100-cent semitone
> > be elevated to the status of defining two categories for
> > all music.
> >
> > There's no sense in making rigid definitions for loose
> > terms like "microtonal music", but I would suggest "music
> > involving pitches which are not meant to be drawn from
> > 12-tone equal temperament".
>
> It seems to me like you're contradicting yourself, where
> first you say that you don't like the idea of elevating the
> 100-cent semitone "to the status of defining two categories
> for all music", then you proceed to do exactly that by
> defining "microtonal" as anything other than 12-tET!

'Anything other than 12-tET' is different than 'is its
smallest step bigger or smaller than 100 cents?'.

But you're right, I don't think "microtonal" is a good
term. And I don't think I'd ever apply it to my music if
I were a musician. I'd probably avoid it like the plague.

Xenharmonic is a much better term, because it describes
the kind of music I'm interested in, which is music with
strange harmonies. It's a bit hard to make xenharmonic
music in 12-tET, but heck, for many listeners Stravinsky
probably qualifies. :)

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:

> > [monz wrote:]
> >
> > It seems to me like you're contradicting yourself, where
> > first you say that you don't like the idea of elevating the
> > 100-cent semitone "to the status of defining two categories
> > for all music", then you proceed to do exactly that by
> > defining "microtonal" as anything other than 12-tET!
>
> 'Anything other than 12-tET' is different than 'is its
> smallest step bigger or smaller than 100 cents?'.
>
> But you're right, I don't think "microtonal" is a good
> term. And I don't think I'd ever apply it to my music if
> I were a musician. I'd probably avoid it like the plague.
>
> Xenharmonic is a much better term, because it describes
> the kind of music I'm interested in, which is music with
> strange harmonies.

I thought that i should say that you and i are much closer
to agreement than it might seem from this exchange we had.

> It's a bit hard to make xenharmonic music in 12-tET,
> but heck, for many listeners Stravinsky probably qualifies.
> :)

Xenharmonic music in 12-tET, eh? ... try Schoenberg!

... for the record: from what i've been able to piece
together from my research, it was Stravinsky's hearing
of a rehearsal (or maybe it was a performance when the
piece went on tour) of Schoenberg's _Pierrot Lunaire_ in
1912 which finally sent him (Stravinsky) over the
xenharmonic edge -- Stravinsky was currently working on
_The Rite of Spring_.

-monz
http://tonalsoft.com
Tonescape microtonal music software

"Xenharmonic" surely reflects more the style and musical intent of a
composer or age than the actual tuning.

How about ultratonal or even hypertonal?

Oz.

----- Original Message -----
From: "monz" <monz@tonalsoft.com>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 05 Mart 2007 Pazartesi 10:00
Subject: [tuning] Re: New (concise?) definition of "microtonal music" - see
quote - from the prog

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > > [monz wrote:]
> > >
> > > It seems to me like you're contradicting yourself, where
> > > first you say that you don't like the idea of elevating the
> > > 100-cent semitone "to the status of defining two categories
> > > for all music", then you proceed to do exactly that by
> > > defining "microtonal" as anything other than 12-tET!
> >
> > 'Anything other than 12-tET' is different than 'is its
> > smallest step bigger or smaller than 100 cents?'.
> >
> > But you're right, I don't think "microtonal" is a good
> > term. And I don't think I'd ever apply it to my music if
> > I were a musician. I'd probably avoid it like the plague.
> >
> > Xenharmonic is a much better term, because it describes
> > the kind of music I'm interested in, which is music with
> > strange harmonies.
>
>
> I thought that i should say that you and i are much closer
> to agreement than it might seem from this exchange we had.
>
>
> > It's a bit hard to make xenharmonic music in 12-tET,
> > but heck, for many listeners Stravinsky probably qualifies.
> > :)
>
>
> Xenharmonic music in 12-tET, eh? ... try Schoenberg!
>
>
> ... for the record: from what i've been able to piece
> together from my research, it was Stravinsky's hearing
> of a rehearsal (or maybe it was a performance when the
> piece went on tour) of Schoenberg's _Pierrot Lunaire_ in
> 1912 which finally sent him (Stravinsky) over the
> xenharmonic edge -- Stravinsky was currently working on
> _The Rite of Spring_.
>
>
>
> -monz
> http://tonalsoft.com
> Tonescape microtonal music software
>
>
>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Ozan Yarman" <ozanyarman@...> wrote:
>
> "Xenharmonic" surely reflects more the style and musical intent of a
> composer or age than the actual tuning.
>
> How about ultratonal or even hypertonal?

Those are cheesy. Besides, microtonal music is largely
about intent, since there is nowhere a perfect 12-tET. -Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:

> But you're right, I don't think "microtonal" is a good
> term. And I don't think I'd ever apply it to my music if
> I were a musician. I'd probably avoid it like the plague.
>
> Xenharmonic is a much better term, because it describes
> the kind of music I'm interested in, which is music with
> strange harmonies. It's a bit hard to make xenharmonic
> music in 12-tET, but heck, for many listeners Stravinsky
> probably qualifies. :)

I _hate_ the term xentonal and xenharmonic. It makes us look like even
bigger sideshow freaks than we are. Plus, not everything microtonal is
strange or alien, or wants to be strange or alien. Not to say I'm not
into strange music. But, c'mon.

Microtonal is fine, it's not going to go away anytime soon. I like a
definition that includes the fact that anyone interested in exploring
the musical possibilities of pitches outside of the standard 12-tone
gamut is a microtonalist. This should include historical temperaments,
JI, experimental tunings and temperaments, etc. What's the fuss?

The definition certainly has evolved from being about 'microtones',
but I don't see the problem of just keeping the word around. The whole
arguing over trying to nail things down semitone-this, semitone-that
seems like a ridiculous waste of time. We all know it when we see it
anyway...why get this anal retentive about a definition?

Do we really want to rename this group MXM?

-A.

Hi Carl,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:

> microtonal music is largely about intent,
> since there is nowhere a perfect 12-tET.

That is absolutely not true. Perfect 12-tET (in this
context i prefer to call it perfect 12-edo) is all around
us on electronic keyboards and computer music software.

If by "perfect", you're really splitting hairs about
taking really tiny intonational discrepancies into account,
then OK, i guess you're right, because even MIDI-based
electronic instruments are quantized to 768-edo, which
doesn't give absolutely perfect 12-edo.

But the differences are so small that i think it's
OK to call them inconsequential. Anyway, since my ears
have become attuned to microtonal music over the last
2 and a half decades, i now hear what sounds like
12-edo music all around me every day ... and if one
word describes it for me, that word is "cheesy".

-monz
http://tonalsoft.com
Tonescape microtonal music software

----- Original Message -----
From: "monz" <monz@tonalsoft.com>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 05 Mart 2007 Pazartesi 20:02
Subject: [tuning] Re: New (concise?) definition of "microtonal music" - see
quote - from the prog

> Hi Carl,
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote:
>
> > microtonal music is largely about intent,
> > since there is nowhere a perfect 12-tET.
>
>
> That is absolutely not true. Perfect 12-tET (in this
> context i prefer to call it perfect 12-edo) is all around
> us on electronic keyboards and computer music software.
>

Exactly.

> If by "perfect", you're really splitting hairs about
> taking really tiny intonational discrepancies into account,
> then OK, i guess you're right, because even MIDI-based
> electronic instruments are quantized to 768-edo, which
> doesn't give absolutely perfect 12-edo.
>

But it does, for 768 is 12 x 2^6. Where is the intonational discrepancy?

> But the differences are so small that i think it's
> OK to call them inconsequential. Anyway, since my ears
> have become attuned to microtonal music over the last
> 2 and a half decades, i now hear what sounds like
> 12-edo music all around me every day ... and if one
> word describes it for me, that word is "cheesy".
>
>
> -monz
> http://tonalsoft.com
> Tonescape microtonal music software
>
>
>
>
>

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

> If by "perfect", you're really splitting hairs about
> taking really tiny intonational discrepancies into account,
> then OK, i guess you're right, because even MIDI-based
> electronic instruments are quantized to 768-edo, which
> doesn't give absolutely perfect 12-edo.

Last time I checked 768 was divisible by 12. In fact, the whole midi
world is absolutely based on 12-et, in the sense that the 100-cent
semitone is what gets subdivided. Midi files are an extremely common
source of pure 12-et music in the lives of regular-type people, even
including midi sequencers who often don't know enough to know you
should never sequence Palestrina in 12-et.

> > microtonal music is largely about intent,
> > since there is nowhere a perfect 12-tET.
>
> That is absolutely not true. Perfect 12-tET (in this
> context i prefer to call it perfect 12-edo) is all around
> us on electronic keyboards and computer music software.

Tell that to Cameron. The point is that someone can
always claim the accuracy isn't good enough for them.
Therefore accuracy isn't a good thing to base the
definition on. Rather, the important thing musically
is whether any deviations from 12-tET were under the
control of the artist.

-Carl

Hi Oz and Carl,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Ozan Yarman" <ozanyarman@...> wrote:

> > ... even MIDI-based
> > electronic instruments are quantized to 768-edo, which
> > doesn't give absolutely perfect 12-edo.
> >
>
> But it does, for 768 is 12 x 2^6. Where is the
> intonational discrepancy?

D'oh!

Of course i knew that ... all i can say is
oops, my bad.

Thanks for pointing it out.

-monz
http://tonalsoft.com
Tonescape microtonal music software

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

> Last time I checked 768 was divisible by 12. In fact, the
> whole midi world is absolutely based on 12-et, in the sense
> that the 100-cent semitone is what gets subdivided.

Yep, Ozan already pointed that out ... i guess my brain
took a nap for awhile.

> Midi files are an extremely common source of pure 12-et music
> in the lives of regular-type people, even including midi
> sequencers who often don't know enough to know you
> should never sequence Palestrina in 12-et.

That was exactly the point i was making to Carl.
I hear 12-edo music all the time, on TV commercials,
video games, etc. etc., because it's all done with
MIDI, and MIDI is so 12-edo-based that until quite
recently it's been a real pain in the ass to get away
from 12-edo in MIDI.

And you're absolutely correct that a lot of people
working with MIDI don't even know there are intonational
alternatives.

-monz
http://tonalsoft.com
Tonescape microtonal music software

Monz,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@...> wrote:
> And you're absolutely correct that a lot of people
> working with MIDI don't even know there are intonational
> alternatives.

"A lot of people"??? Try "virtually all of the people"!

Cheers,
Jon

> > Midi files are an extremely common source of pure 12-et music
> > in the lives of regular-type people, even including midi
> > sequencers who often don't know enough to know you
> > should never sequence Palestrina in 12-et.
>
> That was exactly the point i was making to Carl.
> I hear 12-edo music all the time, on TV commercials,
> video games, etc. etc., because it's all done with
> MIDI, and MIDI is so 12-edo-based that until quite
> recently it's been a real pain in the ass to get away
> from 12-edo in MIDI.

My point is, the accuracy of MIDI isn't what makes
it 12-tET.

My other point is, MIDI doesn't have accuracy, since
it's up to a synth to make the sound.

-Carl