AW.: RE: Re: symmetric chords and ETs

In einer Nachricht vom 12/29/99 12:36:00 AM (MEZ) Mitteleurop�ische Zeit
schreibt PErlich@Acadian-Asset.com:

<< Don't forget Balzano. Like Yasser, he makes an extremely elegant
presentation for his case, which ultimately boils down to number patterns
that, though the author makes them _seem_ musically relevant, it's more an
act of intellectual sleight-of-hand. >>

I really beg to differ on this one. Balzano really trained himself to hear
12tet and 20tet by systematically learning all of the simple divisions (i.e.
12 by 2,3,4,6; 20 by 2,4,5,10) and then the cyclic patterns (i.e. by
relatively prime divisions like 5 or 7 in 12). This is basically the same
mode of hearing as that demanded by Princeton-style 12-tone music, so your
evaluation of whether it is "musically relevant" or not may be essentially an
aesthetic one. I find that with a small bit of practice, one can learn to
recognize basic tri- and hexachords, as well as complete aggregates, _by ear_
in 12tet pieces by Hauer, Webern, Schoenberg, Babbitt. I can't imagine why
it would be otherwise in 20, which shares the same number of divisors as 12.

I readily agree that these modes of listening are harder than others
associated with tonal practice, but that doesn't negate them.