Re: Novaro, Carrillo, Partch

Novaro included some short guitar pieces and exercises in his 2nd book. I sent copies to Wim Hoogewerf several years ago. I can probably scan them and send the files to the Anaphoria site. He was well-known as a teacher, though I believe of only 12-tone music and some of his students may still be alive in Mexico. I have some badly reproduced articles by one of his former students--I'll look up her name and post it when I get home tonight.

Harry Partch told me that he found nothing of musical value in Carrillo's music and expressed some surprise that someone like myself who was influenced and interested in Carrillo's work would also be interested in his. So, I doubt they met or that there was any influence.

In looking in my files last night, I saw in a listing of Carrillo's works, an entry about a SOLFEO in 5th tones (I presume this is merely an exercise or vocalise , not an instrumental piece). I'll post the reference to the lists.

Finally, does anyone have an email address for Arturo Salinas, a Mexican composer who studied with Jean Ettienne Marie and did some tape pieces based on Carrillo's piano in 96 (collage from recorded samples, I believe). I met him at Mills College, where he was a visiting faculty member back in the late 80's, but have lost touch.

--John

I am preparing a trip to Mexico this summer to visit the Carrillo
house which his granchild has turned into a museum and research
centre. I might as well kill two birds with one stone if you guys can
get me in touch anybody related to Novaro and his work
so I can get in touch well in advance.

I would also like to visit the library of the Conservatoire in Mexico
City and some of Carrillo's relatives who I have been in touch with
for a while.

As for the Carrillo and Novaro matter...

Three quotations and some comments:

Jean-Charles François, 1990. 'Fixed Timbre, Dynamic Timbre'
Perspectives of New Music, Vol.28, Nol2 (Summer 1990), pp.112-118

1) "In music of the western tradition, before the electronic era,
timbre was considered secondary, as an ornamentation of pitch"

And so did Novaro who was supported by Carlos Chávez, who wrote
several articles against Carrillo. This might have
turn off Carrillo's ideas of supporting such an innovative young
composer who might have paid the price of this confrontation.
Novaro's lack of formal training might have also been a problem in
the Conservatoire and Carrillo was certainly surprised
he got a Guggeheim grant (which gave him a chance to develop his ideas)

Chávez was the other leading figure of Mexico's contemporary music at
the time, together with Carrillo. That is all it comes
to I would guess, but I should enquire a bit further, specially after
Novaro came back to Mexico completing his Guggeheim
research.

I have been informed by Ernesto Solís Winkler that Carrillo never
tried to monopolize the Sound 13 theories since Carrillo
always trained his students to play in all the microtonal systems and
promoted their musics too! For example the microtonal
works of Rafael Adame, Jerónimo Baqueiro and Elvira Larios were
played in 1924 together with his works for sound 13
which had also just been completed.

This might have all been a politic matter against the Carlos Chávez
group, but nothing to do with music.

As for the music of Julián Carrillo and I would also include here thework of Johnny Reinhard,
the large division of the octave is not a matter of going as far for
the sake of comparison to the
others but for the sake of timbre.

2) A second quotation from the same article:

"Since it can be measured very precisely by ear, pitch is better
equipped in its capacity to articulate a logical language"

and in the case of Novaro, the language of ratios, but in the case of
Carrillo it was more a matter of a language for the perception.

Let me give you a 3rd quotation:

Cornelia Fales 2002. The Paradox of Timbre. Ethnomusicology, Vol.46,
No.1 (Winter, 2002). pp.56-95

3) "...while timbre is a dimension of central importance to
identifying sources. it is also the dimension that is most divergent
from the
sound in the physical world."

Julián Carrillo was indeed aware of the acoustics (physical world),
but a hundred years ahead of the discoveries
to come through electronic music in the area of timbre.

Now you get a continuum keyboard with a piano sound and you can do
even better than Carrillo in his Balbuceos piece (with chromatic
passages
if you can get 192 ET to work or any higher than that (maybe not
enough MIDI notes, right? ... so maybe we cannot even go beyond his
imagination predicted
yet 100 years after)

Carrillo did explore new timbres through his tunings and pitch theory
and there are indeed many other areas of timbre that
he neglected as we all do but the fact that he was ahead of the
electronics in this matter made him unique.

I respect a lot the work of Novaro as far as pitch is concerned, and
I am sure ithat if he had the technology available today he would
have taken care of timbre too!

QUESTION

Did Novaro absorved the ideas of Harry Partch during his visit to the
US and then combined them with Carrillo's ideas to end up with his
theories???

Now let's get things right:

Carrillo considered timbre to be the most important perception and he
indeed succeed in his field with the help of adaptations and new
versions of already
existent instruments. His strong classical training might have kept
his imagination focussed on creating new timbres with the timbres
from the already
existent musical instruments. His talent (had no money!) allowed him
to get a grant
to study in Germany and Belgium where he started to get recognition,
make money and get his pianos patented and manufactured.

Partch considered Acoustics as important as timbre for the
perception, and that is why he brought so many new sonorities through
his instruments, plus and a new language of ratios.
He jumped to a new world of sounding sensations without worrying who
came after , while Carrillo transformed the timbres of the existing
orchestra in order to build a bridge
towards a new world of sonorities. Both were needed and a lot of
composers followed from both ends. There is nothing in between, you
either jump to the other side
of the river and build the bridge from that side or stay on this side
and do it from this end.

It was as hard for Partch to make his new instruments as it was for
Carrillo to train his string players and to adapt and make his
instruments.

Not an expert on Partch and only getting to know about Carrillo so
please feel free to correct me and excuse my late answers due to the
time change.

Novaro. Not much I know but my guess is that he learnt from Harry
Partch about ratios and tried to bring tried to temper them, as most
people are doing
these days in the area of microtonality. So if that is the case
(probably I am wrong though!) then he was ahead of time too!

Tony Salinas

You might also be well advised to visit Monz, Jonathan Glasier, and
Erv Wilson all of whom are microtonal pioneers in Southern California;
whilst you are on the same longitude;-)

On Jan 16, 2008, at 4:08 PM, J.A.Martin Salinas wrote:

> I am preparing a trip to Mexico this summer to visit the Carrillo
> house which his granchild has turned into a museum and research
> centre. I might as well kill two birds with one stone if you guys can
> get me in touch anybody related to Novaro and his work
> so I can get in touch well in advance.
>
> I would also like to visit the library of the Conservatoire in Mexico
> City and some of Carrillo's relatives who I have been in touch with
> for a while.
>
> As for the Carrillo and Novaro matter...
>
> Three quotations and some comments:
>
> Jean-Charles François, 1990. 'Fixed Timbre, Dynamic Timbre'
> Perspectives of New Music, Vol.28, Nol2 (Summer 1990), pp.112-118
>
> 1) "In music of the western tradition, before the electronic era,
> timbre was considered secondary, as an ornamentation of pitch"
>
> And so did Novaro who was supported by Carlos Chávez, who wrote
> several articles against Carrillo. This might have
> turn off Carrillo's ideas of supporting such an innovative young
> composer who might have paid the price of this confrontation.
> Novaro's lack of formal training might have also been a problem in
> the Conservatoire and Carrillo was certainly surprised
> he got a Guggeheim grant (which gave him a chance to develop his
> ideas)
>
> Chávez was the other leading figure of Mexico's contemporary music at
> the time, together with Carrillo. That is all it comes
> to I would guess, but I should enquire a bit further, specially after
> Novaro came back to Mexico completing his Guggeheim
> research.
>
> I have been informed by Ernesto Solís Winkler that Carrillo never
> tried to monopolize the Sound 13 theories since Carrillo
> always trained his students to play in all the microtonal systems and
> promoted their musics too! For example the microtonal
> works of Rafael Adame, Jerónimo Baqueiro and Elvira Larios were
> played in 1924 together with his works for sound 13
> which had also just been completed.
>
> This might have all been a politic matter against the Carlos Chávez
> group, but nothing to do with music.
>
> As for the music of Julián Carrillo and I would also include here the
> work of Johnny Reinhard,
> the large division of the octave is not a matter of going as far for
> the sake of comparison to the
> others but for the sake of timbre.
>
> 2) A second quotation from the same article:
>
> "Since it can be measured very precisely by ear, pitch is better
> equipped in its capacity to articulate a logical language"
>
> and in the case of Novaro, the language of ratios, but in the case of
> Carrillo it was more a matter of a language for the perception.
>
> Let me give you a 3rd quotation:
>
> Cornelia Fales 2002. The Paradox of Timbre. Ethnomusicology, Vol.46,
> No.1 (Winter, 2002). pp.56-95
>
> 3) "...while timbre is a dimension of central importance to
> identifying sources. it is also the dimension that is most divergent
> from the
> sound in the physical world."
>
> Julián Carrillo was indeed aware of the acoustics (physical world),
> but a hundred years ahead of the discoveries
> to come through electronic music in the area of timbre.
>
> Now you get a continuum keyboard with a piano sound and you can do
> even better than Carrillo in his Balbuceos piece (with chromatic
> passages
> if you can get 192 ET to work or any higher than that (maybe not
> enough MIDI notes, right? ... so maybe we cannot even go beyond his
> imagination predicted
> yet 100 years after)
>
> Carrillo did explore new timbres through his tunings and pitch theory
> and there are indeed many other areas of timbre that
> he neglected as we all do but the fact that he was ahead of the
> electronics in this matter made him unique.
>
> I respect a lot the work of Novaro as far as pitch is concerned, and
> I am sure ithat if he had the technology available today he would
> have taken care of timbre too!
>
> QUESTION
>
> Did Novaro absorved the ideas of Harry Partch during his visit to the
> US and then combined them with Carrillo's ideas to end up with his
> theories???
>
> Now let's get things right:
>
> Carrillo considered timbre to be the most important perception and he
> indeed succeed in his field with the help of adaptations and new
> versions of already
> existent instruments. His strong classical training might have kept
> his imagination focussed on creating new timbres with the timbres
> from the already
> existent musical instruments. His talent (had no money!) allowed him
> to get a grant
> to study in Germany and Belgium where he started to get recognition,
> make money and get his pianos patented and manufactured.
>
> Partch considered Acoustics as important as timbre for the
> perception, and that is why he brought so many new sonorities through
> his instruments, plus and a new language of ratios.
> He jumped to a new world of sounding sensations without worrying who
> came after , while Carrillo transformed the timbres of the existing
> orchestra in order to build a bridge
> towards a new world of sonorities. Both were needed and a lot of
> composers followed from both ends. There is nothing in between, you
> either jump to the other side
> of the river and build the bridge from that side or stay on this side
> and do it from this end.
>
> It was as hard for Partch to make his new instruments as it was for
> Carrillo to train his string players and to adapt and make his
> instruments.
>
> Not an expert on Partch and only getting to know about Carrillo so
> please feel free to correct me and excuse my late answers due to the
> time change.
>
> Novaro. Not much I know but my guess is that he learnt from Harry
> Partch about ratios and tried to bring tried to temper them, as most
> people are doing
> these days in the area of microtonality. So if that is the case
> (probably I am wrong though!) then he was ahead of time too!
>
> Tony Salinas
>
>
>

Charles Lucy
lucy@lucytune.com

- Promoting global harmony through LucyTuning -

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

For LucyTuned Lullabies go to:
http://www.lullabies.co.uk

Yeah! I would love to do so!

I keep my doors open to invitations from
other microtonalists:

Monz.- I need a personal email and I promise
I will send emails from this domian so you do not
get junk!
J.Glassier - got an email
Erv Wilson - is he visitable?
John Chalmers - already in touch
and I guess anybody who is free to
go for a drink in Southern California!

Tony Salinas

On 2008/01/17, at 2:17, Charles Lucy wrote:

> You might also be well advised to visit Monz, Jonathan Glasier, and
> Erv Wilson all of whom are microtonal pioneers in Southern
> California; whilst you are on the same longitude;-)
>
>
> On Jan 16, 2008, at 4:08 PM, J.A.Martin Salinas wrote:
>
>> I am preparing a trip to Mexico this summer to visit the Carrillo
>> house which his granchild has turned into a museum and research
>> centre. I might as well kill two birds with one stone if you guys can
>> get me in touch anybody related to Novaro and his work
>> so I can get in touch well in advance.
>>
>> I would also like to visit the library of the Conservatoire in Mexico
>> City and some of Carrillo's relatives who I have been in touch with
>> for a while.
>>
>> As for the Carrillo and Novaro matter...
>>
>> Three quotations and some comments:
>>
>> Jean-Charles François, 1990. 'Fixed Timbre, Dynamic Timbre'
>> Perspectives of New Music, Vol.28, Nol2 (Summer 1990), pp.112-118
>>
>> 1) "In music of the western tradition, before the electronic era,
>> timbre was considered secondary, as an ornamentation of pitch"
>>
>> And so did Novaro who was supported by Carlos Chávez, who wrote
>> several articles against Carrillo. This might have
>> turn off Carrillo's ideas of supporting such an innovative young
>> composer who might have paid the price of this confrontation.
>> Novaro's lack of formal training might have also been a problem in
>> the Conservatoire and Carrillo was certainly surprised
>> he got a Guggeheim grant (which gave him a chance to develop his
>> ideas)
>>
>> Chávez was the other leading figure of Mexico's contemporary music at
>> the time, together with Carrillo. That is all it comes
>> to I would guess, but I should enquire a bit further, specially after
>> Novaro came back to Mexico completing his Guggeheim
>> research.
>>
>> I have been informed by Ernesto Solís Winkler that Carrillo never
>> tried to monopolize the Sound 13 theories since Carrillo
>> always trained his students to play in all the microtonal systems and
>> promoted their musics too! For example the microtonal
>> works of Rafael Adame, Jerónimo Baqueiro and Elvira Larios were
>> played in 1924 together with his works for sound 13
>> which had also just been completed.
>>
>> This might have all been a politic matter against the Carlos Chávez
>> group, but nothing to do with music.
>>
>> As for the music of Julián Carrillo and I would also include here the
>> work of Johnny Reinhard,
>> the large division of the octave is not a matter of going as far for
>> the sake of comparison to the
>> others but for the sake of timbre.
>>
>> 2) A second quotation from the same article:
>>
>> "Since it can be measured very precisely by ear, pitch is better
>> equipped in its capacity to articulate a logical language"
>>
>> and in the case of Novaro, the language of ratios, but in the case of
>> Carrillo it was more a matter of a language for the perception.
>>
>> Let me give you a 3rd quotation:
>>
>> Cornelia Fales 2002. The Paradox of Timbre. Ethnomusicology, Vol.46,
>> No.1 (Winter, 2002). pp.56-95
>>
>> 3) "...while timbre is a dimension of central importance to
>> identifying sources. it is also the dimension that is most divergent
>> from the
>> sound in the physical world."
>>
>> Julián Carrillo was indeed aware of the acoustics (physical world),
>> but a hundred years ahead of the discoveries
>> to come through electronic music in the area of timbre.
>>
>> Now you get a continuum keyboard with a piano sound and you can do
>> even better than Carrillo in his Balbuceos piece (with chromatic
>> passages
>> if you can get 192 ET to work or any higher than that (maybe not
>> enough MIDI notes, right? ... so maybe we cannot even go beyond his
>> imagination predicted
>> yet 100 years after)
>>
>> Carrillo did explore new timbres through his tunings and pitch theory
>> and there are indeed many other areas of timbre that
>> he neglected as we all do but the fact that he was ahead of the
>> electronics in this matter made him unique.
>>
>> I respect a lot the work of Novaro as far as pitch is concerned, and
>> I am sure ithat if he had the technology available today he would
>> have taken care of timbre too!
>>
>> QUESTION
>>
>> Did Novaro absorved the ideas of Harry Partch during his visit to the
>> US and then combined them with Carrillo's ideas to end up with his
>> theories???
>>
>> Now let's get things right:
>>
>> Carrillo considered timbre to be the most important perception and he
>> indeed succeed in his field with the help of adaptations and new
>> versions of already
>> existent instruments. His strong classical training might have kept
>> his imagination focussed on creating new timbres with the timbres
>> from the already
>> existent musical instruments. His talent (had no money!) allowed him
>> to get a grant
>> to study in Germany and Belgium where he started to get recognition,
>> make money and get his pianos patented and manufactured.
>>
>> Partch considered Acoustics as important as timbre for the
>> perception, and that is why he brought so many new sonorities through
>> his instruments, plus and a new language of ratios.
>> He jumped to a new world of sounding sensations without worrying who
>> came after , while Carrillo transformed the timbres of the existing
>> orchestra in order to build a bridge
>> towards a new world of sonorities. Both were needed and a lot of
>> composers followed from both ends. There is nothing in between, you
>> either jump to the other side
>> of the river and build the bridge from that side or stay on this side
>> and do it from this end.
>>
>> It was as hard for Partch to make his new instruments as it was for
>> Carrillo to train his string players and to adapt and make his
>> instruments.
>>
>> Not an expert on Partch and only getting to know about Carrillo so
>> please feel free to correct me and excuse my late answers due to the
>> time change.
>>
>> Novaro. Not much I know but my guess is that he learnt from Harry
>> Partch about ratios and tried to bring tried to temper them, as most
>> people are doing
>> these days in the area of microtonality. So if that is the case
>> (probably I am wrong though!) then he was ahead of time too!
>>
>> Tony Salinas
>>
>>
>
> Charles Lucy
> lucy@lucytune.com
>
> - Promoting global harmony through LucyTuning -
>
> for information on LucyTuning go to:
> http://www.lucytune.com
>
> For LucyTuned Lullabies go to:
> http://www.lullabies.co.uk
>
>
>
>
>

i think the 27 book shows that Novaro work is independent of Partch

> > Novaro. Not much I know but my guess is that he learnt from Harry
> > Partch about ratios and tried to bring tried to temper them, as most
> > people are doing
> > these days in the area of microtonality. So if that is the case
> > (probably I am wrong though!) then he was ahead of time too!

>

Hi Tony and Charles,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Charles Lucy <lucy@...> wrote:
>
> You might also be well advised to visit Monz,
> Jonathan Glasier, and Erv Wilson all of whom are
> microtonal pioneers in Southern California;
> whilst you are on the same longitude;-)

Responding a bit late because i just got home from
a trip to faraway lands.

I can't speak for Erv (in fact, i haven't spoken *to*
him in several years! ... i should remedy that!), but
i can speak for myself and Jonathan when i say yes,
please do visit us in San Diego if you can.

-monz

email: joemonz(AT)yahoo(DOT)com
http://tonalsoft.com/tonescape.aspx
Tonescape microtonal music software