A new piece of music

Hi again.

For various reasons, I have to be brief today. For the time being, I'll tell you that this improvized piece is played in another octave-periodic linear temperament. How it works, I'll say later. Now I'm leaving. Here it is: http://download.yousendit.com/F4D843423726E352

Happy listening.

Petr

I should have said "semi-improvized" because the strings and the cellesta were recorded afterwards, which meant that I had to learn a part of my own music for that time. :-D

Petr

The piece gets better and better toward the end. I played it during my
morning prayer. It was a nice touch. Bravo.

Oz.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Petr Pařízek" <p.parizek@chello.cz>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 21 �ubat 2008 Per�embe 21:29
Subject: [tuning] A new piece of music

> Hi again.
>
> For various reasons, I have to be brief today. For the time being, I'll
tell
> you that this improvized piece is played in another octave-periodic linear
> temperament. How it works, I'll say later. Now I'm leaving. Here it is:
> http://download.yousendit.com/F4D843423726E352
>
> Happy listening.
>
> Petr
>

Nice, Petr!

I agree that the ending gets juicier, with the addition of the string
pad section. I like the quasi-Messiaen flavor evoked with the otonal
11th harmonic-type sonorities.

-AKJ.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Ozan Yarman" <ozanyarman@...> wrote:
>
> The piece gets better and better toward the end. I played it during my
> morning prayer. It was a nice touch. Bravo.
>
> Oz.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Petr Pařízek" <p.parizek@...>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: 21 Þubat 2008 Perþembe 21:29
> Subject: [tuning] A new piece of music
>
>
> > Hi again.
> >
> > For various reasons, I have to be brief today. For the time being,
I'll
> tell
> > you that this improvized piece is played in another
octave-periodic linear
> > temperament. How it works, I'll say later. Now I'm leaving. Here
it is:
> > http://download.yousendit.com/F4D843423726E352
> >
> > Happy listening.
> >
> > Petr
> >
>

Hi tuners,

after some time, here's another piece which I've recorded just a few hours ago and which is not an improv. I think the tuning used is so obvious that I probably even don't have to say what it is -- well, I can, of course, if someone asks; but I'll let you guess first.
Here's the link:
www.sendspace.com/file/cmqhk1

Petr

bravo.

tuning not so obvious to me...consonances are "perfect" but root
relationships aren't obvious...

??

but then, newb.

On May 23, 2009, at 3:39 PM, Petr Pařízek wrote:

>
>
> Hi tuners,
>
> after some time, here's another piece which I've recorded just a few
> hours
> ago and which is not an improv. I think the tuning used is so
> obvious that I
> probably even don't have to say what it is -- well, I can, of
> course, if
> someone asks; but I'll let you guess first.
> Here's the link:
> www.sendspace.com/file/cmqhk1
>
> Petr
>
>
>

Caleb wrote:

> tuning not so obvious to me...consonances are "perfect"
> but root relationships aren't obvious...

Okay, I’ll keep waiting for some time; then I’ll tell you the answer.

Petr

Hi again,

well, I've already waited for quite some time. So now the moment has come when I answer the question what tuning I used in my last piece. The answer is, in fact, that it was the semisixths temperament whose period is a pure octave and whose generator is ~443 cents.

Petr

I'd never had gotten it. I was going to take a wild guess and say 22-et. ~D.

----- Original Message ----- From: Petr Pařízek
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 26 May, 2009 08:00
Subject: Re: [tuning] A new piece of music



Hi again,

well, I've already waited for quite some time. So now the moment has come when I answer the question what tuning I used in my last piece. The answer is, in fact, that it was the semisixths temperament whose period is a pure octave and whose generator is ~443 cents.

Petr

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Petr Pařízek <p.parizek@...> wrote:
>
> Hi again,
>
> well, I've already waited for quite some time. So now the moment has come when I answer the question what tuning I used in my last piece. The answer is, in fact, that it was the semisixths temperament whose period is a pure octave and whose generator is ~443 cents.

Hi Petr,

if you really consider the tuning obvious, I think you are seriously
overestimating the hearing acuity of some of us. :) The beginning sounded a bit like Bohlen-Pierce to me. Maybe it is because both BP and semisixth has an approximate 9:7 as a generator.

Great stuff again by the way, I have a whole folder of your music on my computer!

Kalle Aho

Hi Petr - I've been busy and just listened now.

What is your progression like what the reeds come in?

It sounds like a series of dominant relationships at the end,
- and I've heard something similar in Prent's work too.

Nice piece - and very fluid with the timing.

Chris

2009/5/23 Petr Pařízek <p.parizek@...>

>
>
> Hi tuners,
>
> after some time, here's another piece which I've recorded just a few hours
> ago and which is not an improv. I think the tuning used is so obvious that
> I
> probably even don't have to say what it is -- well, I can, of course, if
> someone asks; but I'll let you guess first.
> Here's the link:
> www.sendspace.com/file/cmqhk1
>
> Petr
>
>
>

Kalle wrote:

> if you really consider the tuning obvious, I think you are seriously
> overestimating the hearing acuity of some of us. :)

The reason why I said that was the frequent use of semisixth progressions together with the only very slightly tempered intervals. I can't think of any other temperament that could offer these possibilities.

> The beginning sounded a bit like Bohlen-Pierce to me. Maybe it is because
> both BP and semisixth has an approximate 9:7 as a generator.

You've hit the nail on the head. The simplest 2D representation of BP I can think of is the one that tempers out 245/243, which is probably the one you were talking of. But the thing is that when you add 126/125 to the commas and use a period of 2/1, you get a 7-limit version of semisixth. Interestingly enough, when I then tried to make the 1:3:5:7 chord as close to JI as I could, the intervals originally resembling octaves got shrunk to something like major 7ths.

> Great stuff again by the way, I have a whole folder of your music on my computer!

Wow, thanks, I'll certainly post a link again when I make something new in the future. BTW: If you haven't heard, quite recently, I made a recording where I tempered the 245/243 not in a 2D way, but rather in a 3D way -- I was not approximating integer ratios but octave-reduced ones, which made that possible. Here's the link: www.sendspace.com/file/zvclla

Petr

Chris wrote:

> What is your progression like what the reeds come in?

Well, I'm not sure how I should notate this. Imagine something like a "B major and G# minor" about a quartertone lower than usual, and then a "C minor and Eb major" at the usual pitch. The thing here is that the major sixth is approximated by two generators, which means that one generator is somewhere between a perfect fourth and a major third.

> It sounds like a series of dominant relationships at the end,

Those would have to be pretty weird dominants then :-) -- no no, my friend, these are the typical progressions of the semisixths temperament.

> - and I've heard something similar in Prent's work too.

Maybe that's because of some of the specific ratios Prent used -- I remember him using things like 13/10 quite frequently some time ago, which may be what you mean.

> Nice piece - and very fluid with the timing.

Thanks.

Petr

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Petr Parízek <p.parizek@...> wrote:
>
> Kalle wrote:
>
> > if you really consider the tuning obvious, I think you are seriously
> > overestimating the hearing acuity of some of us. :)
>
> The reason why I said that was the frequent use of semisixth
progressions together with the only very slightly tempered intervals.
I can't think of any other temperament that could offer these
possibilities.

OK, you surely have advocated Semisixths so I should have guessed
what it was. It's a very good sounding temperament/tuning, at least
in the right hands!

> > The beginning sounded a bit like Bohlen-Pierce to me. Maybe it is
because
> > both BP and semisixth has an approximate 9:7 as a generator.
>
> You've hit the nail on the head. The simplest 2D representation of
BP I can think of is the one that tempers out 245/243, which is
probably the one you were talking of.

Right.

>But the thing is that when you add 126/125 to the commas and use a
period of 2/1, you get a 7-limit version of semisixth. Interestingly
enough, when I then tried to make the 1:3:5:7 chord as close to JI as
I could, the intervals originally resembling octaves got shrunk to
something like major 7ths.
>
> > Great stuff again by the way, I have a whole folder of your music
on my computer!
>
> Wow, thanks, I'll certainly post a link again when I make something
new in the future.

Be sure to do that!

>BTW: If you haven't heard, quite recently, I made a recording where
I tempered the 245/243 not in a 2D way, but rather in a 3D way -- I
was not approximating integer ratios but octave-reduced ones, which
made that possible. Here's the link: www.sendspace.com/file/zvclla

Thanks, I hadn't heard that! Your improvisations are very good,
especially for xenharmonic stuff, not noodly at all. Are you
using normal Halberstadt-style input keyboard when you improvise?
Because you must be quite dexterous player if you do.
Do you edit your improvisations?

Kalle Aho

Kalle wrote:

> Are you
> using normal Halberstadt-style input keyboard when you improvise?

Yes, I haven't tried any other options. And the possibilities I have are rather limited themselves because the Yamaha XG microtuning commands don't allow greater detunings from 12-equal than +/-63 cents.

> Do you edit your improvisations?

Most often I don't. I usually také some time to decide if I want to make a more "composed" piece or just record an improv. But there are obviously some exceptions. For example, when I made the first version of my "Run Down The Whistle" back in December 2007, the first track was completely improvised. Then I had to almost learn my own piece of music just by listening to the recording, measure by measure, to be able to add some chords onto the second track. Nearly half a year later, I made the piece longer and now it's not an improv anymore. BTW: Until three days ago, that was the only non-improvised piece played in semisixths. It has been discussed quite "enthusiastically" here on the TL.

Petr

Petr Pařízek wrote:
> > > Chris wrote:
> >> What is your progression like what the reeds come in?
> > Well, I’m not sure how I should notate this. Imagine something like a „B > major and G# minor“ about a quartertone lower than usual, and then a „C > minor and Eb major“ at the usual pitch. The thing here is that the major > sixth is approximated by two generators, which means that one generator > is somewhere between a perfect fourth and a major third.

Here's a possible notation (the numbers are steps of 46-ET for comparison):

23 A!!/ 40 C/|) 11 F 28 A|) 45 D\! 16 G)!!(
33 B\\! 04 E!!/ 21 G/|) 38 C 09 E|) 26 A\! 43 D)!!(
14 F)||( 31 B!!/ 02 D/|) 19 G 36 B|) 07 E\! 24 A)!!(
41 C)||( 12 F/| 29 A/|) 00 D 17 G\!) 34 B\! 05 E)!!(
22 G)||( 39 C/| 10 F!) 27 A 44 D\!) 15 F||\ 32 B)!!(
03 D)||( 20 G/| 37 C!) 08 E 25 A\!) 42 C||\ 13 F//|
30 A)||( 01 D/| 18 G!) 35 B 06 E\!) 23 G||\

There are enharmonic equivalents not shown in the table: e.g., E|) and B|) can be written F\!) and C\!) The "C minor" and "Eb major" would be C E!!/ G and E!!/ G B!!/ (as you might expect). I guess the "B major and G# minor" are probably B\\! D/|) F)||( and G/|) B\\! D/|) ...

Hi Herman,

before I read carefully your 46-equal representation, I'll at least try to say what I meant using the generator numbers. For semisixths, 7 generators approximate a fifth + 2 octaves and 9 generators approximate a major third + 3 octaves, so a major triad could be written as "0 7 9" and a minor triad as "0 2 9". Now if the starting point is somewhere between Bb and B, then the triads are "0 7 9", "0 2 9", "1 3 10", "1 8 10".

Petr

Lets see if I have a clue... 46 ET is real close to 48 ET so ~ 4 steps to a
12 ET semitone

23 A!!/ 40 C/|) 11 F 28 A|) 45 D\! 16 G)!!(

The "A's" should be an augmented octave?
The F and G forms an augmented octave as well?
My guess is the overall flavor should be 2 nd inversion D min with min 7th.

Is that anywhere near reality?

Thanks,

Chris
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Herman Miller <hmiller@...> wrote:

>
>
> Petr Pařízek wrote:
> >
> >
> > Chris wrote:
> >
> >> What is your progression like what the reeds come in?
> >
> > Well, I'm not sure how I should notate this. Imagine something like a "B
> > major and G# minor" about a quartertone lower than usual, and then a "C
> > minor and Eb major" at the usual pitch. The thing here is that the major
> > sixth is approximated by two generators, which means that one generator
> > is somewhere between a perfect fourth and a major third.
>
> Here's a possible notation (the numbers are steps of 46-ET for comparison):
>
> 23 A!!/ 40 C/|) 11 F 28 A|) 45 D\! 16 G)!!(
> 33 B\\! 04 E!!/ 21 G/|) 38 C 09 E|) 26 A\! 43 D)!!(
> 14 F)||( 31 B!!/ 02 D/|) 19 G 36 B|) 07 E\! 24 A)!!(
> 41 C)||( 12 F/| 29 A/|) 00 D 17 G\!) 34 B\! 05 E)!!(
> 22 G)||( 39 C/| 10 F!) 27 A 44 D\!) 15 F||\ 32 B)!!(
> 03 D)||( 20 G/| 37 C!) 08 E 25 A\!) 42 C||\ 13 F//|
> 30 A)||( 01 D/| 18 G!) 35 B 06 E\!) 23 G||\
>
> There are enharmonic equivalents not shown in the table: e.g., E|) and
> B|) can be written F\!) and C\!) The "C minor" and "Eb major" would be C
> E!!/ G and E!!/ G B!!/ (as you might expect). I guess the "B major and
> G# minor" are probably B\\! D/|) F)||( and G/|) B\\! D/|) ...
>
>
>

Chris wrote:

> Lets see if I have a clue... 46 ET is real close to 48 ET
> so ~ 4 steps to a 12 ET semitone

46-equal is just one of many possibilities how you can get semisixths, similarly as 31-equal is one of many possibilities how you can get meantone. In that particular piece of music, I didn't use any equal temperament approximations because I just chose the 16th root of 60 as the generator, which means that 7 generators are only about 1 cent away from 6/1 and that 9 generators are about 1 cent away from 10/1.

> My guess is the overall flavor should be 2 nd inversion D min with min 7th.
> Is that anywhere near reality?

I'm not very sure what you mean but I don't think so.

Petr

Petr Pařízek wrote:
> 
> > Hi Herman,
> > before I read carefully your 46-equal representation, I'll at least try > to say what I meant using the generator numbers. For semisixths, 7 > generators approximate a fifth + 2 octaves and 9 generators approximate > a major third + 3 octaves, so a major triad could be written as "0 7 9" > and a minor triad as "0 2 9". Now if the starting point is somewhere > between Bb and B, then the triads are "0 7 9", "0 2 9", "1 3 10", "1 8 10".
> > Petr
>

The pitches in the notation table are arranged in generator order, so if your "somewhere between Bb and B" is 3 generators below C, my initial guess was right. Here are the same notes with the generator numbers.

0 B\\! 1 E!!/ 2 G/|) 3 C 4 E|) 5 A\! 6 D)!!(
7 F)||( 8 B!!/ 9 D/|) 10 G 11 B|) 12 E\! 13 A)!!(

This is actually a 7-limit semisixths notation, so it's not immediately obvious that B\\! D/|) is a major third. In a strict 5-limit notation a major third above B\\! would have to be 3 commas below D#, so D/|) is probably as good an approximation as any.