Re: Digest Number 453

I asked, in a light-hearted response to Paul Erlich's brilliant post:

>> Jis 1 questshun. Duz ah need ta no dis stuff tah sang
>> da blues? :-)
>>
Joe Monzo replied:

> Nope.
>
> But if your goal is to sound 'authentic', you might want
> to take a peek at my high-limit JI interpretation of
> Robert Johnson's vocals at:
> http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/rjohnson/drunken.htm
>
> -monz

Thanks, Monz. Actually, my goal was simply to relieve my own funnybone, but
thanks for sharing.

Your analysis is fascinating (and I recommend it to any who has not
seen/heard it). I'm particularly interested in your "descriptions" of the
"very blue" sevenths and thirds. To my ears, they sound very close to an
aurally tuned blue seven (8:7) and blue third (6:7). Veddy intahrrresting.

Jerry

From DWolf:

> Free style is plain just intonation without a fixed gamut of pitches,
> adaptive tuning is a mixture of just and tempered, with most vertical
> sonorities in JI (some schemes make augmented and diminished chords equal
> tempered) and melodic intervals tempered from just to reduce drift.

I realize that this is simply a definition of terms, and is in fact a very
lucid one, but it prompts to a number of observations that have influenced
my own view of musical tuning. I'm happy to share them but please understand
that I am not pushing any particular "theory" of tuning. This is strictly
empirical and you are free (obviously) to take or leave as you wish.
However, your responses, theories and possible explanations are warmly
welcome.

After more than a half century of listening to singers tune, it is very
clear to me that the human ear has its own "free style" of seeking out the
"most consonant" adjustments of collective pitches, both harmonic and
melodic. The important factor here is that sensitive ensemble singers (both
veteran and novice) seem to agree when a particular chord locks into
consonance. In other words, there seems to be a "correct" tuning for them.

Now here is the kicker. The tuning they agree on does not necessarily
correspond to just intonation, at least not to a simple version of it. Try
this experiment: (I have observed it countless times with countless
singers.) Sustain a low pitch and have a singer (or singers) tune a major
tenth above it. It will likely tune slightly lower than a tempered-tuned
third, presumably at a 4:5 ratio. While this sound continues, introduce the
perfect fifth above the low pitch. You will observe the voice(s) singing the
tenth (third) struggle to maintain that pitch and eventually float it upward
and "lock" at at point ABOVE the tempered-tuned third. This suggests that
singers do NOT tend to sing a 4:5:6 major triad. (Forget the Pythagorean
third. It is way too sharp.) (It also seems unlikely that this "high third"
is a product of culture, since it appears to be arrived at in terms of
consonance, as opposed to learned preference.)

Regarding "adaptive" tuning as described by Mr. Wolf, in my experience it is
the melody that most clearly attempts to escape tempered confines. I tend to
agree with Pablo Casals that chromatic pitches stylistically tend
melodically to "lean toward" their destination (or "sponsoring") pitches.
Lower chromatic neighbors (G# to A) tend to be very much higher than upper
chromatic neighbors (Ab to G) no matter their acoustic or theoretical
context.

Also, diminished triads, contrary to Mr. Wolf's description, in my
experience seem NOT to conform to a tempered configuration. A diminished
triad most commonly contains a functional tritone (presumably the same one
that drove Medieval theorists nuts) that acoustically must make up its mind
regarding its allegiance. It is only the tempered keyboard tritone that is
immune. An acoustic tritone (5:7 or 7:10) appears to lean one way or the
other and tunes accordingly. For example, a B-F tritone (diminished fifth)
relates to a C tonic while a B-E# tritone (augmented fourth) relates to an
F# tonic. It appears to me that this difference is aurally evident in both
melodic and harmonic practice. (If your music teacher told you that the 7th
partial is "unusable," he was very mistaken.)

In my experience, tempered-induced tuning (vocal parts learned from piano
models) are much more likely to "drift" than aural (just?) tuning. Since
tempered-tuned "harmony" never quite locks, the overall pitch (when
unaccompanied) often tends to sag, often exaggerated by less-than-optimal
vocal techniques, and eventually takes a dive. In contrast, choral singers
attuned to flexible "free" tuning tend to maintain a given starting tonality
over considerable time. Seems illogical, I know; but this is what I have
observed.

Finally, vocals accompanied by "decaying" tempered sounds (guitar, piano)
can easily maintain "free" tuning, resulting in very artistic and expressive
performances. In such cases, it would seem that it is the harmonic aspect
that is providing "stability" (albeit instrumental) while the melodic aspect
bends pitches in artistic deviation from an "expected" norm. This seems in
direct opposition to Mr. Wolf's description of "adaptive tuning" in which
the harmony adapts to acoustic values while the melody clings to a learned
(apparently) standard.

From numbers I know very little, but am learning. From sounds I know a lot,
and am also still learning.

Your input is welcome.

Gerald Eskelin