19 in J.I.

hopefully this will be like a softball lob for someone to crack....

this is from a link someone posted days ago

"Russian-born American theorist Joseph Yasser
in his book "A Theory of Evolving Tonality" came up with an original
theory of the evolution of musical temperament by means of adding to
the number of the notes of the current temperament the number of
notes of the previous, outmoded temperament. According to his theory,
tonality evolves from the five-note scale (pentatonicism), through
the seven-note scale (diatonicism) and the twelve-note scale
(chromaticism) towards the 19-tone scale (microtonality), which in
turn will evolve in future centuries towards the 31-tone and the 50-
tone scales, strictly following the mathematical progression."

so my question is, can the 19 be tuned in just intonation, is that
effective, have people done it, is there recordings? or is 19 for now
strictly ET?

well, to be a literal-minded sob, no, by definition, 19 can't be just.

But, referring to Partch's chart, we can see that many of the 19 tones approximate exact ratios, thusly:

0
63.2
126.3 vs 16/15 (111.7)
189.5 vs 10/9 (189.5)
252.6 vs 7/6 (266.9)
315.8 vs. 6/5 (315.6) **
378.9 vs 5/4 (386.3)
442.1 vs 9/7 (435.1)
505.3 vs 4/3 (498)
568.4 vs 7/5 (582.5)
631.6 vs 10/7 (617.5)
694.7 etc.
757.9
821.1
884.2
947.4
1010.5
1073.7
1136.8

On Feb 7, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Ben Miller wrote:

> hopefully this will be like a softball lob for someone to crack....
>
> this is from a link someone posted days ago
>
> "Russian-born American theorist Joseph Yasser
> in his book "A Theory of Evolving Tonality" came up with an original
> theory of the evolution of musical temperament by means of adding to
> the number of the notes of the current temperament the number of
> notes of the previous, outmoded temperament. According to his theory,
> tonality evolves from the five-note scale (pentatonicism), through
> the seven-note scale (diatonicism) and the twelve-note scale
> (chromaticism) towards the 19-tone scale (microtonality), which in
> turn will evolve in future centuries towards the 31-tone and the 50-
> tone scales, strictly following the mathematical progression."
>
>
> so my question is, can the 19 be tuned in just intonation, is that > effective, have people done it, is there recordings? or is 19 for > now strictly ET?
>
>

oops, one fix:

On Feb 7, 2009, at 1:28 PM, caleb morgan wrote:

> well, to be a literal-minded sob, no, by definition, 19 can't be just.
>
> But, referring to Partch's chart, we can see that many of the 19 > tones approximate exact ratios, thusly:
>
> 0
> 63.2
> 126.3 vs 16/15 (111.7)
> 189.5 vs 10/9 (182.4)
> 252.6 vs 7/6 (266.9)
> 315.8 vs. 6/5 (315.6) **
> 378.9 vs 5/4 (386.3)
> 442.1 vs 9/7 (435.1)
> 505.3 vs 4/3 (498)
> 568.4 vs 7/5 (582.5)
> 631.6 vs 10/7 (617.5)
> 694.7 etc.
> 757.9
> 821.1
> 884.2
> 947.4
> 1010.5
> 1073.7
> 1136.8

On Feb 7, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Ben Miller wrote:

> hopefully this will be like a softball lob for someone to crack....
>
> this is from a link someone posted days ago
>
> "Russian-born American theorist Joseph Yasser
> in his book "A Theory of Evolving Tonality" came up with an original
> theory of the evolution of musical temperament by means of adding to
> the number of the notes of the current temperament the number of
> notes of the previous, outmoded temperament. According to his theory,
> tonality evolves from the five-note scale (pentatonicism), through
> the seven-note scale (diatonicism) and the twelve-note scale
> (chromaticism) towards the 19-tone scale (microtonality), which in
> turn will evolve in future centuries towards the 31-tone and the 50-
> tone scales, strictly following the mathematical progression."
>
>
> so my question is, can the 19 be tuned in just intonation, is that > effective, have people done it, is there recordings? or is 19 for > now strictly ET?
>
>

>
> According to his theory,
> tonality evolves from the five-note scale (pentatonicism), through
> the seven-note scale (diatonicism) and the twelve-note scale
> (chromaticism) towards the 19-tone scale (microtonality), which in
> turn will evolve in future centuries towards the 31-tone and the 50-
> tone scales, strictly following the mathematical progression.
>

You can find patterns in everything, doesn't mean the pattern found has any
relevant meaning or will continue.
This is a particulary weak pattern. I don't think it has any meaning for
music.

Marcel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

> > According to his theory,
> > tonality evolves from the five-note scale (pentatonicism),
> > through the seven-note scale (diatonicism) and the twelve-note
> > scale (chromaticism) towards the 19-tone scale (microtonality),
> > which in turn will evolve in future centuries towards the
> > 31-tone and the 50-tone scales, strictly following the
> > mathematical progression.
>
> You can find patterns in everything, doesn't mean the pattern
> found has any relevant meaning or will continue.
> This is a particulary weak pattern. I don't think it has any
> meaning for music.

Actually a recurrence relation like this exists for every
linear temperament, and can be used to find the 2-step scales
for that temperament.

-Carl

On Sat, 2009-02-07 at 12:24 -0500, Ben Miller wrote:

> "Russian-born American theorist Joseph Yasser
> in his book "A Theory of Evolving Tonality" came up with an original
> theory of the evolution of musical temperament by means of adding to
> the number of the notes of the current temperament the number of
> notes of the previous, outmoded temperament. According to his theory,
> tonality evolves from the five-note scale (pentatonicism), through
> the seven-note scale (diatonicism) and the twelve-note scale
> (chromaticism) towards the 19-tone scale (microtonality), which in
> turn will evolve in future centuries towards the 31-tone and the 50-
> tone scales, strictly following the mathematical progression."
>
> so my question is, can the 19 be tuned in just intonation, is that
> effective, have people done it, is there recordings? or is 19 for now
> strictly ET?

As Caleb said earlier, 19 cannot be rendered as a simple JI scale. It's
a meantone temperament, essentially third-comma, so you shift down 81/80
every three fifths, giving you a whole pack of wolves.

However, if you're definition of JI is much less strict, you can
approximate 19 equal using 121/81 (~694.82 cents) as your fifth, and of
course 6/5 as your minor third. In Scala format:

! rat-19et.scl
!
Rational approximation of 19 equal temperament using 121/81 and 6/5
19
!
3025/2916
242/225
135/121
125/108
6/5
605/486
484/375
162/121
25/18
36/25
121/81
375/242
972/605
5/3
216/125
242/135
225/121
5832/3025
2/1

Now as for non-meantone ETs like 41, 53 and 72, those are very easily
approximated in JI.

~D.
>

On Sat, 2009-02-07 at 17:14 -0600, I wrote:

> However, if you're definition of JI is much less strict, you can
> approximate 19 equal using 121/81 (~694.82 cents) as your fifth, and of
> course 6/5 as your minor third. In Scala format:
>
> ! rat-19et.scl
> !
> Rational approximation of 19 equal temperament using 121/81 and 6/5
> 19
> !
> 3025/2916
> 242/225
> 135/121
> 125/108
> 6/5

And it just so happens that 3025/2916 is very close to 28/27, so there's
your full 11-limit representation.

Also, what would you call a temperament where six neutral thirds (11/9)
equals a major thirteenth (12/5)? 38-et is virtually perfect for this,
but 7 and 31 are also in the same class.

~D.

Danny Wier wrote:

> Also, what would you call a temperament where six neutral thirds (11/9)
> equals a major thirteenth (12/5)? 38-et is virtually perfect for this,
> but 7 and 31 are also in the same class.

I don't know of a standard name. I'd probably call it "vicentino" because the 5-limit pattern matches the great man's enharmonic.

There is something called "squares" that makes the same approximation but has twice as many notes. So it uses 14 and 31 instead of 7 and 31. Here's the description my software spits out:

16/45

1201.674 cents period
426.552 cents generator

mapping by period and generator:
<1, 3, 8, 6, 7]
<0, -4, -16, -9, -10]

mapping by steps:
<31, 49, 72, 87, 107]
<14, 22, 32, 39, 48]

scalar complexity: 2.205
RMS weighted error: 1.449 cents/octave
max weighted error: 1.980 cents/octave

Graham

Alright...so here's the question underneath my question. Certainly
different "rules" of harmony apply to 19 uniquely, right?? I've heard
Neil Haverstick do some very different harmonies and I'm familiar with
the work of Easley Blackwood. It is my understanding that different
rules function. So, in turn, how can we use these "rules" and make
music with them in J.I. ? Did I make sense there? Any audio
examples would be the thang thang ..

On 2/7/09, Graham Breed <gbreed@...> wrote:
> Danny Wier wrote:
>
>> Also, what would you call a temperament where six neutral thirds (11/9)
>> equals a major thirteenth (12/5)? 38-et is virtually perfect for this,
>> but 7 and 31 are also in the same class.
>
> I don't know of a standard name. I'd probably call it
> "vicentino" because the 5-limit pattern matches the great
> man's enharmonic.
>
> There is something called "squares" that makes the same
> approximation but has twice as many notes. So it uses 14
> and 31 instead of 7 and 31. Here's the description my
> software spits out:
>
> 16/45
>
> 1201.674 cents period
> 426.552 cents generator
>
> mapping by period and generator:
> <1, 3, 8, 6, 7]
> <0, -4, -16, -9, -10]
>
> mapping by steps:
> <31, 49, 72, 87, 107]
> <14, 22, 32, 39, 48]
>
> scalar complexity: 2.205
> RMS weighted error: 1.449 cents/octave
> max weighted error: 1.980 cents/octave
>
>
> Graham
>

--
Sent from my mobile device

Ben Miller wrote:
> hopefully this will be like a softball lob for someone to crack....
> > this is from a link someone posted days ago
> > "Russian-born American theorist Joseph Yasser
> in his book "A Theory of Evolving Tonality" came up with an original
> theory of the evolution of musical temperament by means of adding to
> the number of the notes of the current temperament the number of
> notes of the previous, outmoded temperament. According to his theory,
> tonality evolves from the five-note scale (pentatonicism), through
> the seven-note scale (diatonicism) and the twelve-note scale
> (chromaticism) towards the 19-tone scale (microtonality), which in
> turn will evolve in future centuries towards the 31-tone and the 50-
> tone scales, strictly following the mathematical progression."
> > > so my question is, can the 19 be tuned in just intonation, is that > effective, have people done it, is there recordings? or is 19 for now > strictly ET?

Are there 19-note JI scales? Yes, Scala has for instance

! pipedum_19.scl
!
81/80, 15625/15552 are homophonic intervals, inverse of Mandelbaum 19
!
25/24
27/25
10/9
144/125
6/5
5/4
162/125
4/3
25/18
36/25
3/2
192/125
8/5
5/3
216/125
9/5
50/27
48/25
2/1

and numerous others. One possibility is a chain of minor thirds.

! chain_of_minor_thirds.scl
!
19-note chain of minor thirds
19
!
648/625
419904/390625
78125/69984
125/108
6/5
3888/3125
2519424/1953125
15625/11664
25/18
36/25
23328/15625
1953125/1259712
3125/1944
5/3
216/125
139968/78125
390625/209952
625/324
2/1

An effective strategy is to look for small intervals that are tempered out in 19-note equal temperament, and use those to make a periodicity block. That's the relevance of the 81/80 and 15625/15552 in the first example.

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

There have been quite a few people to come up with 19 JI schemes. Wilson and i imagine Secor also, it is also a natural subset of 31 so any of those would qualify as options. i have done some also.
for some reason though the fork that leads to both 17 and 22 has been taken more often. i think Yasser might overlooked that people might want to do more than just expand on what already has been done, but also wants to touch on things that really couldn't be touched before. It is really to hard to see where it all might lead.
19 just doesn't sound good IMHO
--

/^_,',',',_ //^ /Kraig Grady_ ^_,',',',_
Mesotonal Music from:
_'''''''_ ^North/Western Hemisphere: North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>

_'''''''_ ^South/Eastern Hemisphere:
Austronesian Outpost of Anaphoria <http://anaphoriasouth.blogspot.com/>

',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',

MHO is in agreement with Kraigs.  19 JI just doesn't cut it, it doesn't sound good.

-- Mark Rankin

--- On Sat, 2/7/09, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com> wrote:

From: Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>
Subject: [tuning] Re:19 in J.I.
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 7, 2009, 9:10 PM

There have been quite a few people to come up with 19 JI schemes. Wilson
and i imagine Secor also, it is also a natural subset of 31 so any of
those would qualify as options. i have done some also.
for some reason though the fork that leads to both 17 and 22 has been
taken more often. i think Yasser might overlooked that people might want
to do more than just expand on what already has been done, but also
wants to touch on things that really couldn't be touched before. It is
really to hard to see where it all might lead.
19 just doesn't sound good IMHO
--

/^_,',',',_ //^ /Kraig Grady_ ^_,',',',_
Mesotonal Music from:
_'''''''_ ^North/Western Hemisphere:
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria. com/>

_'''''''_ ^South/Eastern Hemisphere:
Austronesian Outpost of Anaphoria <http://anaphoriasou th.blogspot. com/>

',',',',',', ',',',',' ,',',',', ',',',',' ,',',',', ',',',',' ,

I think there are a number of very knowledgeable people here, whose opinions I respect.

It occurred to me that, instead of trying to become as expert as some of you, I should just try to compose pieces in various tunings that are well-known.

So far, I've written with 12ET, and extended Just--a Partch-like tuning. (details not so important)

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

So, I'm not trying to compete with Easley Blackwood and compose in every Equal temperament from 13 to 24.

I like tunings with 12 notes or more, ET or not, with some strong consonances to build on, but not always.

I like jazz harmonies, but also all kinds of other sounds--including more dissonant.

I'm not so interested in 24ET or 36ET, although they're valid for others.

I'm not trying to write Renaissance counterpoint, or something.

I don't mind a little drudgery--like pitch-bending each pitch individually in Logic.

I like tunings that allow for moving harmonies, but of course that could be lots of things. Oddly enough, I think this can be done with Extended Just.

What would the must-try tunings I should compose in before I, um, die?

What are top 10 or top 12 tunings that each of you would suggest I check out, and why?--a simple list with a few notes would suffice.

I already know I want to check out 31ET.

What are some others, including things like the Carlos Alpha scale?

No deep justifications needed, I'm just curious what some of the obvious must-tries are.

caleb

On Feb 8, 2009, at 10:55 AM, Mark Rankin wrote:

>
> MHO is in agreement with Kraigs. 19 JI just doesn't cut it, it > doesn't sound good.
> -- Mark Rankin
>
> --- On Sat, 2/7/09, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...> wrote:
> From: Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>
> Subject: [tuning] Re:19 in J.I.
> To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, February 7, 2009, 9:10 PM
>
> There have been quite a few people to come up with 19 JI schemes. > Wilson
> and i imagine Secor also, it is also a natural subset of 31 so any of
> those would qualify as options. i have done some also.
> for some reason though the fork that leads to both 17 and 22 has been
> taken more often. i think Yasser might overlooked that people might > want
> to do more than just expand on what already has been done, but also
> wants to touch on things that really couldn't be touched before. It is
> really to hard to see where it all might lead.
> 19 just doesn't sound good IMHO
> -->
> /^_,',',',_ //^ /Kraig Grady_ ^_,',',',_
> Mesotonal Music from:
> _'''''''_ ^North/Western Hemisphere:
> North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria. com/>
>
> _'''''''_ ^South/Eastern Hemisphere:
> Austronesian Outpost of Anaphoria <http://anaphoriasou th.blogspot. com/> >
>
> ',',',',',', ',',',',' ,',',',', ',',',',' ,',',',', ',',',',' ,
>
>
>
>

Hi Caleb,

don't know about you, but Herman has posted a nice list of 2D temperaments about two years ago and I found many of them quite interesting:
/tuning/topicId_71713.html#71722

Petr

Speaking of that message what is this scale?
The notation I find almost impenetrable.

name: beatles
comma: [19, -9, -2> 524288/492075
mapping: [<1, 1, 5], <0, 2, -9]>
TOP period: 1197.104145
TOP generator: 354.720338
MOS: 1+1, 1+2, 3+1, 3+4, 7+3, 10+7

On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Petr Parízek <p.parizek@...> wrote:

> Hi Caleb,
>
> don't know about you, but Herman has posted a nice list of 2D temperaments
> about two years ago and I found many of them quite interesting:
> /tuning/topicId_71713.html#71722
>
> Petr
>
>
>
>

perhaps one might read yassers book before dismissing it
--

/^_,',',',_ //^ /Kraig Grady_ ^_,',',',_
Mesotonal Music from:
_'''''''_ ^North/Western Hemisphere: North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>

_'''''''_ ^South/Eastern Hemisphere:
Austronesian Outpost of Anaphoria <http://anaphoriasouth.blogspot.com/>

',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',

here are two 19 tone JI scale off the top.
see page 7 and 9
http://anaphoria.com/xen456.PDF
the centaur scale leads also to a good 19 tone

--

/^_,',',',_ //^ /Kraig Grady_ ^_,',',',_
Mesotonal Music from:
_'''''''_ ^North/Western Hemisphere: North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>

_'''''''_ ^South/Eastern Hemisphere:
Austronesian Outpost of Anaphoria <http://anaphoriasouth.blogspot.com/>

',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',

caleb morgan wrote:

> What would the must-try tunings I should compose in before I, um, die?
> > What are top 10 or top 12 tunings that each of you would suggest I check > out, and why?--a simple list with a few notes would suffice.
> > I already know I want to check out 31ET.
> > What are some others, including things like the Carlos Alpha scale?
> > No deep justifications needed, I'm just curious what some of the obvious > must-tries are.
> > caleb

The possibilities are so vast that it's easy to stay lost in indecision trying out and evaluating the different options. But here are a few of my favorites.

! parizek_ji1.scl
!
Petr Parizek, 12-tone septimal tuning, 2002.
12
!
21/20
9/8
7/6
5/4
21/16
7/5
3/2
63/40
5/3
7/4
15/8
2/1

This scale has a nice symmetrical structure when you put it on a harmonic lattice. It's also a Constant Structure and strictly proper, two of the features I look for in scales. More to the point, it just sounds good.

. 5/3 5/4 15/8 .
. 7/6 7/4 21/16 .
. 1/1 3/2 9/8 .
. 7/5 21/20 63/40 .

For a 5-limit 12-note scale, it's hard to beat Ellis's Duodene. Again, this scale has good symmetry, it's a Constant Structure and strictly proper.

! duodene.scl
!
Ellis's Duodene : genus [33355]
12
!
16/15
9/8
6/5
5/4
4/3
45/32
3/2
8/5
5/3
9/5
15/8
2/1

. 5/3 5/4 15/8 45/32 .
. .
. 4/3 1/1 3/2 9/8 .
. .
. 16/15 8/5 6/5 9/5 .

Lots of ET's are worth looking at, but I especially like 15-ET. Instead of trying to hide the syntonic comma, it exaggerates the size of the comma to the point where a comma step can be used as an actual melodic step. Many traditional chord progressions just don't work in 15-ET, but it has its own harmonic system with vanishing intervals such as 128/125, 250/243, 256/243, and 15625/15552.

Then there's the category of "regular temperaments" as described in Paul Erlich's "Middle Path" paper -- a generalization of the sort of system you get in meantone tuning, where two intervals (the octave and the fifth in that case) are regularly repeated to reach all the notes in the tuning. One of these that's consistently been rated highly, yet not much music has been written in it, is orwell, with a generator that splits the perfect fifth into 6 equal parts. One of these days I'd like to get around to writing something in orwell. Since it's a generalized temperament, there's not one specific tuning for it, but here's one possibility.

! top-orwell-22.scl
!
TOP-MAX orwell[22]
22
!
44.37751
113.55807
157.93558
227.11614
271.49365
315.87116
385.05172
429.42923
498.60978
542.98729
612.16785
656.54536
700.92287
770.10343
814.48094
883.66150
928.03901
972.41652
1041.59708
1085.97459
1155.15515
1199.53266

Then there's Erv Wilson's "Golden Horograms of the Scale Tree". The interesting property of these scales is the ratio between the large and small step sizes (the golden ratio, phi). Each large step can be subdivided to produce a new scale (another ring of the horogram) which in turn has the golden ratio between the large and small step sizes. This is an aesthetically pleasing ratio in general and allows any interval to be approximated as closely as you want by increasing the size of the scale. But even better, some of the horograms have good approximations for harmonic intervals in the inner rings without needing to go out too far -- a good example is horogram #9, labeled "Hanson". The "15" ring already has a very satisfying harmonic sound in addition to the desirable melodic properties.

http://www.anaphoria.com/hrgm.PDF

So, in summary, my top 5 picks:

Petr Parizek's 12-tone septimal tuning
Ellis's Duodene
15-ET
TOP orwell[22]
Wilson's horogram #9 ("Hanson")

Ask me some other day and I'll probably come up with an entirely different set.

To Chris,

according to the specified values, the period is an octave and the generator
is something over 350 cents. The mapping says that 2 generators should make
a fifth and that 9 generators should make a "minor sixth plus 2 octaves", if
I can call 32/5 like that. In fact, if you split the32/5 into 9 equal steps,
you get a generator of about 357 cents.
What this particular mapping doesn't say, however, is that this temperament
is very good at approximating 7-limit and 13-limit ratios, which is what I
did about a year ago.
You can hear more here:
www.sendspace.com/file/jmad88

Petr

Herman wrote:

> Petr Parizek, 12-tone septimal tuning, 2002.

This was one of my experiments with an "improper" form of an "Euler-Fokker genus". Instead of using only integers as initial factors, I used "3, 3, 5/3, 7/5". The funny thing here is that soon after I had played in this scale for some time, I very quickly came up with another scale which is called "parizek_7lmtd1.scl" in the archive, and immediately started preferring this one over the older version.

> For a 5-limit 12-note scale, it's hard to beat Ellis's Duodene. Again,

Agreed completely.

From my personal point of view, maybe I would also add semisixth (I'll never forget that moment when I first realized how small detuning from JI I could get there and how well the "semisixth" harmonic progressions could be used), hanson, tetracot, and -- the one in which I'm still going to make music some day -- breed. And perhaps "Wilson_Helix" and some of the Partch diamonds as well. Actually, about 6 years ago, I made some sort of a "reduced" version of the Partch's 13-limit scale and called it "parizek_epi2a.scl". Later, I used it in the final part of my "Linear Journeys", which was one of my first compositions completely avoiding 12-equal.

Petr

I would recommend:

* the 15-limit cross-set in just intonation (33 tones)
* the 11-limit eikosany in just intonation (20 tones)
* pajara temperament (especially its 10-tone scales) in 22-ET
* porcupine temperament in 22-ET (especially 7 and 8 tones)
* magic temperament in 22-ET (especially 7 and 10 tones)
* extended meantone temperament in 31-ET (especially 7 tones)
* extended schismic temperament in 41-ET (especially 7 tones)
* miracle temperament in 72-ET (especially 10 tones)

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
>
> Speaking of that message what is this scale?
> The notation I find almost impenetrable.
>
> name: beatles
> comma: [19, -9, -2> 524288/492075
> mapping: [<1, 1, 5], <0, 2, -9]>
> TOP period: 1197.104145
> TOP generator: 354.720338
> MOS: 1+1, 1+2, 3+1, 3+4, 7+3, 10+7

It's a temperament. Many different scales will support it.
Those scales which are MOS (considered desirable) will have
2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 17... tones/octave as given on the last line
of the entry.

The comma line gives the comma which vanishes in beatles,
both as a rational number (524288/492075) and as a
"monzo" ( [19, -9, -2> ). See
http://tonalsoft.com/enc/m/monzo.aspx
for more info on monzos.

All the things in Herman's list are 5-limit rank-2
temperaments, and all 5-limit rank-2 temperaments can be
uniquely identified by a single comma which they temper
out (things get more complicated above the 5-limit).

The mapping line gives two vals
http://tonalsoft.com/enc/v/val.aspx
one for the period, and one for the generator. They tell
us that to get an octave (2/1) out of beatles, we need to
travel + one period and + 0 generators. In other words,
the period of beatles is an octave. To get a 3/1, we must
travel + one period and + 2 generators. So the generator
must be some kind of half-fifth.

And lo and behold, the next two lines give us the period
and generator in cents. In this case, the TOP period and
generator. (TOP is one way to optimize the tuning of the
period and generator in order to minimize the errors of
all the consonances we are trying to approximate.) And
lo and behold, they are an octave and a half-fifth just
as the mapping told us.

To compare with something more familiar, it may help to
examine the entry for meantone:

name: meantone
comma: [-4, 4, -1> 81/80
mapping: [<1, 2, 4], <0, -1, -4]>
TOP period: 1201.698520
TOP generator: 504.134131
MOS: 1+1, 2+1, 2+3, 5+2, 7+5, 12+7, 19+12

Note the famous sequence of scales, 2 3 5 7 12 19 31...
which are the MOS scales for meantone.

Anything unclear?

-Carl

I have many plans for my future microtonal experiments. Some of them:

- ET closed into octave with 9 to 11 and 13 to 18 notes in the octave, and here especially those near to common 12, like 11 or 13. Here I want to research in which way composer has to change a creative process and force himself to accept new number of notes in the octave where just few notes are missing or are added. It must be totally crazy experience, like if for example some chessmaster tries Japanese chess.

- tunings with unequal steps which will be constructed by some purely "numerological" attitude, like sine pattern: 50-60-70-80-90-80-70-60-50-40-30-20-10-20-30-40... Cents, or with expanding size, like 10-25-45-70-100-135-175-220-270-325-385-450... or opposite, or similar way. Or to combine two rows with different slope for different melodic direction: 5-10-20-35-55-80-110-145-185-230-280-335-395-460-530-605-685-770-860-955-1055-1160, 1110-1050-980-900-810-710-600-480-350-210-60. There are many possibilities which I find interesting.

- tunings closed in intervals different from octave, ET or with unequal steps

- adaptive JI, where all verticals are JI tuned. This seems to me the most promissing field concerning a paradise of consonancy, but with lot of unanswered questions (or answered? has somebody here some deeper experience with it?or can send a link to some documents about it?). Here I want to find a way how to tune dissonant chords which don't follow third structure like harmonic series but different one, and which use up to 12 tones. Another question to solve would be how to deal with horizontal lines, that means melody, or how to tune root notes of chords - to use 12ET or other way? Even when I will limit this shifts from practical reasons to +/- 50 Cents, and use 5 Cents step size, I have 240 possible different tuning steps in octave, which is still too much. Does somebody has different attitude how to work with adaptive JI?

- and why to use only one tuning in one composition? No reason for it. I want to combine different tunings in one work, be it sequentially or simultaneously. It will be interesting to use higher level of musical language and explore relations between different layers with different tunings. For example it will be easy to get very dissonant chords from two or more consonant tunings, and even consonant chords from two or more dissonant tunings.

Now only where to get a time for all this?

Daniel Forro

On 9 Feb 2009, at 1:47 AM, caleb morgan wrote:

>
> I think there are a number of very knowledgeable people here, whose > opinions I respect.
>
> It occurred to me that, instead of trying to become as expert as > some of you, I should just try to compose pieces in various tunings > that are well-known.
>
> So far, I've written with 12ET, and extended Just--a Partch-like > tuning. (details not so important)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microtonal
>
> So, I'm not trying to compete with Easley Blackwood and compose in > every Equal temperament from 13 to 24.
>
> I like tunings with 12 notes or more, ET or not, with some strong > consonances to build on, but not always.
>
> I like jazz harmonies, but also all kinds of other sounds--> including more dissonant.
>
> I'm not so interested in 24ET or 36ET, although they're valid for > others.
>
> I'm not trying to write Renaissance counterpoint, or something.
>
> I don't mind a little drudgery--like pitch-bending each pitch > individually in Logic.
>
> I like tunings that allow for moving harmonies, but of course that > could be lots of things. Oddly enough, I think this can be done > with Extended Just.
>
> What would the must-try tunings I should compose in before I, um, die?
>
> What are top 10 or top 12 tunings that each of you would suggest I > check out, and why?--a simple list with a few notes would suffice.
>
> I already know I want to check out 31ET.
>
> What are some others, including things like the Carlos Alpha scale?
>
> No deep justifications needed, I'm just curious what some of the > obvious must-tries are.
>
> caleb< /div>
>

Purely academic question: what means "sounds good"? Just your subjective opinion or based on objective scientific proof?

I think even "not good sounding" tuning can be used in composition if only composer knows what to do with it. Anything can be used in some context and create new relations on higher level. And tuning is just a small (of course essentially important) part of music. There's melody in wide sense, polyphony or layering in wide sense, harmony, metro-rhythmics, articulation, expression, dynamics, timbre/instrumentation/arrangement, tectonics, static/dynamic, density, thema/motif/object work in wide sense...

From this wide point of view 19 JI is for me just one of million possibilities which I can use, or maybe not :-)

Daniel Forro

On 9 Feb 2009, at 12:55 AM, Mark Rankin wrote:

>
> MHO is in agreement with Kraigs. 19 JI just doesn't cut it, it > doesn't sound good.
> -- Mark Rankin
>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Petr Paøízek <p.parizek@...> wrote:
>
> You can hear more here:
> www.sendspace.com/file/jmad88
>
> Petr
>

Marcel: what do you think of this?

-Carl

> > You can hear more here:
> > www.sendspace.com/file/jmad88
> >
> > Petr
> >
>
> Marcel: what do you think of this?
>
> -Carl
>

Hi Carl :)

Sorry I can't listen to it now, I'm at my girlfriends house and only have
fon-free-internet wireless here which will only allow me to check my gmail
for free and wants to make me pay for the rest of the internet.
Tomorrow I'm home again and I'll check it right away.

Marcel

Hi Caleb,

It occurred to me that, instead of trying to become as expert as some of
> you, I should just try to compose pieces in various tunings that are
> well-known.
>
> So far, I've written with 12ET, and extended Just--a Partch-like tuning.
> (details not so important)
>

Well, I will strongly suggest first trying 5-limit Ji where you try out some
modes, harmony and modulating to a different key and learn to work with
81/80.
I'd suggest this JI scale to start with:

1/1 16/15 10/9 9/8 6/5 5/4 4/3 3/2 8/5 5/3 16/9 9/5 15/8 2/1

Here you'll find the following structure:
1/1 9/8 5/4 4/3 3/2 5/3 15/8 2/1 major
1/1 9/8 6/5 4/3 3/2 8/5 9/5 2/1 minor
4/3 3/2 5/3 16/9 2/1 10/9 5/4 4/3 which is exactly the above major scale
transposed by 4/3 up or 3/2 down.
4/3 3/2 8/5 16/9 2/1 16/15 6/5 4/3 which is exactly the above minor scale
stransposed by 4/3 up or 3/2 down.

Then you can also try out all the different modes of these major and minor
scales and modes of the combinations of these major and minor scales.

You can allready create an enourmous amount of true JI music in this 13 note
scale.
After this you can progress to bigger scales allowing more modulations and
add the 7th harmonic which will allow different modes and blues / jazz,
chromatic music and more complex arab music (you can allready do a lot of
arab scales with the above 5 limit modes)

Marcel

Subjective opinion
 
-- Mark Rankin

--- On Sun, 2/8/09, Daniel Forro <dan.for@...> wrote:

From: Daniel Forro <dan.for@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re:19 in J.I.
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, February 8, 2009, 5:44 PM

Purely academic question: what means "sounds good"? Just your
subjective opinion or based on objective scientific proof?

I think even "not good sounding" tuning can be used in composition if
only composer knows what to do with it. Anything can be used in some
context and create new relations on higher level. And tuning is just
a small (of course essentially important) part of music. There's
melody in wide sense, polyphony or layering in wide sense, harmony,
metro-rhythmics, articulation, expression, dynamics, timbre/
instrumentation/ arrangement, tectonics, static/dynamic, density,
thema/motif/ object work in wide sense...

From this wide point of view 19 JI is for me just one of million
possibilities which I can use, or maybe not :-)

Daniel Forro

On 9 Feb 2009, at 12:55 AM, Mark Rankin wrote:

>
> MHO is in agreement with Kraigs. 19 JI just doesn't cut it, it
> doesn't sound good.
> -- Mark Rankin
>

the centaur tuning is only one note difference a 14/9 instead of a 65/40

! parizek_ji1.
scl
!
Petr Parizek, 12-tone septimal tuning, 2002.
12
!
21/20
9/8
7/6
5/4
21/16
7/5
3/2
63/40
5/3
7/4
15/8
2/1
--

/^_,',',',_ //^ /Kraig Grady_ ^_,',',',_
Mesotonal Music from:
_'''''''_ ^North/Western Hemisphere: North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>

_'''''''_ ^South/Eastern Hemisphere:
Austronesian Outpost of Anaphoria <http://anaphoriasouth.blogspot.com/>

',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...> wrote:
>
> the centaur tuning is only one note difference a 14/9 instead of
> a 65/40

I believe it also has a 4/3 not a 21/16. -Carl

> ! parizek_ji1.
> scl
> !
> Petr Parizek, 12-tone septimal tuning, 2002.
> 12
> !
> 21/20
> 9/8
> 7/6
> 5/4
> 21/16
> 7/5
> 3/2
> 63/40
> 5/3
> 7/4
> 15/8
> 2/1
> --

Thanks, Petra, and I see that the Chris has asked about this notation,
and you have answered.

I'll try to check these scales out after I've written them out in
cents or ratios, which are the notations I understand, at this point.

And, thanks, everybody, so far.

My next post will be just a combination of the replies, most of which
have been exactly what I was looking for.

On Feb 8, 2009, at 12:41 PM, Petr Parízek wrote:

>
> Hi Caleb,
>
> don't know about you, but Herman has posted a nice list of 2D
> temperaments about two years ago and I found many of them quite
> interesting:
> /tuning/topicId_71713.html#71722
>
> Petr
>
>
>
>

Caleb's summary of answers he found particularly responsive and helpful:

Herman Miller's top 5:

Petr Parizek's 12-tone septimal tuning
Ellis's Duodene
15-ET
TOP orwell[22]
Wilson's horogram #9 ("Hanson")

Carl Lumma's picks:

* the 15-limit cross-set in just intonation (33 tones)
* the 11-limit eikosany in just intonation (20 tones)
* pajara temperament (especially its 10-tone scales) in 22-ET
* porcupine temperament in 22-ET (especially 7 and 8 tones)
* magic temperament in 22-ET (especially 7 and 10 tones)
* extended meantone temperament in 31-ET (especially 7 tones)
* extended schismic temperament in 41-ET (especially 7 tones)
* miracle temperament in 72-ET (especially 10 tones)

Daniel Forro has some gleams in his eye for the future:

- ET closed into octave with 9 to 11 and 13 to 18 notes in the
octave, and here especially those near to common 12, like 11 or 13.
....

- tunings with unequal steps which will be constructed by some purely
"numerological" attitude, like sine pattern:
50-60-70-80-90-80-70-60-50-40-30-20-10-20-30-40... Cents, or with
expanding size, like 10-25-45-70-100-135-175-220-270-325-385-450...
or opposite, or similar way. Or to combine two rows with different
slope for different melodic direction:
5-10-20-35-55-80-110-145-185-230-280-335-395-460-530-605-685-770-860-955
-1055-1160, 1110-1050-980-900-810-710-600-480-350-210-60. There are
many possibilities which I find interesting.

- tunings closed in intervals different from octave, ET or with
unequal steps

- adaptive JI, where all verticals are JI tuned. This seems to me the
most promissing field concerning a paradise of consonancy, but with
lot of unanswered questions (or answered? has somebody here some
deeper experience with it?or can send a link to some documents about
it?). Here I want to find a way how to tune dissonant chords which
don't follow third structure like harmonic series but different one,
and which use up to 12 tones. ...

- and why to use only one tuning in one composition? No reason for
it. I want to combine different tunings in one work, be it
sequentially or simultaneously. ...
Now only where to get a time for all this?

Petr explains notation somewhat:

according to the specified values, the period is an octave and the
generator
is something over 350 cents. The mapping says that 2 generators should
make
a fifth and that 9 generators should make a "minor sixth plus 2
octaves", if
I can call 32/5 like that. In fact, if you split the32/5 into 9 equal
steps,
you get a generator of about 357 cents.
What this particular mapping doesn't say, however, is that this
temperament
is very good at approximating 7-limit and 13-limit ratios, which is
what I
did about a year ago.
You can hear more here:
www.sendspace.com/file/jmad88

On Feb 9, 2009, at 5:40 AM, caleb morgan wrote:

>
> Thanks, Petra, and I see that the Chris has asked about this
> notation, and you have answered.
>
> I'll try to check these scales out after I've written them out in
> cents or ratios, which are the notations I understand, at this point.
>
> And, thanks, everybody, so far.
>
> My next post will be just a combination of the replies, most of
> which have been exactly what I was looking for.
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 8, 2009, at 12:41 PM, Petr Parízek wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Caleb,
>>
>> don't know about you, but Herman has posted a nice list of 2D
>> temperaments about two years ago and I found many of them quite
>> interesting:
>> /tuning/topicId_71713.html#71722
>>
>> Petr
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

>
>
> Petr:

> You can hear more here:
> www.sendspace.com/file/jmad88
>
>
> Caleb: Wow. That completely attracts my ear, sounds musical, etc.

>
I can really hear the 13's.
>
> I can really hear the 13's.

>
Utterly cool.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 9, 2009, at 5:40 AM, caleb morgan wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks, Petra, and I see that the Chris has asked about this
>> notation, and you have answered.
>>
>> I'll try to check these scales out after I've written them out in
>> cents or ratios, which are the notations I understand, at this point.
>>
>> And, thanks, everybody, so far.
>>
>> My next post will be just a combination of the replies, most of
>> which have been exactly what I was looking for.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 8, 2009, at 12:41 PM, Petr Parízek wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Caleb,
>>>
>>> don't know about you, but Herman has posted a nice list of 2D
>>> temperaments about two years ago and I found many of them quite
>>> interesting:
>>> /tuning/topicId_71713.html#71722
>>>
>>> Petr
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

To Caleb,

my original idea was something I was calling the "triharmonic scale", which I first thought of more than two years ago. Unfortunately, I was unable to map the 20-tone scale onto my keyboard in an easily "playable" manner because of the Yamaha XG format tuning limitations. That's why I later changed the period from 4/1 to 2/1. You can read more here:
/tuning/topicId_75311.html#75311

Petr

Thanks for the detailed reply. I have to print out this and the original to fully comprehend it. Without your explanation though I was totally lost.

Chris
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: Petr Pařízek <p.parizek@chello.cz>

Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:32:46
To: Tuning List<tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?

To Chris,

according to the specified values, the period is an octave and the generator
is something over 350 cents. The mapping says that 2 generators should make
a fifth and that 9 generators should make a "minor sixth plus 2 octaves", if
I can call 32/5 like that. In fact, if you split the32/5 into 9 equal steps,
you get a generator of about 357 cents.
What this particular mapping doesn't say, however, is that this temperament
is very good at approximating 7-limit and 13-limit ratios, which is what I
did about a year ago.
You can hear more here:
www.sendspace.com/file/jmad88

Petr

------------------------------------

You can configure your subscription by sending an empty email to one
of these addresses (from the address at which you receive the list):
tuning-subscribe@yahoogroups.com - join the tuning group.
tuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com - leave the group.
tuning-nomail@yahoogroups.com - turn off mail from the group.
tuning-digest@yahoogroups.com - set group to send daily digests.
tuning-normal@yahoogroups.com - set group to send individual emails.
tuning-help@yahoogroups.com - receive general help information.
Yahoo! Groups Links

I'm a casual bird-enthusiast, and I've done a lot of science-documentary scoring.

So, I'm always aware of the background sounds in movies. There's even a cliche, in American movies. When they want to suggest rugged grandeur, or wilderness, they will stick in the sound of the red-tailed hawk.

This is one of the most over-used Foley cliches. Foley is the process of putting sound-effects in. (I guess a hawk sound is not literally Foley, but never mind.)

http://filmsound.org/cliche/

It sounds a little like this:

http://www.freeinfosociety.com/media/sounds/355.mp3 (if this doesn't work right away, scroll down to red-tailed hawk)

Now, Petr, here's my (silly) question.

I'm watching this good movie called TranSiberian, and they have the red-tail hawk sound.

They're in Siberia.

Is there anything that sounds like that in Siberia?

The bird that you see looks more like a vulture or an eagle, I think, than a red--tail hawk...

caleb

>
>
>

Ahum ... Excuse me, why do you think I should know more? :-)

Petr

hahaha

I am ignorant American who thinks that greater Russia is the size of
New York, and everyone knows the sound of every bird!

Anyway, we have red-tailed hawks here in suburban Boston, and even the
blue-jays mimic their sound--you hear it all the time, both real and
fake.

On Feb 9, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Petr Parízek wrote:

>
> Ahum ... Excuse me, why do you think I should know more? :-)
>
> Petr
>
>
>
>

On Feb 9, 2009, at 4:03 PM, caleb morgan wrote:
> hahaha
>
> I am ignorant American who thinks that greater Russia is the size
> of New York, and everyone knows the sound of every bird!
>
> Anyway, we have red-tailed hawks here in suburban Boston, and even
> the blue-jays mimic their sound--you hear it all the time, both
> real and fake.

:) Are you thinking Petr is actually Russian?

Best
Torsten

> On Feb 9, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Petr Parízek wrote:
>
>>
>> Ahum ... Excuse me, why do you think I should know more? :-)
>>
>> Petr
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

sorry, yes I was.

silly me.

Petr, what part of the world are you from?

On Feb 9, 2009, at 12:17 PM, Torsten Anders wrote:

>
> On Feb 9, 2009, at 4:03 PM, caleb morgan wrote:
> > hahaha
> >
> > I am ignorant American who thinks that greater Russia is the size
> > of New York, and everyone knows the sound of every bird!
> >
> > Anyway, we have red-tailed hawks here in suburban Boston, and even
> > the blue-jays mimic their sound--you hear it all the time, both
> > real and fake.
>
> :) Are you thinking Petr is actually Russian?
>
> Best
> Torsten
>
> > On Feb 9, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Petr Parízek wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Ahum ... Excuse me, why do you think I should know more? :-)
> >>
> >> Petr
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Hi Carl,

> You can hear more here:
> > www.sendspace.com/file/jmad88
> >
> > Petr
> >
>
> Marcel: what do you think of this?
>
> -Carl

Had a chance to listen to it now and I'm sorry but I say it is and sounds
out of tune.
I do hear it is well made and enjoyed it. And a chord by itself played with
7th 9th 11th 13th harmonic etc does sound consonant by itself.
Much of this music (I think / say) is 5-limit, that is the musical structure
is 5-limit or atleast part of it.
Can't say this of the whole song as some of it sounds like indeed playing
with harmonics and not musical structures like modes, modulations etc.

Marcel

Caleb wrote:

> Petr, what part of the world are you from?

Actually, the Czech Republic (in case you weren't aware, it was part of former "Czechoslovakia" until 1993).

Anyway, your name doesn't seem to sound too "American" or English either, does it? 8-)

Petr

Hi Petr!

I am just back from a delightful week in Prague! What should I say, I was
REALLY impressed: I knew about Prague's renowned classical music tradition,
but I found it one of the most beautiful cities I have ever seen, well
preserved, with an excellent transportation system, very good restaurants,
affordable hotels. No problem with language: people either speak English or
are very good with gestures!
Guess next time will try and visit other parts of the Czech republic as
well.

Yours

Claudio

Bray, Ireland

_____

From: tuning@yahoogroups.com [mailto:tuning@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Petr Parízek
Sent: 09 February 2009 18:44
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [tuning] (off-topic) funny question about hawk foley cliche'
for Petr

Caleb wrote:

> Petr, what part of the world are you from?

Actually, the Czech Republic (in case you weren’t aware, it was part of
former „Czechoslovakia“ until 1993).

Anyway, your name doesn’t seem to sound too „American“ or English either,
does it? 8-)

Petr

Marcel wrote:

> Had a chance to listen to it now and I'm sorry but I say it is and sounds out of tune.

Do you think the same about the Bohlen-Pierce scale?
www.sendspace.com/file/fvc56v

Petr

Hi Petr,

Do you think the same about the Bohlen-Pierce scale?
> www.sendspace.com/file/fvc56v

No, it sounds strange to me and unclear, but I can't object to it in the
same way as the jmad88.

Marcel

Peter, from linguistic point of view such thing like "typical
American name" doesn't exist...

Daniel Forro

On 10 Feb 2009, at 3:43 AM, Petr Parízek wrote:

>
> Caleb wrote:
>
> > Petr, what part of the world are you from?
>
> Actually, the Czech Republic (in case you weren’t aware, it was
> part of former „Czechoslovakia“ until 1993).
>
> Anyway, your name doesn’t seem to sound too „American“ or English
> either, does it? 8-)
>
> Petr

This I would highly recommend. First Prague is too expensive, second people are not so nice (be very careful with taxi drivers) like in the other parts of country (which is normal in every capital), third there's too much tourists, fourth a lot of small street criminality by gipsies and poor immigrants from Balcan countries. Czech republic has many other and more quiet and beautiful places, everywhere - be it historical cities, castles and chatteaus, cathedrals and churches, museums, galleries, nature spots, lakes, mountains, or events - folklore or classical or rock music festivals... On such small country there are 12 UNESCO protected places, even whole cities are under UNESCO protection. Some of them are real jewels. If you need any advice, just ask here.

Daniel Forro

On 10 Feb 2009, at 3:54 AM, Claudio Di Veroli wrote:

>
> Hi Petr!
>
> I am just back from a delightful week in Prague! What should I say, > I was REALLY impressed: I knew about Prague's renowned classical > music tradition, but I found it one of the most beautiful cities I > have ever seen, well preserved, with an excellent transportation > system, very good restaurants, affordable hotels. No problem with > language: people either speak English or are very good with gestures!
> Guess next time will try and visit other parts of the Czech > republic as well.
>
> Yours
>
> Claudio
>
> Bray, Ireland

If we step outside the promotion of myopic self interest long enough.........
It seems that it would be worth while to explore the scales that have passed some real use in the world for some period of time.
These are products that came about as resolving many different ways of thinking about it. something no one person or even one puny list can approach.
From here one might be able to figure out what appeals to one and build from there.

The 22 tone srutis of India would have to be high on the list as it is also the scale that Boomsliter and creel concluded with.
basically where western music comes from
The scales of the arabs and it neighbors-
The scales of indonesian gamelan
the various scales found in Africa especially on ballophones and mbiras, koras as well.
The subharmonics flutes of Peru, and especially the double subharmonic series found in bolivia.
China
Burma
anywhere one has interest. Eastern Europe, Ireland, northern Europe Etc.

As far as speculative tunings. which are useful in how to develop material one likes.

The vast array of Tetrachordal scales found in Chalmers book.
the various diamonds and lamdomas
The tritriadic scales
The Marwa and purvi modulations
The eikosany and it subsets both the 1-11and the 22 tone form with the 15 instead of a 5
Meta meantone and meta mavila
Scales of Mt. meru. at least the first 5 and from there one will now if one wants to proceed deeper.

and i leave the list of temperaments to those who have investigated them more than me.

12
31
53
72 ETs minimum

From this list, one would have a good idea of what one would likes as well as various ways of organizing it.

-- /^_,',',',_ //^ /Kraig Grady_ ^_,',',',_
Mesotonal Music from:
_'''''''_ ^North/Western Hemisphere: North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>

_'''''''_ ^South/Eastern Hemisphere:
Austronesian Outpost of Anaphoria <http://anaphoriasouth.blogspot.com/>

',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',

>
> It seems that it would be worth while to explore the scales that have
> passed some real use in the world for some period of time.
>
> The 22 tone srutis of India would have to be high on the list
>

I agree that the scales devloped over time in the world must be worthwile to
study.
But I don't think one should expect those scales to work well for music
other than the music that has originally been made with them.
Also like with for instance the 22 tone srutis of India it may be nessecary
to study the music theory behind the scales to play those scales properly.

Marcel

And offcourse not to expect those scales to be in tune or correct any more
than 12tet.

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 2:53 AM, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>wrote:

> I agree that the scales devloped over time in the world must be worthwile
> to study.
> But I don't think one should expect those scales to work well for music
> other than the music that has originally been made with them.
> Also like with for instance the 22 tone srutis of India it may be nessecary
> to study the music theory behind the scales to play those scales properly.
>

caleb morgan wrote:

> I'm watching this good movie called TranSiberian, and they have the > red-tail hawk sound.
> > They're in Siberia.
> > Is there anything that sounds like that in Siberia?
> > The bird that you see looks more like a vulture or an eagle, I think, > than a red--tail hawk...
> > caleb

Among many other things, I used to collect bird guides and bird song recordings.

The Rough-legged Buzzard (Rough-legged Hawk in North America), _Buteo lagopus_, ranges across northern Siberia. (Red-tailed Hawk is _Buteo jamaicensis_.) The Common Buzzard (_Buteo buteo_) is found in the southern parts of Siberia. From the sound files I've been able to find, neither of these has that distinctive Red-tailed Hawk sound, although bird sounds do vary by region. Still, I'd say it's a good chance that's a Red-tailed Hawk sound that's out of place in Siberia.

Watch _Raiders of the Lost Ark_ and you'll hear a very clear sound of a Willow Ptarmigan (_Lagopus lagopus_), a bird of the Arctic tundra, in the Central American jungle!

Same hobby here some time ago, still I keep lot of records, but no
more time to study deeply. Inspiration came from Messiaen? Peter Szőke?

http://kalerne.net/joomla/index.php?
option=com_content&task=view&id=144&Itemid=47

http://beemp3.com/index.php?q=birds+music&st=all

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2406070/Martinelli-Zoomusicology

http://72.14.235.132/search?
q=cache:Sw41dG1ZvX4J:www.zoosemiotics.helsinki.fi/mart.pdf+Péter
+Szőke&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=82&client=safari

http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:yxZ4OWDCseEJ:interact.uoregon.edu/
medialit/wfae/library/articles/van_peer_nature_record_1.pdf+Péter
+Szőke&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=99&client=safari

Daniel Forro

On 10 Feb 2009, at 1:13 PM, Herman Miller wrote:

> caleb morgan wrote:
>
> > I'm watching this good movie called TranSiberian, and they have the
> > red-tail hawk sound.
> >
> > They're in Siberia.
> >
> > Is there anything that sounds like that in Siberia?
> >
> > The bird that you see looks more like a vulture or an eagle, I
> think,
> > than a red--tail hawk...
> >
> > caleb
>
> Among many other things, I used to collect bird guides and bird song
> recordings.
>
> The Rough-legged Buzzard (Rough-legged Hawk in North America), _Buteo
> lagopus_, ranges across northern Siberia. (Red-tailed Hawk is _Buteo
> jamaicensis_.) The Common Buzzard (_Buteo buteo_) is found in the
> southern parts of Siberia. From the sound files I've been able to
> find,
> neither of these has that distinctive Red-tailed Hawk sound, although
> bird sounds do vary by region. Still, I'd say it's a good chance
> that's
> a Red-tailed Hawk sound that's out of place in Siberia.
>
> Watch _Raiders of the Lost Ark_ and you'll hear a very clear sound
> of a
> Willow Ptarmigan (_Lagopus lagopus_), a bird of the Arctic tundra, in
> the Central American jungle!
>

I think the problem is reverse. This is the problem you have with scales out of the blue.

The music of India, like all these other cultures music has changed time and time again and people can still use it.
it is far more flexible than any theory which covers little more than the surface.

In just the same way that 12 ET has managed to do all types of things because it can be thought of in many different ways.
true it is good to understand how something is constructed, but people understand things often by ear and this seems often more innovative than what they are told. it is only in retrospect does theory seem to have something to add.

As i mentioned, the researchers Boomliter and Creel investigated what westerners heard when given the option. The 22 shutis.
and proposed the idea of extended referance as a concept. If nothing else it pointed that westerners prefer it.

Some scales can do many different things, some cannot. That is why some scales are better than others.
All scales just aren't created equally. Especially for what one wants to say or hear.

On the other hand i doubt if we have touched upon all the things that are capable of much. So we can't have closed minds.
The very trends of thought and concerns on this list would exclude things that have held people musical expression for centuries.
if "you can't get there from here", then it shows that where we are is way more limited than actual practice.
possibly in the reality it might be far more behind, than in front.

I agree that the scales devloped over time in the world must be worthwile to
study.
But I don't think one should expect those scales to work well for music
other than the music that has originally been made with them.
Also like with for instance the 22 tone srutis of India it may be nessecary
to study the music theory behind the scales to play those scales properly.

Marcel
Back to top <mailbox:///Users/kraiggrady/Library/Thunderbird/Profiles/jmxj84tr.default/Mail/pop.anaphoria.com/Inbox?number=-1569093991#toc> -- /^_,',',',_ //^ /Kraig Grady_ ^_,',',',_
Mesotonal Music from:
_'''''''_ ^North/Western Hemisphere: North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>

_'''''''_ ^South/Eastern Hemisphere:
Austronesian Outpost of Anaphoria <http://anaphoriasouth.blogspot.com/>

',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',

Great answer! Thanks.

I find this kind of error funny, and obvious. What amazes me is that there are more people who can tell gun-shots or car-motor sounds apart. To me, a gun mostly just goes "bang" and one car sounds like another.

caleb

On Feb 9, 2009, at 11:13 PM, Herman Miller wrote:

> caleb morgan wrote:
>
> > I'm watching this good movie called TranSiberian, and they have the
> > red-tail hawk sound.
> >
> > They're in Siberia.
> >
> > Is there anything that sounds like that in Siberia?
> >
> > The bird that you see looks more like a vulture or an eagle, I > think,
> > than a red--tail hawk...
> >
> > caleb
>
> Among many other things, I used to collect bird guides and bird song
> recordings.
>
> The Rough-legged Buzzard (Rough-legged Hawk in North America), _Buteo
> lagopus_, ranges across northern Siberia. (Red-tailed Hawk is _Buteo
> jamaicensis_.) The Common Buzzard (_Buteo buteo_) is found in the
> southern parts of Siberia. From the sound files I've been able to > find,
> neither of these has that distinctive Red-tailed Hawk sound, although
> bird sounds do vary by region. Still, I'd say it's a good chance > that's
> a Red-tailed Hawk sound that's out of place in Siberia.
>
> Watch _Raiders of the Lost Ark_ and you'll hear a very clear sound > of a
> Willow Ptarmigan (_Lagopus lagopus_), a bird of the Arctic tundra, in
> the Central American jungle!
>
>
>

Caleb says:

Dear microencephalites and macrophages,

My little head is already exploding. I've compiled some answers, below.

My next task is to figure out what these scales are. Google is my friend, but so are you.

If I can do the work to understand your answers, below, I will have really learned something.

Ignore what I say next, unless you want to know more about me:

Metaphysics: Paradise is impossible. All is flux. You can't shtup into the same rubber twice. Meat, caffeine, fast women, fast computers are good. No hope for improving the world. The world doesn't want to be improved. I like robots, but I like 'em with some human feel.

Attributes: Fast hands, little black heart, no programming chops of my own.

Background: Jazz and modernist. Experience with 12ET and a 36-note version of the Partch 11-limit scale. After about 5 years with the 11-limit 36-note scale, I experienced a day or two of confusion when it began to seem like my ordinary language, more familiar than 12ET. Lately, I'm just confused in general. Also, discouraged. I go around asking: "Are you my mother?"

Current Gear: Mac OSX, Logic. Microtuning features of Logic not useful for my purposes, especially. Proteus/1, Proteus/3, TG77, Kurzweil K2000R.

Gear Philosophy: Use standard, mainstream, off-the-shelf gear in non-standard ways. Use standard keyboard, overcome difficulties by brute force, practice, and many swear-words.

Composing/improv: After figuring out the basic theory of a scale, and implementing it on computers and keyboards, roll around in it like a dog rolling in muck.

Not especially interested in: notation. solfege. influencing others.

For practical and aesthetic reasons, I'm interested in tunings of 12 notes or more--subsets of which are used at any given moment in the piece. I've found that, for me, things start to get impractical when there's more than around 48 notes per octave. Kraig Grady makes an important point when he talks about tunings having more than one use.

So, thank you all, so far. Again, the next step is to figure out what the *&^* you're talking about. I know ratios and cents, modal theory, 12-tone theory, but you guys are doing some next-level work, here.

caleb

Kraig Grady suggests:

*The 22 tone srutis of India
*scale of Boomsliter and creel
*The scales of the arabs and it neighbors-
*The scales of indonesian gamelan
*the various scales found in Africa especially on ballophones and
mbiras, koras as well.
*The subharmonics flutes of Peru, and especially the double subharmonic
series found in bolivia.
*China
*Burma

*The vast array of Tetrachordal scales found in Chalmers book.
*the various diamonds and lamdomas
*The tritriadic scales
*The Marwa and purvi modulations
*The eikosany and it subsets both the 1-11and the 22 tone form with the
15 instead of a 5
*Meta meantone and meta mavila
*Scales of Mt. meru. at least the first 5 and from there one will now if
one wants to proceed deeper.

list of temperaments:

*12
*31
*53
*72 ETs minimum
=============================

Herman Miller's top 5:

*Petr Parizek's 12-tone septimal tuning
*Ellis's Duodene
*15-ET
*TOP orwell[22]
*Wilson's horogram #9 ("Hanson")

==============================

Carl Lumma's picks:

* the 15-limit cross-set in just intonation (33 tones)
* the 11-limit eikosany in just intonation (20 tones)
* pajara temperament (especially its 10-tone scales) in 22-ET
* porcupine temperament in 22-ET (especially 7 and 8 tones)
* magic temperament in 22-ET (especially 7 and 10 tones)
* extended meantone temperament in 31-ET (especially 7 tones)
* extended schismic temperament in 41-ET (especially 7 tones)
* miracle temperament in 72-ET (especially 10 tones)

==============================

Daniel Forro has some gleams in his eye for the future:

*ET closed into octave with 9 to 11 and 13 to 18 notes in the
octave, and here especially those near to common 12, like 11 or 13.
....

* tunings with unequal steps which will be constructed by some purely
"numerological" attitude, like sine pattern:
50-60-70-80-90-80-70-60-50-40-30-20-10-20-30-40... Cents, or with
expanding size, like 10-25-45-70-100-135-175-220-270-325-385-450...
or opposite, or similar way. Or to combine two rows with different
slope for different melodic direction:
5-10-20-35-55-80-110-145-185-230-280-335-395-460-530-605-685-770-860-955
-1055-1160, 1110-1050-980-900-810-710-600-480-350-210-60. There are
many possibilities which I find interesting.

*tunings closed in intervals different from octave, ET or with
unequal steps

*adaptive JI, where all verticals are JI tuned. This seems to me the
most promissing field concerning a paradise of consonancy, but with
lot of unanswered questions (or answered? has somebody here some
deeper experience with it?or can send a link to some documents about
it?). Here I want to find a way how to tune dissonant chords which
don't follow third structure like harmonic series but different one,
and which use up to 12 tones. ...

>
>
>
>
>
>

caleb morgan wrote:
> Caleb says:
> > Dear microencephalites and macrophages,
> > My little head is already exploding. I've compiled some answers, below.
> > My next task is to figure out what these scales /are/. Google is my friend, but > so are you.

Here are some cents, anyway, with certain theoretically interesting tunings, arbitary tonics, and 1200 cent octaves. 19 notes of meantone:

0.0
42.1
117.5
159.6
235.1
310.5
352.6
428.0
503.5
545.6
621.0
663.1
738.6
814.0
856.1
931.5
1007.0
1049.1
1124.5

I suggested a 29 note mapping for schismatic a long time ago. I may have been relevant to another thread but I missed it.

http://x31eq.com/schv12.htm

Here are 22 notes:

0.0
64.6
89.6
179.1
268.7
293.7
358.3
383.3
472.9
497.9
562.5
587.5
677.1
766.6
791.7
856.2
881.2
970.8
995.8
1060.4
1085.4
1175.0

22 notes of magic:

0.0
26.7 (not in 19 note scale)
85.6
144.6
203.5
262.5
321.4
380.4
407.0 (not in 19 note scale)
466.0
524.9
583.9
642.8
701.8
760.7
787.4 (not in 19 note scale)
846.3
905.3
964.2
1023.2
1082.1
1141.1

21 notes of miracle:

0.0
83.0
116.6
199.6
233.3
316.2
349.9
432.9
466.5
549.5
583.2
666.1
699.8
782.8
816.4
899.4
933.1
1016.0
1049.7
1132.7
1166.3

22 notes of pajara:

0.0
42.3
107.0
149.3
214.1
256.4
321.1
363.4
428.2
470.5
535.2
600.0
642.3
707.0
749.3
814.1
856.4
921.1
963.4
1028.2
1070.5
1135.2

Graham

Hi Kraig,

I think the problem is reverse. This is the problem you have with scales
> out of the blue.
>

I agree that out of the blue scale creation isn't very musical.
And that many people here seem to be doing just that.
Don't think it'll lead to much.

The music of India, like all these other cultures music has changed time
> and time again and people can still use it.
> it is far more flexible than any theory which covers little more than
> the surface.
>

Hmm I'm not sure to which degree I can agree with this.
I don't know indian music theory but I guess it will say which notes to play
after one another and things like that that work together with the scale as
to not produce false sounding notes.

In just the same way that 12 ET has managed to do all types of things
> because it can be thought of in many different ways.
> true it is good to understand how something is constructed, but people
> understand things often by ear and this seems often more innovative
> than what they are told. it is only in retrospect does theory seem to
> have something to add.
>

Yes but 12tet maybe more so than other tunings as it's purposfully a
tempered tuning and has many enharmonically equal notes.

As i mentioned, the researchers Boomliter and Creel investigated what
> westerners heard when given the option. The 22 shutis.
> and proposed the idea of extended referance as a concept. If nothing
> else it pointed that westerners prefer it.
>

I don't know this research but I can only assume they played simple scales
at the proper place of the indian shrutis.
Had they played classical music with many modulations etc for sure nobody
will prefer an indian shruti over 12tet for this as it'll sound horribly out
of tune.
So I don't think this means much except perhaps that people prefer pure
intervals to tempered ones.

Some scales can do many different things, some cannot. That is why some
> scales are better than others.
> All scales just aren't created equally. Especially for what one wants to
> say or hear.
>

Yes agreed.

But, I do think that music has an underlying structure and meaning that
holds for all music, western, arabic, indian etc.Once this structure is
found I beleive we can play all music ever made in tune.
So in this light I do beleive we can think up a scale and theory (not out of
the blue but with the deepest thought) that's better than any scale formed
in centuries in any culture.

Marcel

Oh yeah, and all the world scales were created with practical limitations on
scale size and playability.We have computers and synthesizers now :)

Marcel

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>wrote:

> But, I do think that music has an underlying structure and meaning that
> holds for all music, western, arabic, indian etc.Once this structure is
> found I beleive we can play all music ever made in tune.
> So in this light I do beleive we can think up a scale and theory (not out
> of the blue but with the deepest thought) that's better than any scale
> formed in centuries in any culture.
>

Marcel de Velde wrote:
> Hi Kraig,

> As i mentioned, the researchers Boomliter and Creel investigated what
> westerners heard when given the option. The 22 shutis.
> and proposed the idea of extended referance as a concept. If nothing
> else it pointed that westerners prefer it.
> > > I don't know this research but I can only assume they played simple scales at > the proper place of the indian shrutis.
> Had they played classical music with many modulations etc for sure nobody will > prefer an indian shruti over 12tet for this as it'll sound horribly out of tune.
> So I don't think this means much except perhaps that people prefer pure > intervals to tempered ones. Kraig has it online:

http://www.anaphoria.com/BC2A.PDF

Yes, the basic conclusion is that (in a non-blind trial) musicians preferred pure intervals. Which is notable given that standard practice is to tune to tempered intervals.

They also showed that the pitches tend to jump up the spiral of fifths at the start, and move down to the cadence. Their "extended reference" is a cumbersome way to explain this. You could also talk about a chain of fifths with schismatic approximations which fits the oldest descriptions of the shruti scale.

Graham

Hi Graham,

Kraig has it online:
>
> http://www.anaphoria.com/BC2A.PDF
>
> Yes, the basic conclusion is that (in a non-blind trial)
> musicians preferred pure intervals. Which is notable given
> that standard practice is to tune to tempered intervals.
>
> They also showed that the pitches tend to jump up the spiral
> of fifths at the start, and move down to the cadence. Their
> "extended reference" is a cumbersome way to explain this.
> You could also talk about a chain of fifths with schismatic
> approximations which fits the oldest descriptions of the
> shruti scale.
>
> Graham
>

Thank you very much for the link.

I've only just read part of it but can allready see where they go wrong.
They're taking melodies out of existing music and play it in their
interpretation of classical just intonation.

This is not correct just intonation, and I'm not suprised at all that people
prefer the way a real musician plays it naturally on an instrument that has
free pitch.

The thing is that they approach classical just intonation with a fixed scale
in which they play the melody.
A melody is not based on a fixed scale.
All melody has underlying harmony and this harmony can modulate every which
way which gives melodies that can for instance have 3 consecutive steps of
9/8 etc.
You're not going to find this in a normal classical just intonation scale.
(my guess is they used something like 1/1 16/15 9/8 6/5 5/4 4/3 45/32 3/2
8/5 5/3 9/5 15/8 2/1)
And many many melodies when played correctly will at one point be at for
instance 9/5 and at another point at 16/9.
To think that all melodies can be played with a fixed root and a few nice
looking just intonation intervals relevant to that root is completely false.

To keep a long story short.
They have no idea how to play the melodies in correct just intonation, so
they will inevatibly end up with false melodies relative to the intent of
the melody in the just intonation case)

Marcel

Marcel de Velde wrote:

> I've only just read part of it but can allready see where they go wrong.
> They're taking melodies out of existing music and play it in their > interpretation of classical just intonation.

I thought they got musicians to choose the tuning on a keyboard with a reasonable choice of pitches.

> This is not correct just intonation, and I'm not suprised at all that people > prefer the way a real musician plays it naturally on an instrument that has free > pitch.

And how is that?

> The thing is that they approach classical just intonation with a fixed scale in > which they play the melody.

That's how they define it.

> A melody is not based on a fixed scale.

That's what they conclude.

> All melody has underlying harmony and this harmony can modulate every which way > which gives melodies that can for instance have 3 consecutive steps of 9/8 etc.
> You're not going to find this in a normal classical just intonation scale.
> (my guess is they used something like 1/1 16/15 9/8 6/5 5/4 4/3 45/32 3/2 8/5 > 5/3 9/5 15/8 2/1)
> And many many melodies when played correctly will at one point be at for > instance 9/5 and at another point at 16/9.
> To think that all melodies can be played with a fixed root and a few nice > looking just intonation intervals relevant to that root is completely false.

That's what they conclude.

> To keep a long story short.
> They have no idea how to play the melodies in correct just intonation, so they > will inevatibly end up with false melodies relative to the intent of the melody > in the just intonation case)

Where do you disagree with them?

Graham

Ah sorry I should have read the whole paper before writing.(read it now)I
thought they were going to say musicians prefer their natural just
intonation tuning (which i thought not to be real just intonation) to
classical just intonation tuning or something like that.
But in the end they do try to understand how just intonation really works
(although they don't succeed very well or far in it)
So I take back what I wrote above about the paper.
I like it now for what it is :)

Marcel

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 3:56 AM, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>wrote:

> I've only just read part of it but can allready see where they go wrong.
> They're taking melodies out of existing music and play it in their
> interpretation of classical just intonation.
>
> This is not correct just intonation, and I'm not suprised at all that
> people prefer the way a real musician plays it naturally on an instrument
> that has free pitch.
>
> The thing is that they approach classical just intonation with a fixed
> scale in which they play the melody.
> A melody is not based on a fixed scale.
> All melody has underlying harmony and this harmony can modulate every which
> way which gives melodies that can for instance have 3 consecutive steps of
> 9/8 etc.
> You're not going to find this in a normal classical just intonation scale.
> (my guess is they used something like 1/1 16/15 9/8 6/5 5/4 4/3 45/32 3/2
> 8/5 5/3 9/5 15/8 2/1)
> And many many melodies when played correctly will at one point be at for
> instance 9/5 and at another point at 16/9.
> To think that all melodies can be played with a fixed root and a few nice
> looking just intonation intervals relevant to that root is completely false.
>
> To keep a long story short.
> They have no idea how to play the melodies in correct just intonation, so
> they will inevatibly end up with false melodies relative to the intent of
> the melody in the just intonation case)
>

Hi Graham,

Where do you disagree with them?

Please see my above message :)
Wrote it before I read yours.

Marcel

I doubt about a possibility to create one universal tuning or scale suitable for any music, like TOA - Theory Of All (except ET with a lot of steps in octave, like 240, or 612, and millions of subsets, which is far from practical usability). Even with computers and synthesizers. There are limitations in controllers and thinking.

Daniel Forro

On 11 Feb 2009, at 10:13 AM, Marcel de Velde wrote:

> Oh yeah, and all the world scales were created with practical > limitations on scale size and playability.
>
> We have computers and synthesizers now :)
>
> Marcel
>
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Marcel de Velde > <m.develde@...>wrote:
> But, I do think that music has an underlying structure and meaning > that holds for all music, western, arabic, indian etc.
> Once this structure is found I beleive we can play all music ever > made in tune.
> So in this light I do beleive we can think up a scale and theory > (not out of the blue but with the deepest thought) that's better > than any scale formed in centuries in any culture.

>
> I doubt about a possibility to create one universal tuning or scale
> suitable for any music, like TOA - Theory Of All (except ET with a
> lot of steps in octave, like 240, or 612, and millions of subsets,
> which is far from practical usability). Even with computers and
> synthesizers. There are limitations in controllers and thinking.
>

Not only do I think this is the case.
But I think I'm allmost there :)

The only (logical) catch is offcourse that the more complex thing you wish
to play the bigger the scale gets.
But it doesn't by any mean grow unmanageable. Lots of (if not most)
classical music can be played in 19 JI notes per octave, most other complex
classical music in 28 JI notes per octave. And I've calculated musical
structure / scale through up to 61 notes per octave and I can't imagine a
classical composition has yet been written that is this complex.
About same story for arabic music I'm guessing now. (same scales!)

But if you know what you wish to play you can offcourse adjust the scale to
this, and load/tune only the notes you'll use.

Marcel

---I doubt about a possibility to create one universal tuning or scale
---suitable for any music, like TOA - Theory Of All
   I guess it depends what you mean by "Theory of All".
   To me, a "theory of all" tuning would mean a tuning that could easily represent all the emotions of any set of scales and combine the harmonic ability of 12TET with the melodic vastness of 22 and 24-tone ethnic scales, for example.

   I don't even think you need more than, say 25 notes to do such a thing.  Far as I've seen, the most complex scales really have only up to 24 or so notes usable at once...and up to 9 or so available to make chords from.  I have even heard the human mind can only keep track of 9 distinct colors/notes... easily.

   So making a scale with, say, 9 to 10 notes available for chords (including those mood-equivalent to 24-tone Arab music, for example) and another 10 or so notes available for contrast would likely work.  I mean...melodically how much difference can there be in having 24 or so tones (already quite closely spaced) and hundreds? 

-Michael

--- On Tue, 2/10/09, Daniel Forro <dan.for@...> wrote:

From: Daniel Forro <dan.for@tiscali.cz>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, February 10, 2009, 8:38 PM

I doubt about a possibility to create one universal tuning or scale

suitable for any music, like TOA - Theory Of All (except ET with a

lot of steps in octave, like 240, or 612, and millions of subsets,

which is far from practical usability). Even with computers and

synthesizers. There are limitations in controllers and thinking.

Daniel Forro

On 11 Feb 2009, at 10:13 AM, Marcel de Velde wrote:

> Oh yeah, and all the world scales were created with practical

> limitations on scale size and playability.

>

> We have computers and synthesizers now :)

>

> Marcel

>

> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Marcel de Velde

> <m.develde@gmail. com>wrote:

> But, I do think that music has an underlying structure and meaning

> that holds for all music, western, arabic, indian etc.

> Once this structure is found I beleive we can play all music ever

> made in tune.

> So in this light I do beleive we can think up a scale and theory

> (not out of the blue but with the deepest thought) that's better

> than any scale formed in centuries in any culture.

>
> So making a scale with, say, 9 to 10 notes available for chords
> (including those mood-equivalent to 24-tone Arab music, for example) and
> another 10 or so notes available for contrast would likely work. I
> mean...melodically how much difference can there be in having 24 or so tones
> (already quite closely spaced) and hundreds?

This will not work.
First of all there is a subtle distinction between tones of a melody.
And to play a large range of melodies in JI (true meaning of the word) you
need more than 24 or so tones if you want to play them all from the same
root (which you don't btw :)
53 tet will suit you here although it's not JI so doesn't count.

As for chords. 9 10 notes will not cut it either.

But say you got the above to work.
Then the real trouble starts.
Because you will modulate and change key and all the above may sound out of
tune.

The only way to make it all work is if you truly understand the structure of
music.
And make musical music (like normal people who compose tonal music in 12tet
or arabic music)
Then you can play everythin in tune with a minimal number of tones.
But don't expect every single possible mode/keyscale to be playable from the
same root and other unmusical things like that.
Again in order to solve this you will need to know the musical locations of
each and every mode/keyscale.

Marcel

---  So
making a scale with, say, 9 to 10 notes available for chords (including
---those mood-equivalent to 24-tone Arab music, for example) and another
10 ----or so notes available for contrast would likely work.  I
mean...melodically ---how much difference can there be in having 24 or so
tones (already quite ----closely spaced) and hundreds?

>>>And to play a large range of melodies in JI (true meaning of the word)
you need more than 24 or so tones if you want to play them all from the
same root (which you don't btw :)

    I NEVER said anything about following JI or Adaptive JI (you seem to be talking here about adaptive JI and "matching everything to the root").  In fact I'm utterly convinced the perfect "all-inclusive" scale is NOT a type of JI and that JI would make it very hard to make a consistent amount of good sounding chords available in each key (and not just one key).
   MOS scales, the Golden Ratio Tuning (a special MOS tuning), Lucy-Tuning...are not JI either.  Yet you can achieve an emotional feel and variety of chords/moods in any of the above similar to Western harmony.

>>As for chords. 9 10 notes will not cut it either.
    Why not?  12TET only allows 7 notes available for chords at once.  And, sure, you can modulate, but all that does is switch between one set of 7 and another.  BTW, when I said 9-10 notes I meant how many notes are
available "at once" for a chord.  There could easily be 12-15 combinations/transpositions of those 9-10 notes within the scale.  Do you really need, say, an 11+ note chord?

--But don't expect every single possible mode/keyscale to be playable from the --same root and other unmusical things like that.
--Again in order to solve this you will need to know the musical locations of --each and every mode/keyscale.
   True, but who says
A) that the notes have to be 100% mathematically correct concerning intervals from the root of each note.  How about 95% correct?  Of course, 7-tone scales under 12TET are really just a "90% correct" approximations of perfect JI...but it's close enough to fool most people.
B) That finding musical roots of scales is so hard?  In 12TET (and many other tunings including pelog and non-TET tunings), you can achieve a transposition or "changing of musical roots" just by moving each note in a scale up by one note within a tuning, for example. 

  Relieve those assumptions...and I still don't see why an all-inclusive tuning within 25 tones or less is so unrealistic.

--- On Tue, 2/10/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, February 10, 2009, 10:13 PM

This will not work.First of all there is a subtle distinction between tones of a melody.And to play a large range of melodies in JI (true meaning of the word) you need more than 24 or so tones if you want to play them all from the same root (which you don't btw :)
53 tet will suit you here although it's not JI so doesn't count.
As for chords. 9 10 notes will not cut it either.
But say you got the above to work.
Then the real trouble starts.Because you will modulate and change key and all the above may sound out of tune.
The only way to make it all work is if you truly understand the structure of music.
And make musical music (like normal people who compose tonal music in 12tet or arabic music)Then you can play everythin in tune with a minimal number of tones.But don't expect every single possible mode/keyscale to be playable from the same root and other unmusical things like that.
Again in order to solve this you will need to know the musical locations of each and every mode/keyscale.
Marcel 

>
> Relieve those assumptions...and I still don't see why an all-inclusive
> tuning within 25 tones or less is so unrealistic.

Ah I assumed you ment JI indeed.I was defenately talking JI for TOA.

But if you just mean a scale that will kind of play everything without much
respect for the inner workings.
Depending on how out of tune you will accept you allready have a general
purpose scale with 12tet.

Marcel

boomltiter and creel let people pick. you can't assume they are all wrong.
there is no such thing as correct just intonation.
One thing that is being missed in this is that people will "modulate" even in the simplest of melodies, or hears a modulation " inwardly" when they sing it. They will often choose another note than the one they just used depending on context. When you can think of every possible context, then you can start talking about rules.

As far as coming up with better scales that most of the worlds cultures i can state that the list appears to be off to a pretty dismal start. This is not to say i have not witness a few gems, but these seem to come and go almost unnoticed. Quickly ignored in the political fashion at the moment. these scales refuse to go away despite the fact that little or no music has been done on them.
-- /^_,',',',_ //^ /Kraig Grady_ ^_,',',',_
Mesotonal Music from:
_'''''''_ ^North/Western Hemisphere: North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>

_'''''''_ ^South/Eastern Hemisphere:
Austronesian Outpost of Anaphoria <http://anaphoriasouth.blogspot.com/>

',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',

>
> When you can think of every possible context,
> then you can start talking about rules.
>

Yes I agree. And this is exactly what I'm doing!!
On top of that I can do things like rate the likelyhood of different
contexts etc.

> As far as coming up with better scales that most of the worlds cultures
> i can state that the list appears to be off to a pretty dismal start.
>
I agree aswell and I found it very dissapointing.But what I find even worse
is the scales some people play that gives music that hurts the ear its so
out of tune but because some people think it's right they're no longer
listening and accept this out of tune as "correct" :(
I once said some people here may be better off making music in 12tet but got
flamed because of that (fairly logical)

Marcel

--Depending on how out of tune you will accept you already have a general purpose scale --with 12tet.
   That's true.
   I guess you could say my issues with 12TET are as follows

A)    Not enough melodic variation possible with 7-notes per scale...even little things like the 9-tone blues scale (using quarter tones between major and minor versions of a scale) is a significant improvement.
     And, again, you just can't compare 22-tone Indian melodies to 7-tone Western ones...completely different feel to them.
B)   Difficulty of finding original chord progressions.  The fact most 13th chords can't be inverted, for example...makes it a mathematical game to find good chords that aren't overly simple and/or overly-used/unoriginal. 

     12TET basically seems to call off/"heavily compromise" the possibilities of having many possible chords and many possible combinations of melodic steps in it's 7-tone scales...in order to keep certain more or less 100% pure intervals like the 5th and octave (2/1, in this case).
    Many MOS scales seem (of the 7 note plus type) appear to have many more possible chords that 12TET and that sound maybe 85% pure on average.  The good news is that, between that larger variety of chords...there appear to me more ways to match, say, the Indian 22-note scales played melodically.
  In fact, going back to your point, it may be a good opinion to use a "mid-size" tuning like 53TET to approximate both an MOS scale (for backing chords) and an ethnic scale such as Indian 22-tone played together.
   Do you think something along those lines could work?

-Michael

--- On Tue,
2/10/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, February 10, 2009, 10:56 PM

Relieve those assumptions. ..and I still don't see why an all-inclusive tuning within 25 tones or less is so unrealistic.

Ah I assumed you ment JI indeed.I was defenately talking JI for TOA.
But if you just mean a scale that will kind of play everything without much respect for the inner workings.

Depending on how out of tune you will accept you allready have a general purpose scale with 12tet.
Marcel

Yes, but why to play for example Beethoven, Wagner or Debussy in 19 JI or 28 JI? They composed their music in standard 12ET as far as I'm informed, and didn't complain about it.

Let's play historical music in historical tunings (or their approximation which is used in music practice). New scales or JI will be good for future new works.

Daniel Forro

On 11 Feb 2009, at 1:57 PM, Marcel de Velde wrote:
>
> The only (logical) catch is offcourse that the more complex thing > you wish to play the bigger the scale gets.
> But it doesn't by any mean grow unmanageable. Lots of (if not most) > classical music can be played in 19 JI notes per octave, most other > complex classical music in 28 JI notes per octave. And I've > calculated musical structure / scale through up to 61 notes per > octave and I can't imagine a classical composition has yet been > written that is this complex.
> About same story for arabic music I'm guessing now. (same scales!)
>
> But if you know what you wish to play you can offcourse adjust the > scale to this, and load/tune only the notes you'll use.
>
> Marcel

---But what I find even worse is the scales some people play that
gives music that hurts the ---ear its so out of tune but because some
people think it's right they're no longer listening ---and accept this out
of tune as "correct" :(

     I run up against this all the time.  A lot of scales I design are simply the result of starting with basic mathematical limits and bending them through lots of testing to fit what my ears like.  Almost every scale I post I get questions like "what type of JI is this?" or "where is the perfect 5th?" 
    To me that's not the point...math is more a general guide than the solution.  And I make it a point NOT to let myself say "well it works beautifully in mathematics, therefore it must be in tune and I will listen to it until my mind 'forces' it to feel in tune".  An easy example is when I took the golden ratio scale and learned through hearing that 2/1 is not the octave (1.618033 is) and that only certain notes in the tuning sound consonant when played at the same time AKA in a chord.

---I once said some people here may be better off making music in 12tet but got flamed ---because of that (fairly logical)
     I kind of agree.  Let me put it this way; developing ones own new tunings is a noble cause .  But, at the same time, trying to force oneself to think something is in-tune just because they math behind the scale seems to work well is a recipe for disaster!

   And good litmus test...compose part of a song is 12TET and then part of the song in your own tuning.  If you can make the two parts transition between each other smoothly and without shocking the listener (IE making them feel they just got struck by lightening trying to interpret a drastic change in feel/resolve of the scale) you are on a good track...otherwise, forget it. 

-Michael

--- On Tue, 2/10/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, February 10, 2009, 11:21 PM

When you can think of every possible context,

then you can start talking about rules.

Yes I agree. And this is exactly what I'm doing!!On top of that I can do things like rate the likelyhood of different contexts etc.
 
As far as coming up with better scales that most of the worlds cultures

i can state that the list appears to be off to a pretty dismal start. I agree aswell and I found it very dissapointing.But what I find even worse is the scales some people play that gives music that hurts the ear its so out of tune but because some people think it's right they're no longer listening and accept this out of tune as "correct" :(
I once said some people here may be better off making music in 12tet but got flamed because of that (fairly logical)
Marcel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:
>
> > When you can think of every possible context,
> > then you can start talking about rules.
>
> Yes I agree. And this is exactly what I'm doing!!

Actually what you are doing is being a total nitwit, and the
(until now) general politeness of people here seems to have had
the unfortunate effect of merely stroking your ego.

Write back about correct intonation when you've published
something other than vague assertions or posted some audio
files.

-Carl

agreed, strongly.

On Feb 11, 2009, at 2:58 AM, Daniel Forro wrote:

> Yes, but why to play for example Beethoven, Wagner or Debussy in 19
> JI or 28 JI? They composed their music in standard 12ET as far as I'm
> informed, and didn't complain about it.
>
> Let's play historical music in historical tunings (or their
> approximation which is used in music practice). New scales or JI will
> be good for future new works.
>
> Daniel Forro
>
> On 11 Feb 2009, at 1:57 PM, Marcel de Velde wrote:
> >
> > The only (logical) catch is offcourse that the more complex thing
> > you wish to play the bigger the scale gets.
> > But it doesn't by any mean grow unmanageable. Lots of (if not most)
> > classical music can be played in 19 JI notes per octave, most other
> > complex classical music in 28 JI notes per octave. And I've
> > calculated musical structure / scale through up to 61 notes per
> > octave and I can't imagine a classical composition has yet been
> > written that is this complex.
> > About same story for arabic music I'm guessing now. (same scales!)
> >
> > But if you know what you wish to play you can offcourse adjust the
> > scale to this, and load/tune only the notes you'll use.
> >
> > Marcel
>
>

Humm, Beethoven / Wagner / Debussy may indeed have 'composed in 12ET'
so far as their pianos went (that's assuming Beethoven's piano was in
tune more than once every few months, anyway...) but orchestral or
chamber music is a totally different consideration.

String, woodwind and brass players will always deviate from ET
depending on the acoustic and musical situation - and often in the
direction of harmonically just intervals. ET will do fine for most of
Wagner's complex shifting harmonies, but not for big sustained major
chords. The ends of Walkure and Siegfried-Idyll are inconceivable, at
least musically, without a nearly just major third, as are several
spots in Parsifal. I think it is reasonable to say composers in the
'official' ET era expected musicians to be able to play close to ET
(due to contact with pianos) but also to hear and play consonant
5-limit chords where musically practical and appropriate.

I think more accurate is to say 'they composed for musicians with a
background of ET'.
~~~T~~~

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, caleb morgan <calebmrgn@...> wrote:
>
> agreed, strongly.
>
>
> On Feb 11, 2009, at 2:58 AM, Daniel Forro wrote:
>
> > Yes, but why to play for example Beethoven, Wagner or Debussy in 19
> > JI or 28 JI? They composed their music in standard 12ET as far as I'm
> > informed, and didn't complain about it.
> >
> > Let's play historical music in historical tunings (or their
> > approximation which is used in music practice). New scales or JI will
> > be good for future new works.
> >
> > Daniel Forro
>

Very well put Tom.
Couldn't agree more.

Claudio

http://temper.braybaroque.ie/
_______

Humm, Beethoven / Wagner / Debussy may indeed have 'composed in 12ET'
so far as their pianos went (that's assuming Beethoven's piano was in
tune more than once every few months, anyway...) but orchestral or
chamber music is a totally different consideration.
String, woodwind and brass players will always deviate from ET
depending on the acoustic and musical situation - and often in the
direction of harmonically just intervals . . .
...............

Yes, all that's exactly what I have included in the sentence "or their approximation which is used in music practice".

One thing is imagination of composer, how his/her musical ideas are expressed in the score (enharmonics etc.), which is in the case of 12ET always only simplified generalized "abstract" picture of music. Classical scores are full of small or bigger mistakes against rules of enharmonics, to make it more readable, or just from tradition (like mainly sharps for strings, flats for brass and similar old tricks, or using more simple keys, e.g. not C# major, but Db major, or avoiding double accidentals...).

Another thing is performing practice - conductor and performers have to solve all possible problems hidden in the score, especially in tonal or extended tonal music (chord tuning, modulations - especially enharmonic-chromatic...) and convert score to best possible sounding music.

Daniel Forro

On 12 Feb 2009, at 12:26 AM, Tom Dent wrote:

>
> Humm, Beethoven / Wagner / Debussy may indeed have 'composed in 12ET'
> so far as their pianos went (that's assuming Beethoven's piano was in
> tune more than once every few months, anyway...) but orchestral or
> chamber music is a totally different consideration.
>
> String, woodwind and brass players will always deviate from ET
> depending on the acoustic and musical situation - and often in the
> direction of harmonically just intervals. ET will do fine for most of
> Wagner's complex shifting harmonies, but not for big sustained major
> chords. The ends of Walkure and Siegfried-Idyll are inconceivable, at
> least musically, without a nearly just major third, as are several
> spots in Parsifal. I think it is reasonable to say composers in the
> 'official' ET era expected musicians to be able to play close to ET
> (due to contact with pianos) but also to hear and play consonant
> 5-limit chords where musically practical and appropriate.
>
> I think more accurate is to say 'they composed for musicians with a
> background of ET'.
> ~~~T~~~
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, caleb morgan <calebmrgn@...> wrote:
> >
> > agreed, strongly.
> >
> >
> > On Feb 11, 2009, at 2:58 AM, Daniel Forro wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, but why to play for example Beethoven, Wagner or Debussy > in 19
> > > JI or 28 JI? They composed their music in standard 12ET as far > as I'm
> > > informed, and didn't complain about it.
> > >
> > > Let's play historical music in historical tunings (or their
> > > approximation which is used in music practice). New scales or > JI will
> > > be good for future new works.
> > >
> > > Daniel Forro
> >
>

Oh yes, long links don't work here. Just copy whole link.

DF

On 10 Feb 2009, at 2:24 PM, Daniel Forro wrote:

> Same hobby here some time ago, still I keep lot of records, but no
> more time to study deeply. Inspiration came from Messiaen? Peter
> Szőke?
>
> http://kalerne.net/joomla/index.php?
> option=com_content&task=view&id=144&Itemid=47
>
> http://beemp3.com/index.php?q=birds+music&st=all
>
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/2406070/Martinelli-Zoomusicology
>
> http://72.14.235.132/search?
> q=cache:Sw41dG1ZvX4J:www.zoosemiotics.helsinki.fi/mart.pdf+Péter
> +Szőke&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=82&client=safari
>
> http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:yxZ4OWDCseEJ:interact.uoregon.edu/
> medialit/wfae/library/articles/van_peer_nature_record_1.pdf+Péter
> +Szőke&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=99&client=safari
>
> Daniel Forro
>

Hi Michael,

In fact, going back to your point, it may be a good opinion to use a
> "mid-size" tuning like 53TET to approximate both an MOS scale (for backing
> chords) and an ethnic scale such as Indian 22-tone played together.
> Do you think something along those lines could work?
>

Yes 53tet will work truly perfectly as far as how it sounds.
It's so good you could allmost call it JI. (and I'm not sure if I could hear
the difference)

But it is larger than JI needs to be (unless you're making very complex
music).
And you need a good theory of which notes to play otherwise you're going to
play the wrong notes in 53tet and it'll still sound out of tune.

Marcel

---But it is larger than JI needs to be (unless you're making very ---complex music).  And
you need a good theory of which notes to play ---otherwise you're going to
play the wrong notes in 53tet and it'll still ---sound out of tune.
    Exactly, the theory would become pretty intimidating with so many notes.  Most common musicians would probably just give up. :-(

   Which takes me back to the idea of a 24 to 30 note scale which can summarize the general feel (not necessarily the math/ratios!) of JI and the kind of melodic flexibility of, say, the 22-tone Indian or 24-tone Arab tunings.
******************************************************
   Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise...you get 12TET plus the Arab micro-tones in-between...plus you can play blues with it with the two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in. 
     Add a few extra notes for the notes in the Indian tuning which differ from 24TET and you are getting pretty close to an "everything scale" that matches virtually everything fairly well.
  Again, it's not JI, but probably close enough to
fool most people into thinking it is.
************************************************************************
   But then, of course, to include to the Pelog scales you'd need even more notes and it becomes unrealistic (again, too many tones and too complex a theory is needed).  Unless, one of you has a clever way to fit those in as well to an under 30 note tuning.  Anyhow, there are practical problems IE Pelog only works well with instruments of certain timbre (I believe you need instruments with strong ODD harmonics to sound consonant in Pelog).
************************************************************************

    As for "new music/new scales" (the other side of the discussion as opposed to "emulating past/historical scales)...I think a tuning with at least 9-notes per scale under it that are harmony and chord-capable (can form many consonant chords) is the next step.
    We
already have so many good 7-tone scales (usually as subsets of 12-step tunings) to count...and I think most of us can agree it would be nice to have more melodic flexibility without sacrificing the ability to play chord-based/poly-phonic music.
   
-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 9:54 AM

Hi Michael,
In fact, going back to your point, it may be a good opinion to use a "mid-size" tuning like 53TET to approximate both an MOS scale (for backing chords) and an ethnic scale such as Indian 22-tone played together.

   Do you think something along those lines could work?
Yes 53tet will work truly perfectly as far as how it sounds.It's so good you could allmost call it JI. (and I'm not sure if I could hear the difference)

But it is larger than JI needs to be (unless you're making very complex music).And you need a good theory of which notes to play otherwise you're going to play the wrong notes in 53tet and it'll still sound out of tune.

Marcel

>
> Humm, Beethoven / Wagner / Debussy may indeed have 'composed in 12ET'
> so far as their pianos went (that's assuming Beethoven's piano was in
> tune more than once every few months, anyway...) but orchestral or
> chamber music is a totally different consideration.
>
> String, woodwind and brass players will always deviate from ET
> depending on the acoustic and musical situation - and often in the
> direction of harmonically just intervals. ET will do fine for most of
> Wagner's complex shifting harmonies, but not for big sustained major
> chords. The ends of Walkure and Siegfried-Idyll are inconceivable, at
> least musically, without a nearly just major third, as are several
> spots in Parsifal. I think it is reasonable to say composers in the
> 'official' ET era expected musicians to be able to play close to ET
> (due to contact with pianos) but also to hear and play consonant
> 5-limit chords where musically practical and appropriate.
>
> I think more accurate is to say 'they composed for musicians with a
> background of ET'.
>

Yes agreed too.
Also if beethoven bach wagner etc had a chance to have their pieces played
in just intonation I find it very likely they would have prefered that.

In any case, music has an underlying structure that is JI.
So no matter how it was composed and for which tuning, to play it in JI is
the only correct way as far as the music is concerned.
I would personally allways give preference to JI.
But if someone wishes to hear it in the historical tuning I can understand
that too.

Marcel

>
> Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise...you get 12TET plus
> the Arab micro-tones in-between...plus you can play blues with it with the
> two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in.

I don't like 24tet a lot and it has many problems.
You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
And for arabic music it's not all that great either even though they've used
it a lot themselves.
With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes for
instance which is a pretty important one.
Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or 35/32, up
for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in the
correct way in 24tet.
Many other problems.
I still vote for 53tet if you go ET beyond 12tet.

Marcel

Sorry that should be 27/25 offcourse, not 25/27.

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>wrote:

> Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or 35/32, up
> for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in the
> correct way in 24tet.

Marcel-All people are normal and they all make normal music
--

/^_,',',',_ //^ /Kraig Grady_ ^_,',',',_
Mesotonal Music from:
_'''''''_ ^North/Western Hemisphere: North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>

_'''''''_ ^South/Eastern Hemisphere:
Austronesian Outpost of Anaphoria <http://anaphoriasouth.blogspot.com/>

',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',

>
> Marcel-All people are normal and they all make normal music

hehe :)

--With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes --for instance which is a pretty important one.
    I guess your hearing is a lot more picky than mine...I don't hear a very significant difference between 10/9 or 9/8.
---You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
   And that's such a bad thing?  Many types of mean-tone and 12TET aren't that much different from each other...
--Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or --35/32, up for debate),
  Interesting point I'd have to try them to see how much difference it makes...

   My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician) package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a 100% accurate version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder to learn far as theory.  So the question that's up in the air is...is the slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?
 

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:35 AM

Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise.. .you get 12TET plus the Arab micro-tones in-between.. .plus you can play blues with it with the two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in. 

I don't like 24tet a lot and it has many problems.You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.And for arabic music it's not all that great either even though they've used it a lot themselves.
With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes for instance which is a pretty important one.Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or 35/32, up for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in the correct way in 24tet.
Many other problems.I still vote for 53tet if you go ET beyond 12tet.
Marcel

>
> My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with
> 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician)
> package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a 100% accurate
> version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder
> to learn far as theory. So the question that's up in the air is...is the
> slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?

Ok good point.
Though I do see serious trouble in 24 tet where you make a melody in 24 tet
and then try to harmonise it.
In many cases that won't work in 24tet. Especially in harmonising arabic
like melodies.
You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound
horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies.
And retuning to for instance 53tet won't be easy in many cases.
But in many other cases where you don't do such things it should work.
You can play arabic melodies better than 12tet.
And you can play classical music most of the time equally good as 12tet and
sometimes a little bit better.
But you'll run into trouble when mixing the 2.

Marcel

Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical. Perhaps a better solution is to add select scale degrees to suppliment 12tet instead of trying to make a monolithic "this solves all problems" tuning system. PS my blackberry automatically adds a tag which I could change but I'm too lazy to do so.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@yahoo.com>

Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:17:42
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?

--With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes --for instance which is a pretty important one.
    I guess your hearing is a lot more picky than mine...I don't hear a very significant difference between 10/9 or 9/8.
---You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
   And that's such a bad thing?  Many types of mean-tone and 12TET aren't that much different from each other...
--Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or --35/32, up for debate),
  Interesting point I'd have to try them to see how much difference it makes...

   My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician) package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a 100% accurate version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder to learn far as theory.  So the question that's up in the air is...is the slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?
 

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:35 AM

Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise.. .you get 12TET plus the Arab micro-tones in-between.. .plus you can play blues with it with the two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in. 

I don't like 24tet a lot and it has many problems.You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.And for arabic music it's not all that great either even though they've used it a lot themselves.
With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes for instance which is a pretty important one.Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or 35/32, up for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in the correct way in 24tet.
Many other problems.I still vote for 53tet if you go ET beyond 12tet.
Marcel

---You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off
   Hmm...but how's that possible when 24TET IS a quarter note scale?!

   Just move up or down one key on 24TET to move up/down that quarter-note-off error you are having problems with.  Who says you only can use 12 transpositions of the Western 7-note scale for chords, when 24TET has 24 transpositions available each 1/4 note apart. :-)
-----------------------------------
   I could imagine someone being an 8th note off (48TET accuracy)...but not a quarter note off.  And then again the question seems to become, how many people would be that sensitive to an 8th note or so difference in tuning (enough to make it worth slightly more than doubling the number of notes in the scale to 53TET)?

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:25 PM

My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician) package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a
100% accurate version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder to learn far as theory.  So the question that's up in the air is...is the slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?

Ok good point.Though I do see serious trouble in 24 tet where you make a melody in 24 tet and then try to harmonise it.In many cases that won't work in 24tet. Especially in harmonising arabic like melodies.
You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies.And retuning to for instance 53tet won't be easy in many cases.
But in many other cases where you don't do such things it should work.You can play arabic melodies better than 12tet.And you can play classical music most of the time equally good as 12tet and sometimes a little bit better.
But you'll run into trouble when mixing the 2.
Marcel

--Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical.

   Why is 24TET hard to make musical? 12TET is a simple subset of 24TET.  Just use scales under 12TET within 24TET and you get exactly the same thing (only you can get 24 possible keys instead of 7 for, say, the major scale). :-)

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@... <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:

From: chrisvaisvil@... <chrisvaisvil@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:33 PM

Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical. Perhaps a better solution is to add select scale degrees to suppliment 12tet instead of trying to make a monolithic "this solves all problems" tuning system. PS my blackberry automatically adds a tag which I could change but I'm too lazy to do so. Sent via BlackBerry from T-MobileFrom: Michael Sheiman
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
To: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
--With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes --for instance which is a pretty important one.
    I guess your hearing is a lot more picky than mine...I don't hear a very significant difference between 10/9 or 9/8.
---You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
   And that's such a bad thing?  Many types of mean-tone and 12TET aren't that much different from each other...
--Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or --35/32, up for debate),
  Interesting point I'd have to try them to see how much difference it makes...

   My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician) package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a 100% accurate version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder to learn far as theory.  So the question that's up in the air is...is the slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?
 

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:35 AM

Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise.. .you get 12TET plus the Arab micro-tones in-between.. .plus you can play blues with it with the two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in. 
I don't like 24tet a lot and it has many problems.You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.And for arabic music it's not all that great either even though they've used it a lot themselves.With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes for instance which is a pretty important one.Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or 35/32, up for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in the correct way in 24tet.Many other problems.I still vote for 53tet if you go ET beyond 12tet.
Marcel

Have you tried it? I have tried both. 36 imho is much superior to 24. 24 is really hard to use harmonically.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@yahoo.com>

Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:52:21
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?

--Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical.

   Why is 24TET hard to make musical? 12TET is a simple subset of 24TET.  Just use scales under 12TET within 24TET and you get exactly the same thing (only you can get 24 possible keys instead of 7 for, say, the major scale). :-)

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@gmail.com> wrote:

From: chrisvaisvil@gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:33 PM

Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical. Perhaps a better solution is to add select scale degrees to suppliment 12tet instead of trying to make a monolithic "this solves all problems" tuning system. PS my blackberry automatically adds a tag which I could change but I'm too lazy to do so. Sent via BlackBerry from T-MobileFrom: Michael Sheiman
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
To: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
--With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes --for instance which is a pretty important one.
    I guess your hearing is a lot more picky than mine...I don't hear a very significant difference between 10/9 or 9/8.
---You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
   And that's such a bad thing?  Many types of mean-tone and 12TET aren't that much different from each other...
--Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or --35/32, up for debate),
  Interesting point I'd have to try them to see how much difference it makes...

   My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician) package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a 100% accurate version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder to learn far as theory.  So the question that's up in the air is...is the slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?
 

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:35 AM

Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise.. .you get 12TET plus the Arab micro-tones in-between.. .plus you can play blues with it with the two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in. 
I don't like 24tet a lot and it has many problems.You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.And for arabic music it's not all that great either even though they've used it a lot themselves.With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes for instance which is a pretty important one.Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or 35/32, up for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in the correct way in 24tet.Many other problems.I still vote for 53tet if you go ET beyond 12tet.
Marcel

Yes I have.
I think the difference in our approaches (in general) is you will use an entire tuning as your scale while I break part of tunings into scales and only then compose (within those simpler scales).

    Every single note in 12TET exists in 24TET.  True, the fingering of them on a 12TET piano makes it confusing, but they are all there.  Thus, mathematically it is impossible to say 12TET can do anything 24TET can't do...because, again, 24TET includes the exact same notes as 12TET, plus 12TET transposed up by 1/4 tone for the other 12 notes.

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@... <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
From: chrisvaisvil@... <chrisvaisvil@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 1:00 PM

Have you tried it? I have tried both. 36 imho is much superior to 24. 24 is really hard to use harmonically. Sent via BlackBerry from T-MobileFrom: Michael Sheiman
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:52:21 -0800 (PST)
To: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
--Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical.

   Why is 24TET hard to make musical? 12TET is a simple subset of 24TET.  Just use scales under 12TET within 24TET and you get exactly the same thing (only you can get 24 possible keys instead of 7 for, say, the major scale). :-)

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:33 PM

Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical. Perhaps a better solution is to add select scale degrees to suppliment 12tet instead of trying to make a monolithic "this solves all problems" tuning system. PS my blackberry automatically adds a tag which I could change but I'm too lazy to do so. Sent via BlackBerry from T-MobileFrom: Michael Sheiman
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
To: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
--With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes --for instance which is a pretty important one.
    I guess your hearing is a lot more picky than mine...I don't hear a very significant difference between 10/9 or 9/8.
---You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
   And that's such a bad thing?  Many types of mean-tone and 12TET aren't that much different from each other...
--Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or --35/32, up for debate),
  Interesting point I'd have to try them to see how much difference it makes...

   My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician) package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a 100% accurate version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder to learn far as theory.  So the question that's up in the air is...is the slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?
 

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:35 AM

Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise.. .you get 12TET plus the Arab micro-tones in-between.. .plus you can play blues with it with the two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in. 
I don't like 24tet a lot and it has many problems.You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.And for arabic music it's not all that great either even though they've used it a lot themselves.With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes for instance which is a pretty important one.Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or 35/32, up for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in the correct way in 24tet.Many other problems.I still vote for 53tet if you go ET beyond 12tet.
Marcel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, chrisvaisvil@... wrote:
>
> Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical.

24 is a decent 2:3:11:17 system, using degrees <24 38 83 98].

36 makes a decent tritave-based system (non-octave) using
degrees <57 101 133 147] for 3:7:13:17.

Not saying it's easy, but it's where one might start.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, chrisvaisvil@... wrote:
>
> Have you tried it? I have tried both. 36 imho is much superior
> to 24. 24 is really hard to use harmonically.

Not disagreeing, but I would like to share this track:

http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/24-eq/24eqtune.mid

by Joe Monzo, which I think is a great use of 24.

-Carl

>
> 24TET includes the exact same notes as 12TET, plus 12TET transposed up by
> 1/4 tone for the other 12 notes.

Yes but to transpose up / modulate to any of the 12tet intervals + a 1/4
tone usually doesn't make any sense musically with harmonies.
So you're still stuck to 12tet subset of 24tet for harmonic music. You can
just as well not have the extra 12 tones.
But you can use it for arabic like melody and very simple harmonies like
only 3/2 or 4/3 that follow the melody (like much done in arabic music)

Marcel

>
> 24 is a decent 2:3:11:17 system, using degrees <24 38 83 98].

I wouldn't call 2:3:11:17 anything near musical.

Marcel

>
> Not disagreeing, but I would like to share this track:
>
> http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/24-eq/24eqtune.mid
>
> by Joe Monzo, which I think is a great use of 24.
>

Sounds horribly out of tune to me.

Marcel

> I wouldn't call 2:3:11:17 anything near musical.

Yes, we know.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Not disagreeing, but I would like to share this track:
> >
> > http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/24-eq/24eqtune.mid
> >
> > by Joe Monzo, which I think is a great use of 24.
> >
>
> Sounds horribly out of tune to me.
>
> Marcel

Good for you.

-Carl

---Yes but to transpose up / modulate to any of the 12tet intervals +
a ---1/4 tone usually doesn't make any sense musically with harmonies.
   Exactly (perhaps with the exception of blues quarter-tones).
   So you stick with the 12TET subset of 24TET for harmonies and use the other 12-notes for short "neighboring tones"...as Arab music does a lot of the time.  So the other 12 tones aren't useless period...just useless for harmony.

   Also, just wondering...how far off is the Indian 22-tone scale from 24TET (IE, in cents, which notes in the Indian scale are 10-cents+ away from the nearest 24TET note).  Just curious...

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 1:32 PM

24TET includes the exact same notes as 12TET, plus 12TET transposed up by 1/4 tone for the other 12 notes.

Yes but to transpose up / modulate to any of the 12tet intervals + a 1/4 tone usually doesn't make any sense musically with harmonies.So you're still stuck to 12tet subset of 24tet for harmonic music. You can just as well not have the extra 12 tones.
But you can use it for arabic like melody and very simple harmonies like only 3/2 or 4/3 that follow the melody (like much done in arabic music)
Marcel

>
> which I think is a great use of 24.

If you want a great use of 24tet listen to turkish music made with this
tuning.

Marcel

Mike,

with all due respect, this *is* the 21st century and all notes are fair
game.

That being said, there was a piece I posted quite a while back and I was
bedeviled on how to fit a note(s) that was actually a result of using
quarter tones nicely into the harmony.

http://clones.soonlabel.com/mp3/quarterpicnic.mp3

And it certainly is not the case that I have some aversion to dissonance. I
made choices that made logical musical sense but I was not really satisfied
with the result. It didn't add a nuance it added clashes. 36 et was more
nuanced imho.

Perhaps I need to look up some Ives that is quarter tone - I lost my vinyl
of his complete works years ago. Obviously Ives is a more competent composer
than I.

However, I see little point in composing in 24 tet if one can't use the
extra notes constructively. And isn't having a musical, expressive use what
is at issue?

Chris

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Michael Sheiman
<djtrancendance@...>wrote:

> Yes I have.
> I think the difference in our approaches (in general) is you will use an
> entire tuning as your scale while I break part of tunings into scales and
> only then compose (within those simpler scales).
>
> Every single note in 12TET exists in 24TET. True, the fingering of
> them on a 12TET piano makes it confusing, but they are all there. Thus,
> mathematically it is impossible to say 12TET can do anything 24TET can't
> do...because, again, 24TET includes the exact same notes as 12TET, plus
> 12TET transposed up by 1/4 tone for the other 12 notes.
>
>
> --- On *Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@... <chrisvaisvil@...>*wrote:
>
> From: chrisvaisvil@... <chrisvaisvil@...>
> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
> To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 1:00 PM
>
>
> Have you tried it? I have tried both. 36 imho is much superior to 24. 24
> is really hard to use harmonically.
>
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> ------------------------------
> *From*: Michael Sheiman
> *Date*: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:52:21 -0800 (PST)
> *To*: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
> *Subject*: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
>
> --Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical.
>
> Why is 24TET hard to make musical? 12TET is a simple subset of 24TET.
> Just use scales under 12TET within 24TET and you get exactly the same thing
> (only you can get 24 possible keys instead of 7 for, say, the major scale).
> :-)
>
>
> --- On *Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>*wrote:
>
>
> From: chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
> To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
> Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:33 PM
>
> Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical. Perhaps a better solution is
> to add select scale degrees to suppliment 12tet instead of trying to make a
> monolithic "this solves all problems" tuning system. PS my blackberry
> automatically adds a tag which I could change but I'm too lazy to do so.
>
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> ------------------------------
> *From*: Michael Sheiman
> *Date*: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
> *To*: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
> *Subject*: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
>
> --With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes
> --for instance which is a pretty important one.
> I guess your hearing is a lot more picky than mine...I don't hear a
> very significant difference between 10/9 or 9/8.
> ---You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
> And that's such a bad thing? Many types of mean-tone and 12TET aren't
> that much different from each other...
> --Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or
> --35/32, up for debate),
> Interesting point I'd have to try them to see how much difference it
> makes...
>
> My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with
> 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician)
> package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a 100% accurate
> version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder
> to learn far as theory. So the question that's up in the air is...is the
> slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?
>
>
> -Michael
>
> --- On *Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>
> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
> To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
> Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:35 AM
>
> Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise.. .you get 12TET
>> plus the Arab micro-tones in-between.. .plus you can play blues with it with
>> the two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in.
>
>
> I don't like 24tet a lot and it has many problems.
> You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
> And for arabic music it's not all that great either even though they've
> used it a lot themselves.
> With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes for
> instance which is a pretty important one.
> Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or 35/32, up
> for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in the
> correct way in 24tet.
> Many other problems.
> I still vote for 53tet if you go ET beyond 12tet.
>
> Marcel
>
>
>

Hi Chris,

> And isn't having a musical, expressive use what is at issue?

I can't agree more :)
And good example of 24tet in western musical context.

Have you also tried 53tet vs 36tet?

Marcel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:
>
> > which I think is a great use of 24.
>
>
> If you want a great use of 24tet listen to turkish music made
> with this tuning.
>
> Marcel

Chris said it was hard to use harmonically. I like traditional
Turkish music a lot (and it is only 24-ET to a first
approximation), but it is not a demonstration of how to use
it *harmonically*. -Carl

>
> Chris said it was hard to use harmonically. I like traditional
> Turkish music a lot (and it is only 24-ET to a first
> approximation), but it is not a demonstration of how to use
> it *harmonically*. -Carl
>

Yes, exactly like I wrote before.

"Though I do see serious trouble in 24 tet where you make a melody in 24 tet
and then try to harmonise it.
In many cases that won't work in 24tet. Especially in harmonising arabic
like melodies.
You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound
horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."

"But in many other cases where you don't do such things it should work.
You can play arabic melodies better than 12tet.
And you can play classical music most of the time equally good as 12tet and
sometimes a little bit better.
But you'll run into trouble when mixing the 2."

I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself, or studied them.
But one look at them tells the above story which is fairly logical.

Marcel

>
> Exactly (perhaps with the exception of blues quarter-tones).
> So you stick with the 12TET subset of 24TET for harmonies and use the
> other 12-notes for short "neighboring tones"...as Arab music does a lot of
> the time. So the other 12 tones aren't useless period...just useless for
> harmony.
>

Yes agreed :)
Fairly useless for harmony and modulation of such harmony.
But indeed not useless for all things.
I don't know much about turkish music but isn't 24tet the way they tune
these days and teach music?
Making most turkish orchestra music 24tet?

Marcel

Good gracious! Turkish Maqam music is never performed in 24-tET!!! The
only examples consigned to that temperament are done with electric
pianos featuring so-called "Oriental quarter-tones".

Oz.

On Feb 12, 2009, at 12:02 AM, Carl Lumma wrote:

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:
>>
>>> which I think is a great use of 24.
>>
>>
>> If you want a great use of 24tet listen to turkish music made
>> with this tuning.
>>
>> Marcel
>
> Chris said it was hard to use harmonically. I like traditional
> Turkish music a lot (and it is only 24-ET to a first
> approximation), but it is not a demonstration of how to use
> it *harmonically*. -Carl
>

✩ ✩ ✩
www.ozanyarman.com

--with all due respect, this *is* the 21st century and all notes are fair ---game.
   And they are...only with the restriction certain sets of them can be used "at once" IF you want to get a market-able level of consonance.  I agree with you trying to randomly make chords in 24TET without at least reserving 12 of those notes for harmony (and using the others only as neighboring tones) is very hard to do.

---However, I see little point in composing in 24 tet if one can't use the
---extra notes constructively. And isn't having a musical, expressive use
---what is at issue?
     Again, I trust you can, just not harmonically.  And, again, Arab music uses 12TET + the other 12 notes as non-harmonic "neighboring tones" a lot.  And, according to Marcel, it seems Turkish music does the same sort of thing.   So you can get extra expressiveness easily out of the "extra 12 tones", just not of the harmonic variety.

   If there is any cool trick Ives or anyone else uses to get consonant chords that can't be fit into 12TET to work within 24TET, though...I'd be eager to see how they get away with it.  From what I've seen, agreed...most harmonic chords in 24TET come simply from the subsets of 12TET under 24TET.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:

From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 1:49 PM

Mike,

with all due respect, this *is* the 21st century and all notes are fair game.

That being said, there was a piece I posted quite a while back and I was bedeviled on how to fit a note(s) that was actually a result of using quarter tones nicely into the harmony.

http://clones. soonlabel. com/mp3/quarterp icnic.mp3

And it certainly is not the case that I have some aversion to dissonance. I made choices that made logical musical sense but I was not really satisfied with the result. It didn't add a nuance it added clashes. 36 et was more nuanced imho.

Perhaps I need to look up some Ives that is quarter tone - I lost my vinyl of his complete works years ago. Obviously Ives is a more competent composer than I.

However, I see little point in composing in 24 tet if one can't use the extra notes constructively. And isn't having a musical, expressive use what is at issue?

Chris

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@ yahoo.com> wrote:

Yes I have.
I think the difference in our approaches (in general) is you will use an entire tuning as your scale while I break part of tunings into scales and only then compose (within those simpler scales).

    Every single note in 12TET exists in 24TET.  True, the fingering of them on a 12TET piano makes it confusing, but they are all there.  Thus, mathematically it is impossible to say 12TET can do anything 24TET can't do...because, again, 24TET includes the exact same notes as 12TET, plus 12TET transposed up by 1/4 tone for the other 12 notes.

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>

Subject: Re:
[tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 1:00 PM

Have you tried it? I have tried both. 36 imho is much superior to 24. 24 is really hard to use harmonically. Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
From: Michael Sheiman
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:52:21 -0800 (PST)
To: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?

--Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical.

   Why is 24TET hard to make musical? 12TET is a simple subset of 24TET.  Just use scales under 12TET within 24TET
and you get exactly the same thing (only you can get 24 possible keys instead of 7 for, say, the major scale). :-)

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>

Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:33 PM

Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical. Perhaps a better solution is to add select scale degrees to suppliment 12tet instead of trying to make a monolithic "this solves all problems" tuning system. PS my blackberry automatically adds a tag which I could change but I'm too lazy to do so.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-MobileFrom: Michael Sheiman
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
To: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>

Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?

--With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes --for instance which is a pretty important one.
    I guess your hearing is a lot more picky than mine...I don't hear a very significant difference between 10/9 or 9/8.

---You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
   And that's such a bad thing?  Many types of mean-tone and 12TET aren't that much
different from each other...
--Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or --35/32, up for debate),
  Interesting point I'd have to try them to see how much difference it makes...

   My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician) package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a 100% accurate version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder to learn far as theory.  So the question that's up in the air is...is the slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>

Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to
Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:35 AM

Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise.. .you get 12TET plus the Arab micro-tones in-between.. .plus you can play blues with it with the two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in. 

I don't like 24tet a lot and it has many problems.You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.And for arabic music it's not all that great either even though they've used it a lot themselves.
With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes for instance which is a pretty important one.Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and
1125/1024 (or 35/32, up for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in the correct way in 24tet.Many other problems.I still vote for 53tet if you go ET beyond 12tet.

Marcel

---You'll
end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound
---horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."
    Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.

---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself
    That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:06 PM

Chris said it was hard to use harmonically. I like traditional

Turkish music a lot (and it is only 24-ET to a first

approximation) , but it is not a demonstration of how to use

it *harmonically* . -Carl
Yes, exactly like I wrote before.
"Though I do see serious trouble in 24 tet where you make a melody in 24 tet and then try to harmonise it.
In many cases that won't work in 24tet. Especially in harmonising arabic like melodies.You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."

"But in many other cases where you don't do such things it should work.You can play arabic melodies better than 12tet.And you can play classical music most of the time equally good as 12tet and sometimes a little bit better.
But you'll run into trouble when mixing the 2."
I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself, or studied them.But one look at them tells the above story which is fairly logical.

Marcel

if you haven't noticed... in world music using microtonal embellishments
that give the impression of the actual culture being homogenized is all the
rage. Yes, they use marketable unexciting basic harmonic formula. However,
rhythmically things can get pretty progressive at times. (all of this is my
own opinion - not fact)

Perhaps that is your quest - that is not my quest.

Though I thought the point of your explorations was:

1. have all notes of a scale sound at once and be consonant
2. find "new moods" via new scales / tunings
3. to bring this creation to market

What you are describing here is being done, has been brought to market, and
is arguably a lamentable development.

And Charles Ives not a composer I'd look to for your definition "consonance"
quite honestly. At least not beyond is first symphony or so... This
insurance salesman wrote in two and three keys - at the same time.

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Michael Sheiman
<djtrancendance@...>wrote:

> --with all due respect, this *is* the 21st century and all notes are
> fair ---game.
> And they are...only with the restriction certain sets of them can be
> used "at once" IF you want to get a market-able level of consonance. I
> agree with you trying to randomly make chords in 24TET without at least
> reserving 12 of those notes for harmony (and using the others only as
> neighboring tones) is very hard to do.
>
> ---However, I see little point in composing in 24 tet if one can't use the
> ---extra notes constructively. And isn't having a musical, expressive use
> ---what is at issue?
> Again, I trust you can, just not harmonically. And, again, Arab music
> uses 12TET + the other 12 notes as non-harmonic "neighboring tones" a lot.
> And, according to Marcel, it seems Turkish music does the same sort of
> thing. So you can get extra expressiveness easily out of the "extra 12
> tones", just not of the harmonic variety.
>
> If there is any cool trick Ives or anyone else uses to get consonant
> chords that can't be fit into 12TET to work within 24TET, though...I'd be
> eager to see how they get away with it. From what I've seen, agreed...most
> harmonic chords in 24TET come simply from the subsets of 12TET under 24TET.
>
> -Michael
>
> --- On *Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>
> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
> To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 1:49 PM
>
> Mike,
>
> with all due respect, this *is* the 21st century and all notes are fair
> game.
>
> That being said, there was a piece I posted quite a while back and I was
> bedeviled on how to fit a note(s) that was actually a result of using
> quarter tones nicely into the harmony.
>
> http://clones. soonlabel. com/mp3/quarterp icnic.mp3<http://clones.soonlabel.com/mp3/quarterpicnic.mp3>
>
> And it certainly is not the case that I have some aversion to dissonance. I
> made choices that made logical musical sense but I was not really satisfied
> with the result. It didn't add a nuance it added clashes. 36 et was more
> nuanced imho.
>
> Perhaps I need to look up some Ives that is quarter tone - I lost my vinyl
> of his complete works years ago. Obviously Ives is a more competent composer
> than I.
>
> However, I see little point in composing in 24 tet if one can't use the
> extra notes constructively. And isn't having a musical, expressive use what
> is at issue?
>
> Chris
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@
> yahoo.com <http://mc/compose?to=djtrancendance@...>> wrote:
>
>> Yes I have.
>> I think the difference in our approaches (in general) is you will use an
>> entire tuning as your scale while I break part of tunings into scales and
>> only then compose (within those simpler scales).
>>
>> Every single note in 12TET exists in 24TET. True, the fingering of
>> them on a 12TET piano makes it confusing, but they are all there. Thus,
>> mathematically it is impossible to say 12TET can do anything 24TET can't
>> do...because, again, 24TET includes the exact same notes as 12TET, plus
>> 12TET transposed up by 1/4 tone for the other 12 notes.
>>
>>
>> --- On *Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com<http://mc/compose?to=chrisvaisvil@...>
>> <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <http://mc/compose?to=chrisvaisvil@...>>*wrote:
>>
>> From: chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com<http://mc/compose?to=chrisvaisvil@...><chrisvaisvil@
>> gmail.com <http://mc/compose?to=chrisvaisvil@...>>
>> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
>> To: tuning@yahoogroups. com <http://mc/compose?to=tuning@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 1:00 PM
>>
>>
>> Have you tried it? I have tried both. 36 imho is much superior to 24. 24
>> is really hard to use harmonically.
>>
>> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From*: Michael Sheiman
>> *Date*: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:52:21 -0800 (PST)
>> *To*: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
>> *Subject*: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
>>
>> --Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical.
>>
>> Why is 24TET hard to make musical? 12TET is a simple subset of 24TET.
>> Just use scales under 12TET within 24TET and you get exactly the same thing
>> (only you can get 24 possible keys instead of 7 for, say, the major scale).
>> :-)
>>
>>
>> --- On *Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>*wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
>> To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
>> Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:33 PM
>>
>> Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical. Perhaps a better solution is
>> to add select scale degrees to suppliment 12tet instead of trying to make a
>> monolithic "this solves all problems" tuning system. PS my blackberry
>> automatically adds a tag which I could change but I'm too lazy to do so.
>>
>> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From*: Michael Sheiman
>> *Date*: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
>> *To*: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
>> *Subject*: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
>>
>> --With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9
>> stepsizes --for instance which is a pretty important one.
>> I guess your hearing is a lot more picky than mine...I don't hear a
>> very significant difference between 10/9 or 9/8.
>> ---You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
>> And that's such a bad thing? Many types of mean-tone and 12TET aren't
>> that much different from each other...
>> --Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or
>> --35/32, up for debate),
>> Interesting point I'd have to try them to see how much difference it
>> makes...
>>
>> My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with
>> 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician)
>> package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a 100% accurate
>> version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder
>> to learn far as theory. So the question that's up in the air is...is the
>> slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?
>>
>>
>> -Michael
>>
>> --- On *Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>* wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>
>> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
>> To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
>> Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:35 AM
>>
>> Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise.. .you get 12TET
>>> plus the Arab micro-tones in-between.. .plus you can play blues with it with
>>> the two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in.
>>
>>
>> I don't like 24tet a lot and it has many problems.
>> You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
>> And for arabic music it's not all that great either even though they've
>> used it a lot themselves.
>> With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes
>> for instance which is a pretty important one.
>> Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or 35/32,
>> up for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in
>> the correct way in 24tet.
>> Many other problems.
>> I still vote for 53tet if you go ET beyond 12tet.
>>
>> Marcel
>>
>>
>
>

please demonstrate the math.

" Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE. You
can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter
tone scale)...only an 8th note off. Restate this as "8th note off" and
I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just
spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis."

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Michael Sheiman
<djtrancendance@...>wrote:

> ---You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll
> sound ---horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."
> Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE. You
> can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter
> tone scale)...only an 8th note off. Restate this as "8th note off" and
> I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just
> spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.
>
> ---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself
> That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above
> that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.
>
> -Michael
>
>
>
> --- On *Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>
> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
> To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:06 PM
>
> Chris said it was hard to use harmonically. I like traditional
>> Turkish music a lot (and it is only 24-ET to a first
>> approximation) , but it is not a demonstration of how to use
>> it *harmonically* . -Carl
>>
>
> Yes, exactly like I wrote before.
>
> "Though I do see serious trouble in 24 tet where you make a melody in 24
> tet and then try to harmonise it.
> In many cases that won't work in 24tet. Especially in harmonising arabic
> like melodies.
> You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound
> horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."
>
> "But in many other cases where you don't do such things it should work.
> You can play arabic melodies better than 12tet.
> And you can play classical music most of the time equally good as 12tet and
> sometimes a little bit better.
> But you'll run into trouble when mixing the 2."
>
> I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself, or studied them.
> But one look at them tells the above story which is fairly logical.
>
> Marcel
>
>
>

---Though I thought the point of your explorations was:
---1. have all notes of a scale sound at once and be consonant
---2. find "new moods" via new scales / tunings
---3. to bring this creation to market
    Well that's exactly it...concerning my view of what tunings should become like for types of music composed in the present/future. I just don't expect everyone to, say, randomly start adapting everything they make or have made to fit in, say, the golden ratio tuning all at once..."even I" don't have my head that far up my, well...  :-) 

   However, far as emulating music from the "present/past"...I think 24TET gets a good deal closer than 12TET to a happy medium of preserving traditions and allowing 12TET-style harmony.  In other words...I realize some people are too stubborn to abandon 12TET completely so "for now" I think 24TET is a decent compromise (and far better than trying to squeeze say, Arab or Indian music, into 12TET).

  Put it this way, I am, like yourself, heavily AGAINST tuning and scale homogenization...but, it figure, using 24TET instead of 12TET would at least bring us a bit closer to the original cultural tunings.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:

From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:46 PM

if you haven't noticed... in world music using microtonal embellishments that give the impression of the actual culture being homogenized is all the rage. Yes, they use marketable unexciting basic harmonic formula. However, rhythmically things can get pretty progressive at times. (all of this is my own opinion - not fact)

Perhaps that is your quest - that is not my quest.

Though I thought the point of your explorations was:

1. have all notes of a scale sound at once and be consonant
2. find "new moods" via new scales / tunings

3. to bring this creation to market

What you are describing here is being done, has been brought to market, and is arguably a lamentable development.

And Charles Ives not a composer I'd look to for your definition "consonance" quite honestly. At least not beyond is first symphony or so... This insurance salesman wrote in two and three keys - at the same time.

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@ yahoo.com> wrote:

--with all due respect, this *is* the 21st century and all notes are fair ---game.
   And they are...only with the restriction certain sets of them can be used "at once" IF you want to get a market-able level of consonance.  I agree with you trying to randomly make chords in 24TET without at least reserving 12 of those notes for harmony (and using the others only as neighboring tones) is very hard to do.

---However, I see little point in composing in 24 tet if one can't use the
---extra notes constructively. And isn't having a musical, expressive use
---what is at issue?
     Again, I trust you can, just not harmonically.  And, again, Arab music uses 12TET + the other 12 notes as non-harmonic "neighboring tones" a lot.  And, according to Marcel, it seems Turkish music does the same sort of thing.   So you can get extra expressiveness easily out of the "extra 12 tones", just not of the harmonic variety.

   If there is any cool trick Ives or anyone else uses to get consonant chords that can't be fit into 12TET to work within 24TET, though...I'd be eager to see how they get away with it.  From what I've seen, agreed...most harmonic chords in 24TET come simply from the subsets of 12TET under 24TET.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: Chris Vaisvil
<chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com

Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 1:49 PM

Mike,

with all due respect, this *is* the 21st century and all notes are fair game.

That being said, there was a piece I posted quite a while back and I was bedeviled on how to fit a note(s) that was actually a result of using quarter tones nicely into the harmony.

http://clones. soonlabel. com/mp3/quarterp icnic.mp3

And it certainly is not the case that I have some aversion to dissonance. I made choices that made logical musical sense but I was not really satisfied with the result. It didn't add a nuance it added clashes. 36 et was more nuanced imho.

Perhaps I need to look up some Ives that is quarter tone - I lost my vinyl of his complete works years ago. Obviously Ives is a more competent composer than I.

However, I see little point in composing in 24 tet if one can't use the extra notes constructively. And isn't having a musical, expressive use what is at issue?

Chris

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@ yahoo.com> wrote:

Yes I have.
I think the difference in our approaches (in general) is you will use an entire tuning as your scale while I break part of tunings into scales and only then compose (within those simpler scales).

    Every single note in 12TET exists in 24TET.  True, the fingering of them on a 12TET piano makes it confusing, but they are all there.  Thus, mathematically it is impossible to say 12TET can do anything 24TET can't do...because, again, 24TET includes the exact same notes as 12TET, plus 12TET transposed up by 1/4 tone for the other 12 notes.

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>

Subject: Re:
[tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 1:00 PM

Have you tried it? I have tried both. 36 imho is much superior to 24. 24 is really hard to use harmonically. Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

From: Michael Sheiman
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:52:21 -0800 (PST)
To: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?

--Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical.

   Why is 24TET hard to make musical? 12TET is a simple subset of 24TET.  Just use scales under 12TET within 24TET
and you get exactly the same thing (only you can get 24 possible keys instead of 7 for, say, the major scale). :-)

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>

Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 12:33 PM

Imho 24 or 36 tet is hard to make musical. Perhaps a better solution is to add select scale degrees to suppliment 12tet instead of trying to make a monolithic "this solves all problems" tuning system. PS my blackberry automatically adds a tag which I could change but I'm too lazy to do so.

Sent via BlackBerry from T-MobileFrom: Michael Sheiman
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
To: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>

Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?

--With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes --for instance which is a pretty important one.
    I guess your hearing is a lot more picky than mine...I don't hear a very significant difference between 10/9 or 9/8.

---You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.
   And that's such a bad thing?  Many types of mean-tone and 12TET aren't that much
different from each other...
--Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and 1125/1024 (or --35/32, up for debate),
  Interesting point I'd have to try them to see how much difference it makes...

   My point...it seems you can get "85% accuracy" on all of the above with 24TET in a much more realistic and easy to learn (for the average musician) package that's also very easy to slightly re-tune into a 100% accurate version....while 53TET, while being more like 95% accurate, is much harder to learn far as theory.  So the question that's up in the air is...is the slight gain in accuracy worth the harder learning curve of 53TET?

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>

Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to
Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 11:35 AM

Come to think of it, 24TET is a pretty good compromise.. .you get 12TET plus the Arab micro-tones in-between.. .plus you can play blues with it with the two "blue note" quarter tones (per 7-tone scale) built in. 

I don't like 24tet a lot and it has many problems.You'd pretty much stay in a 12 tet subset for classical music.And for arabic music it's not all that great either even though they've used it a lot themselves.

With 24tet you don't get the distinction between 9/8 and 10/9 stepsizes for instance which is a pretty important one.Also it tempers 2 important arabic notes. 25/27 and
1125/1024 (or 35/32, up for debate), yet in the case of 25/27 you can't use it harmonically in the correct way in 24tet.Many other problems.I still vote for 53tet if you go ET beyond 12tet.

Marcel

As for the "complex" math (being sarcastic here, it's not complex at all),

This is 24TET
c c2 c# c#2 d d2 d# d#2 e e2 f f2 f# f#2 g g2 g# g#2 a a2 a# a#2 b b2

And these are the two 12TET tunings that come together to comprise it
1) c c# d d# e f f# g g# a a# b
2) c2 c#2 d2 d#2 e2 f2 f#2 g2 g#2 a2 a#2 b2

    As you see, 24TET is really just 12TET stuck in between the notes of 12TET.  And you can use either #1 or #2 in exactly the same way as 12TET, because they both contain EXACTLY the same 100-cent intervals at 12TET.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:47 PM

please demonstrate the math.

"    Ugh...again this degree of
error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone
off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th
note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair
chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out
falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis."

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@ yahoo.com> wrote:

---You'll
end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound
---horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."
    Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.

---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself
    That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com

Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:06 PM

Chris said it was hard to use harmonically. I like traditional

Turkish music a lot (and it is only 24-ET to a first

approximation) , but it is not a demonstration of how to use

it *harmonically* . -Carl
Yes, exactly like I wrote before.
"Though I do see serious trouble in 24 tet where you make a melody in 24 tet and then try to harmonise it.

In many cases that won't work in 24tet. Especially in harmonising arabic like melodies.You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."

"But in many other cases where you don't do such things it should work.You can play arabic melodies better than 12tet.And you can play classical music most of the time equally good as 12tet and sometimes a little bit better.

But you'll run into trouble when mixing the 2."
I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself, or studied them.But one look at them tells the above story which is fairly logical.

Marcel

where's the 1/8th tone?

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Michael Sheiman
<djtrancendance@...>wrote:

> As for the "complex" math (being sarcastic here, it's not complex at
> all),
>
> This is 24TET
> c c2 c# c#2 d d2 d# d#2 e e2 f f2 f# f#2 g g2 g# g#2 a a2 a# a#2 b b2
>
> And these are the two 12TET tunings that come together to comprise it
> 1) c c# d d# e f f# g g# a a# b
> 2) c2 c#2 d2 d#2 e2 f2 f#2 g2 g#2 a2 a#2 b2
>
> As you see, 24TET is really just 12TET stuck in between the notes of
> 12TET. And you can use either #1 or #2 in exactly the same way as 12TET,
> because they both contain EXACTLY the same 100-cent intervals at 12TET.
>
> -Michael
>
>
>
> --- On *Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>
> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
> To: tuning@...m
> Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:47 PM
>
> please demonstrate the math.
>
> " Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE. You
> can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter
> tone scale)...only an 8th note off. Restate this as "8th note off" and
> I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just
> spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis."
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@
> yahoo.com <http://mc/compose?to=djtrancendance@...>> wrote:
>
>> ---You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll
>> sound ---horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."
>> Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE. You
>> can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter
>> tone scale)...only an 8th note off. Restate this as "8th note off" and
>> I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just
>> spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.
>>
>> ---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself
>> That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above
>> that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.
>>
>> -Michael
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On *Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com<http://mc/compose?to=m.develde@...>
>> >* wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com<http://mc/compose?to=m.develde@...>
>> >
>> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
>> To: tuning@yahoogroups. com <http://mc/compose?to=tuning@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:06 PM
>>
>> Chris said it was hard to use harmonically. I like traditional
>>> Turkish music a lot (and it is only 24-ET to a first
>>> approximation) , but it is not a demonstration of how to use
>>> it *harmonically* . -Carl
>>>
>>
>> Yes, exactly like I wrote before.
>>
>> "Though I do see serious trouble in 24 tet where you make a melody in 24
>> tet and then try to harmonise it.
>> In many cases that won't work in 24tet. Especially in harmonising arabic
>> like melodies.
>> You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound
>> horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."
>>
>> "But in many other cases where you don't do such things it should work.
>> You can play arabic melodies better than 12tet.
>> And you can play classical music most of the time equally good as 12tet
>> and sometimes a little bit better.
>> But you'll run into trouble when mixing the 2."
>>
>> I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself, or studied them.
>> But one look at them tells the above story which is fairly logical.
>>
>> Marcel
>>
>>
>
>

>
> Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE. You can't
> get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone
> scale)...only an 8th note off. Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll
> give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing
> out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.
>

No it is a quarter tone off, not 8th note off. I said it right.
But I understand your thinking error, no big deal happens a lot.

It's a quarter tone from for instance 100 cents to 150 cents, so if the
right note is 100 cents or 200 cents but you're playing 150 cents you're a
quarter note off. Not an 8th note off.

---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself
> That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above
> that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.
>

I'll ignore this.

Marcel

Oh I know see a second way you ment it.You ment the scale covering quarter
tones, so it can't be more than an 8th tone off from any inbetween interval.
Yes that's true but this is not the way I ment it.
I ment that when you combine 24tet melody with a harmony this can lead to
you wanting to modulate with a quarter tone due to the quantitising effect
of 24tet. Once you modulate or transpose a harmony with an 12tet interval
you'll end up beeing about a quarter note off. or exactly a quarter note
relevant to 12tet.

Marcel

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>wrote:

> Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE. You can't
>> get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone
>> scale)...only an 8th note off. Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll
>> give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing
>> out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.
>>
>
> No it is a quarter tone off, not 8th note off. I said it right.
> But I understand your thinking error, no big deal happens a lot.
>
> It's a quarter tone from for instance 100 cents to 150 cents, so if the
> right note is 100 cents or 200 cents but you're playing 150 cents you're a
> quarter note off. Not an 8th note off.
>
>
> ---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself
>> That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above
>> that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.
>>
>
> I'll ignore this.
>
> Marcel
>

>
> Once you modulate or transpose a harmony with an 12tet interval you'll end
> up beeing about a quarter note off. or exactly a quarter note relevant to
> 12tet.

That should offcourse be "Once you modulate or transpose a harmony with an
12tet interval + QUARTER NOTE you'll end up beeing about a quarter note off"
Exactly a quarter note from 12tet, and about a quarter note from JI which in
this case very close to 12tet.

Marcel

djtrancendance@... wrote:
> ---But it is larger than JI needs to be (unless you're making very ---complex > music). And you need a good theory of which notes to play ---otherwise you're > going to play the wrong notes in 53tet and it'll still ---sound out of tune.
> Exactly, the theory would become pretty intimidating with so many notes. > Most common musicians would probably just give up. :-(
> > Which takes me back to the idea of a 24 to 30 note scale which can summarize > the general feel (not necessarily the math/ratios!) of JI and the kind of > melodic flexibility of, say, the 22-tone Indian or 24-tone Arab tunings.

Then how about 21 notes of miracle (blackjack) or 22 notes of orwell? Both have been given in this thread. There other options that won't be so close to Arab tunings, or may require more notes.

> But then, of course, to include to the Pelog scales you'd need even more > notes and it becomes unrealistic (again, too many tones and too complex a theory > is needed). Unless, one of you has a clever way to fit those in as well to an > under 30 note tuning. Anyhow, there are practical problems IE Pelog only works > well with instruments of certain timbre (I believe you need instruments with > strong ODD harmonics to sound consonant in Pelog).

I don't know why you'd expect or want pelogs to work with near-JI tunings. The timbres they evolved with are inharmonic. If you want something close to some random scale, anything sufficiently lumpy with enough notes will do. The worst option is an equal temperament, where if it doesn't work on one scale degree, it won't get any better on the others.

> As for "new music/new scales" (the other side of the discussion as opposed > to "emulating past/historical scales)...I think a tuning with at least 9-notes > per scale under it that are harmony and chord-capable (can form many consonant > chords) is the next step.

Orwell has a 9 note MOS. Miracle 10.

> We already have so many good 7-tone scales (usually as subsets of 12-step > tunings) to count...and I think most of us can agree it would be nice to have > more melodic flexibility without sacrificing the ability to play > chord-based/poly-phonic music.

We have a lot of scales that do what you say you want. Time to read this again?

http://eceserv0.ece.wisc.edu/~sethares/paperspdf/Erlich-MiddlePath.pdf

Graham

Argh......
    There is no 1/8th tone, only 1/4 tones in 24TET.  And each 12TET subset of 24TET (starting at C) is a 1/4 above the other 12TET subset (starting at C2).  This is actually really basic stuff.  24TET includes 2 12TET tuning, 36TET includes 3 of them erm 2*12 = 24 and 3*12 = 36...and 48TET has 4 sets of 12TET in it....get it now?

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:

From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 3:02 PM

where's the 1/8th tone?

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@ yahoo.com> wrote:

As for the "complex" math (being sarcastic here, it's not complex at all),

This is 24TET
c c2 c# c#2 d d2 d# d#2 e e2 f f2 f# f#2 g g2 g# g#2 a a2 a# a#2 b b2

And these are the two 12TET tunings that come together to comprise it

1) c c# d d# e f f# g g# a a# b
2) c2 c#2 d2 d#2 e2 f2 f#2 g2 g#2 a2 a#2 b2

    As you see, 24TET is really just 12TET stuck in between the notes of 12TET.  And you can use either #1 or #2 in exactly the same way as 12TET, because they both contain EXACTLY the same 100-cent intervals at 12TET.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning]
Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:47 PM

please demonstrate the math.

"    Ugh...again this degree of
error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone
off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th
note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair
chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out
falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis."

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@ yahoo.com> wrote:

---You'll
end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound
---horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."
    Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.

---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself
    That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?

To: tuning@yahoogroups. com

Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:06 PM

Chris said it was hard to use harmonically. I like traditional

Turkish music a lot (and it is only 24-ET to a first

approximation) , but it is not a demonstration of how to use

it *harmonically* . -Carl
Yes, exactly like I wrote before.
"Though I do see serious trouble in 24 tet where you make a melody in 24 tet and then try to harmonise it.

In many cases that won't work in 24tet. Especially in harmonising arabic like melodies.You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."

"But in many other cases where you don't do such things it should work.You can play arabic melodies better than 12tet.And you can play classical music most of the time equally good as 12tet and sometimes a little bit better.

But you'll run into trouble when mixing the 2."
I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself, or studied them.But one look at them tells the above story which is fairly logical.

Marcel

--It's a quarter tone from for instance 100 cents to 150 cents, so if the
right note is 100 cents --or 200 cents but you're playing 150 cents
you're a quarter note off. Not an 8th note off.

   Well 24TET is quarter tone scale with 50 cents gaps between notes. 
   So the consecutive quarter tones in 24TET would be, say 100,150, and 200 cents.

   So if you played 150 cents you would be DEAD ON one of those quarter notes in 24TET with not a bit of error.  And even if you played at 175 cents (maximum distance away from the nearest 24TET note) you'd be 25-cents IE an 8th tone tone off the nearest 24TET note (half way between 150 and 200 cents).
*******************************************************************
   However IF YOU ARE TALKING about the nearest 12TET tuning within 24TET, then yes, it is possible to be 1/4 note off since 12TET has interval gaps of 100 cents making the largest possible error 50 cents out of tune.  In that case, perhaps we are talking about two different things...

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 3:54 PM

Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.

No it is a quarter tone off, not 8th note off. I said it right.But I understand your thinking error, no big deal happens a lot.
It's a quarter tone from for instance 100 cents to 150 cents, so if the right note is 100 cents or 200 cents but you're playing 150 cents you're a quarter note off. Not an 8th note off.
 
---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself

    That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.
I'll ignore this.

Marcel

---You ment the scale covering quarter tones, so it can't be more than an 8th tone off from ---any inbetween interval.

Ah, ok, we were answering different questions.
   You were asking "how many tones off the nearest 12TET harmony scale within 12TET can you get" while I was asking "how many tones away from the nearest 24TET tone can you get.

---this can lead to you wanting to modulate with a quarter tone due to the quantitising effect ---of 24tet.
   Agreed...unless you memorize where the 12TET key you've decided to use as a base is...it's tempting to shift to "the other" 12TET key 1/4 up to better harmonize thus resulting in the "1/4 tone error" you were talking about.
  One possible solution...make a special 24TET piano/guitar etc. with special colors or markings to indicate the first 12TET key within 24TET...so it's quite obvious if you are in the same harmonic tuning or not (and very easy to know how to avoid drifting/modulating into the wrong/other 12TET tuning within 24TET).

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 3:57 PM

Oh I know see a second way you ment it.You ment the scale covering quarter tones, so it can't be more than an 8th tone off from any inbetween interval.Yes that's true but this is not the way I ment it.
I ment that when you combine 24tet melody with a harmony this can lead to you wanting to modulate with a quarter tone due to the quantitising effect of 24tet. Once you modulate or transpose a harmony with an 12tet interval you'll end up beeing about a quarter note off. or exactly a quarter note relevant to 12tet.

Marcel

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com> wrote:

Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.

No it is a quarter tone off, not 8th note off. I said it right.But I understand your thinking error, no big deal happens a lot.
It's a quarter tone from for instance 100 cents to 150 cents, so if the right note is 100 cents or 200 cents but you're playing 150 cents you're a quarter note off. Not an 8th note off.

 
---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself

    That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.
I'll ignore this.

Marcel

--Then how about 21 notes of miracle (blackjack) or 22 notes
--of orwell? Both have been given in this thread.
   It may indeed be a good idea for "historical tuning" (IE playing music from other cultures much more accurately than 12TET).  Mind my asking, could you give me links to the messages in which they are mentioned?
*********************************************************************
---Orwell has a 9 note MOS. Miracle 10.
...Again the question becomes "do these accomplish 9 notes while sounding as harmonically capable as 12TET to average Joe musician?"  The end goal in my book is to get everyday musicians to adopt some of these scales.

     BTW, any links to these scales?  I've actually tried MOS scales (Wilson's Horagram scales posted on a much earlier thread)...However most of the ones which sounded competitive with 12TET concerning consonance (enough to fool most musicians into thinking it is as good or better than 12TET) were 6 note scales and 9 note scales seemed to sound far too jazzy and random (at least to my ears) to make most musicians give it much of chance.

   Maybe Orwell's MOS scales are different somehow (and or one of Wilson's scale I haven't heard yet fits the bill)...I'm not quite sure...but I'd like to at least hear his scales and give them a shot. 
*******************************************************
  Thank you for your patience...I'm still learning here and I know I haven't heard half the amount of scales some of the rest of you have...and I may eventually find something already made that really hits the mark for me.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Graham Breed <gbreed@...> wrote:

From: Graham Breed <gbreed@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 5:30 PM

djtrancendance@ yahoo.com wrote:

> ---But it is larger than JI needs to be (unless you're making very ---complex

> music). And you need a good theory of which notes to play ---otherwise you're

> going to play the wrong notes in 53tet and it'll still ---sound out of tune.

> Exactly, the theory would become pretty intimidating with so many notes.

> Most common musicians would probably just give up. :-(

>

> Which takes me back to the idea of a 24 to 30 note scale which can summarize

> the general feel (not necessarily the math/ratios! ) of JI and the kind of

> melodic flexibility of, say, the 22-tone Indian or 24-tone Arab tunings.

Then how about 21 notes of miracle (blackjack) or 22 notes

of orwell? Both have been given in this thread. There

other options that won't be so close to Arab tunings, or may

require more notes.

> But then, of course, to include to the Pelog scales you'd need even more

> notes and it becomes unrealistic (again, too many tones and too complex a theory

> is needed). Unless, one of you has a clever way to fit those in as well to an

> under 30 note tuning. Anyhow, there are practical problems IE Pelog only works

> well with instruments of certain timbre (I believe you need instruments with

> strong ODD harmonics to sound consonant in Pelog).

I don't know why you'd expect or want pelogs to work with

near-JI tunings. The timbres they evolved with are

inharmonic. If you want something close to some random

scale, anything sufficiently lumpy with enough notes will

do. The worst option is an equal temperament, where if it

doesn't work on one scale degree, it won't get any better on

the others.

> As for "new music/new scales" (the other side of the discussion as opposed

> to "emulating past/historical scales)...I think a tuning with at least 9-notes

> per scale under it that are harmony and chord-capable (can form many consonant

> chords) is the next step.

Orwell has a 9 note MOS. Miracle 10.

> We already have so many good 7-tone scales (usually as subsets of 12-step

> tunings) to count...and I think most of us can agree it would be nice to have

> more melodic flexibility without sacrificing the ability to play

> chord-based/ poly-phonic music.

We have a lot of scales that do what you say you want. Time

to read this again?

http://eceserv0. ece.wisc. edu/~sethares/ paperspdf/ Erlich-MiddlePat h.pdf

Graham

Haba's quarter-tone piano made by Förster in 1928 which we had long
years in Department of Composition at Janacek's Academy of Music in
Brno, Czech Republic, had three shorter piano manuals with normal
size keys, first and third manual played normal tuning, middle manual
triggered another set of strings tuned quarter-tone higher. Second
manual was placed about two centimeters higher then first one, and
third the same in relation to the second one. So no special key size,
colors or other markings were necessary, playing it was quite easy.
As I have studied pipe organ and was used to more manuals, I could
master it quickly and liked to improvise on it. Unfortunately
approximately in the middle of 80ies it was sent to Museum of music
in Prague...

That piano was that it was totally out of tune as nobody used it and
took care. So it was like double honky-tonk :-) But anyway in my
opinion 24ET sounds just terribly even when tuned. Until now I could
use it only in some works, few times in a melody of Arabian type,
later I explored quarter-tone shifts using standard and neutral
thirds in chords, another time used it just as an atonal random-notes-
random-rhythms atmosphere with marimbas and vibes. It doesn't offer
much possibilities, besides it was used a lot before.

Daniel Forro

On 12 Feb 2009, at 2:05 PM, Michael Sheiman wrote:

>
> ---You ment the scale covering quarter tones, so it can't be more
> than an 8th tone off from ---any inbetween interval.
>
> Ah, ok, we were answering different questions.
> You were asking "how many tones off the nearest 12TET harmony
> scale within 12TET can you get" while I was asking "how many tones
> away from the nearest 24TET tone can you get.
>
> ---this can lead to you wanting to modulate with a quarter tone due
> to the quantitising effect ---of 24tet.
> Agreed...unless you memorize where the 12TET key you've decided
> to use as a base is...it's tempting to shift to "the other" 12TET
> key 1/4 up to better harmonize thus resulting in the "1/4 tone
> error" you were talking about.
> One possible solution...make a special 24TET piano/guitar etc.
> with special colors or markings to indicate the first 12TET key
> within 24TET...so it's quite obvious if you are in the same
> harmonic tuning or not (and very easy to know how to avoid drifting/
> modulating into the wrong/other 12TET tuning within 24TET).
>
> -Michael

Michael Sheiman wrote:
> --Then how about 21 notes of miracle (blackjack) or 22 notes
> --of orwell? Both have been given in this thread.
> It may indeed be a good idea for "historical tuning" (IE playing music from > other cultures much more accurately than 12TET). Mind my asking, could you give > me links to the messages in which they are mentioned?

I could go on the web and search for them, but then so could you. I sent a message on the 10th, I think 3:30 UCT, with cents values for scales that might answer your question. I left out orwell because I remember Herman giving it. The others have all come up somewhere.

> *********************************************************************
> ---Orwell has a 9 note MOS. Miracle 10.
> ...Again the question becomes "do these accomplish 9 notes while sounding as > harmonically capable as 12TET to average Joe musician?" The end goal in my book > is to get everyday musicians to adopt some of these scales.

I don't like to speculate about what people from other cultures will think. Both scales have most intervals close to JI, even accounting for wolves, but that may not be what musicians are listening for. They both fail to include 5-limit triads, which means you're forced to look at more exotic harmonies. They have neutral intervals and so are naturally a better fit for Arabic music. Those neutral intervals naturally take up space that other intervals could be occupying.

If you take larger scales, they're bound to include a subset to keep any musician happy. You can get normal diatonics, swap in some neutral thirds, and so on. They'll also be missing a lot of chords or scales. You can't please everybody with 22 notes.

> BTW, any links to these scales? I've actually tried MOS scales (Wilson's > Horagram scales posted on a much earlier thread)...However most of the ones > which sounded competitive with 12TET concerning consonance (enough to fool most > musicians into thinking it is as good or better than 12TET) were 6 note scales > and 9 note scales seemed to sound far too jazzy and random (at least to my ears) > to make most musicians give it much of chance.

I sent a link to Paul Erlich's Middle Path paper, which includes them.

I don't know if any radically different scales will satisfy "most musicians". Orwell is something that may satisfy those who want something close to JI, with applications to Arabic music, which was your original question. Miracle gets that bit closer to JI. Both will be too crude for true Arabic and related music but I don't know of anything better with that number of notes. Ozan's worked very hard at it and come up with 36 notes that might do it.

> Maybe Orwell's MOS scales are different somehow (and or one of Wilson's scale > I haven't heard yet fits the bill)...I'm not quite sure...but I'd like to at > least hear his scales and give them a shot. The 9 note orwell must have been in there. But did you have it tuned right? It has a fair bit harmonically and plenty more chords when you extend it up to 22 notes. I haven't done anything with it myself. If it isn't close enough for you, then you can try miracle.

I know the 10 note miracle scale, and it's got some harmony, but it's boring melodically. I have used a pentatonic subset, though. (Close to pygmie.scl in the Scala archive.)

Graham

>
> Argh......
> There is no 1/8th tone, only 1/4 tones in 24TET. And each 12TET subset
> of 24TET (starting at C) is a 1/4 above the other 12TET subset (starting at
> C2). This is actually really basic stuff. 24TET includes 2 12TET tuning,
> 36TET includes 3 of them erm 2*12 = 24 and 3*12 = 36...and 48TET has 4 sets
> of 12TET in it....get it now?

Look Michael, I'll explain what I ment with an example.

Lets say you play part of an arabic melody that goes like this:
3/2 5/3 9/5 2/1

Now a defining character of this sequence of notes is the 27/25 between 5/3
and 9/5.
If you play it in 24tet (or 12tet) like this: 700cents 900cents 1000cents
1200cents this character is completely lost.
With melody stepsizes is very important in defining the character.
The 27/25 stepsize is 133.238cents. In 24tet you can best represent this
stepsize with 3 quarter notes making it 150cents.
So the best way to play 3/2 5/3 9/5 2/1 in 24tet would be either:
700cents 900cents 1050cents 1200cents
or 700cents 900cents 1050cents 1250cents
now taking the 9/5 to 2/1 stepsize too literally is taking it a bit too far
as it'll destroy the relation between 5/3 and 2/1 and especially 3/2 and
2/1.
So it's best to do 700cents 900cents 1050cents 1200cents.

Now if you decide to play 3/2 5/3 9/5 and then harmonise it by playing 6/5
3/2 9/5 the moment the melody hits 9/5 you have a big problem.
You just made 9/5 1050cents and 3/2 700cents.
Either you play the harmony (a major triad) as something like 350cents
700cents 1050cents. Which is a harmony way more false than 12tet.
Or you play the harmony as 300cents 700cents 1000cents in which case the
1050 of the melody is a quarter note off.
Or you play the harmony as 350cents 750cents 1050cents in which case the
whole harmony is about a quarter note off from JI.
Or you forget all about trying to preserve the charater of the melody and
simply play the melody in 12tet aswell making the 9/5 1000cents and the
harmony 300cents 700cents 1000cents. In which case if you keep this up
you'll never leave a 12tet subset of 24tet and might aswell simply use 12tet
as you have 12 tones you'll never play.

Now to get back to the point:
While 24tet may seem simpler than 53tet, 24tet has a unique set of problems.
Those problems make 24tet harder than 53tet in many ways.
Yes true for 53tet you need better theory or you'll end up beeing a comma or
several commas alot of the time.
But atleast 53tet is fully capable of playing any music very correct.
So it's your fault if you mess up. With 24tet you can do everything perfect
yourself and the scale will still mess everything up.
In the end of the day even though you'll mess up a bit in 53tet I think the
endresult will sound better. And atleast you'll know it's you not the scale
that's messing up if things sound bad.

Marcel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
>
> where's the 1/8th tone?

It's easy to see that the maximum error of an equal-step
tuning for an arbitrary dyad target is 1/2 the step size.
And the average error over a large enough set of dyads
is 1/4 the step size.

But for chords, the dyadic errors can add, up to the full
step size. For instance, if I want a 4:5:6 triad and the
error of 4:5 in my temperament is -0.49 steps and the error
of 5:6 is +0.49 steps, then the error of 2:3 will be 0.98
steps. Alternatively, I can choose a different
approximation of 4:5, the one with a +0.51 step error.
Then the error of 2:3 will only be 0.02 steps and the total
error of the chord will be lower than when I used the best
available approximations of 4:5 and 5:6.

Calling the 4:5 error x and the 5:6 error y, the 2:3
error is then x-y, and the total error of the chord is

|x| + |y| + |x - y|

And then I think the question you're asking is: What's the
biggest that one term of this expression can be if we
minimize the total expression? And the answer appears to
be 2/3 of a step. And I'm going to be crazy and say this
holds not only for triads, but for all larger chords as
well: the largest error you'll see is 2/3 of a step. I
did this quickly and would welcome a counterexample.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>   Thank you for your patience...I'm still learning here and I
> know I haven't heard half the amount of scales some of the rest
> of you have...and I may eventually find something already made
> that really hits the mark for me.

Again, I think your expectations are too high -- you can't
pass judgment on a scale in 5 minutes, or 10. It takes some
mucking about. -Carl

FYI: I was in Prague last week, went to the Museum of Music, said I in the
ticket office I was a specialist in tuning things, the lady asked
permission, it was granted, and there I was playing in Alois Haba's Förster
piano: found it in good playing order and in tune! Pity had no scores!

Of course the idea of two pianos one on top of the other and two keyboards
one displaced 1/2 semitone w.r.t. the other is quite simplistic and better
arrangements have been proposed, but this one has the great advantage of
allowing a standard musician to try and inmediately start doing things in
24TET.

Claudio

Haba's quarter-tone piano made by Förster in 1928 which we had long
years in Department of Composition at Janacek's Academy of Music in
Brno, Czech Republic, had three shorter piano manuals with normal
size keys, first and third manual played normal tuning, middle manual
triggered another set of strings tuned quarter-tone higher. Second
manual was placed about two centimeters higher then first one, and
third the same in relation to the second one. So no special key size,
colors or other markings were necessary, playing it was quite easy.
As I have studied pipe organ and was used to more manuals, I could
master it quickly and liked to improvise on it. Unfortunately
approximately in the middle of 80ies it was sent to Museum of music
in Prague...

Great. Must be the same piece I used to play. Congratulations! Nice
experience.

Daniel Forro

On 12 Feb 2009, at 9:33 PM, Claudio Di Veroli wrote:

>
> FYI: I was in Prague last week, went to the Museum of Music, said I
> in the ticket office I was a specialist in tuning things, the lady
> asked permission, it was granted, and there I was playing in Alois
> Haba's Förster piano: found it in good playing order and in tune!
> Pity had no scores!
>
> Of course the idea of two pianos one on top of the other and two
> keyboards one displaced 1/2 semitone w.r.t. the other is quite
> simplistic and better arrangements have been proposed, but this one
> has the great advantage of allowing a standard musician to try and
> inmediately start doing things in 24TET.
>
> Claudio
>
> Haba's quarter-tone piano made by Förster in 1928 which we had long
> years in Department of Composition at Janacek's Academy of Music in
> Brno, Czech Republic, had three shorter piano manuals with normal
> size keys, first and third manual played normal tuning, middle manual
> triggered another set of strings tuned quarter-tone higher. Second
> manual was placed about two centimeters higher then first one, and
> third the same in relation to the second one. So no special key size,
> colors or other markings were necessary, playing it was quite easy.
> As I have studied pipe organ and was used to more manuals, I could
> master it quickly and liked to improvise on it. Unfortunately
> approximately in the middle of 80ies it was sent to Museum of music
> in Prague...

Mike I apologize. I thought you was saying there is an 1/8th tone difference IN 24 TET - not as you seem to mean in comparison to other tuning.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@yahoo.com>

Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:50:50
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?

Argh......
    There is no 1/8th tone, only 1/4 tones in 24TET.  And each 12TET subset of 24TET (starting at C) is a 1/4 above the other 12TET subset (starting at C2).  This is actually really basic stuff.  24TET includes 2 12TET tuning, 36TET includes 3 of them erm 2*12 = 24 and 3*12 = 36...and 48TET has 4 sets of 12TET in it....get it now?

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 3:02 PM

where's the 1/8th tone?

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@ yahoo.com> wrote:

As for the "complex" math (being sarcastic here, it's not complex at all),

This is 24TET
c c2 c# c#2 d d2 d# d#2 e e2 f f2 f# f#2 g g2 g# g#2 a a2 a# a#2 b b2

And these are the two 12TET tunings that come together to comprise it

1) c c# d d# e f f# g g# a a# b
2) c2 c#2 d2 d#2 e2 f2 f#2 g2 g#2 a2 a#2 b2

    As you see, 24TET is really just 12TET stuck in between the notes of 12TET.  And you can use either #1 or #2 in exactly the same way as 12TET, because they both contain EXACTLY the same 100-cent intervals at 12TET.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning]
Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:47 PM

please demonstrate the math.

"    Ugh...again this degree of
error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone
off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th
note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair
chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out
falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis."

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@ yahoo.com> wrote:

---You'll
end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound
---horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."
    Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.

---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself
    That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?

To: tuning@yahoogroups. com

Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:06 PM

Chris said it was hard to use harmonically. I like traditional

Turkish music a lot (and it is only 24-ET to a first

approximation) , but it is not a demonstration of how to use

it *harmonically* . -Carl
Yes, exactly like I wrote before.
"Though I do see serious trouble in 24 tet where you make a melody in 24 tet and then try to harmonise it.

In many cases that won't work in 24tet. Especially in harmonising arabic like melodies.You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."

"But in many other cases where you don't do such things it should work.You can play arabic melodies better than 12tet.And you can play classical music most of the time equally good as 12tet and sometimes a little bit better.

But you'll run into trouble when mixing the 2."
I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself, or studied them.But one look at them tells the above story which is fairly logical.

Marcel

Apology accepted.  :-) BTW, that's right...I meant up to one 8th tone possible error from notes in other "random" scales (IE pelog), not 8th tones within itself. :-)

--- On Thu, 2/12/09, chrisvaisvil@... <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:

From: chrisvaisvil@... <chrisvaisvil@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, February 12, 2009, 7:07 AM

Mike I apologize. I thought you was saying there is an 1/8th tone difference IN 24 TET - not as you seem to mean in comparison to other tuning. Sent via BlackBerry from T-MobileFrom: Michael Sheiman
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:50:50 -0800 (PST)
To: <tuning@yahoogroups. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
Argh......
    There is no 1/8th tone, only 1/4 tones in 24TET.  And each 12TET subset of 24TET (starting at C) is a 1/4 above the other 12TET subset (starting at C2).  This is actually really basic stuff.  24TET includes 2 12TET tuning, 36TET includes 3 of them erm 2*12 = 24 and 3*12 = 36...and 48TET has 4 sets of 12TET in it....get it now?

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 3:02 PM

where's the 1/8th tone?

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@ yahoo.com> wrote:
As for the "complex" math (being sarcastic here, it's not complex at all),

This is 24TET
c c2 c# c#2 d d2 d# d#2 e e2 f f2 f# f#2 g g2 g# g#2 a a2 a# a#2 b b2

And these are the two 12TET tunings that come together to comprise it
1) c c# d d# e f f# g g# a a# b
2) c2 c#2 d2 d#2 e2 f2 f#2 g2 g#2 a2 a#2 b2

    As you see, 24TET is really just 12TET stuck in between the notes of 12TET.  And you can use either #1 or #2 in exactly the same way as 12TET, because they both contain EXACTLY the same 100-cent intervals at 12TET.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@ gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:47 PM

please demonstrate the math.

"    Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis."

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Michael Sheiman <djtrancendance@ yahoo.com> wrote:
---You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound ---horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."
    Ugh...again this degree of error is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  You can't get a full quarter-tone off with a 1/4 tone scale (24TET IS a quarter tone scale)...only an 8th note off.   Restate this as "8th note off" and I'll give you a fair chance to say you are doing something more than just spewing out falsities in order to prove a pet hypothesis.

---I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself
    That would partly explain why you would claim things like the above that simply, even on the most basic mathematical level, are not true.

-Michael

--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@gmail. com>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 2:06 PM

Chris said it was hard to use harmonically. I like traditional
Turkish music a lot (and it is only 24-ET to a first
approximation) , but it is not a demonstration of how to use
it *harmonically* . -Carl
Yes, exactly like I wrote before.
"Though I do see serious trouble in 24 tet where you make a melody in 24 tet and then try to harmonise it. In many cases that won't work in 24tet. Especially in harmonising arabic like melodies.You'll end up with modulations about a quarter note off which'll sound horrible or you'll end up with very out of tune harmonies."
"But in many other cases where you don't do such things it should work.You can play arabic melodies better than 12tet.And you can play classical music most of the time equally good as 12tet and sometimes a little bit better. But you'll run into trouble when mixing the 2."
I've never played 24tet or 53tet myself, or studied them.But one look at them tells the above story which is fairly logical.
Marcel

Michael Sheiman wrote:
> --with all due respect, this *is* the 21st century and all notes are > fair ---game.
> And they are...only with the restriction certain sets of them can be > used "at once" IF you want to get a market-able level of consonance. I > agree with you trying to randomly make chords in 24TET without at least > reserving 12 of those notes for harmony (and using the others only as > neighboring tones) is very hard to do.

Marketable, ugh. I find very little of the sorts of things I actually like to listen to in the aisles of Target or Best Buy.

I like the introductory paragraph of Vincent Persichetti's book _Twentieth-Century Harmony_. "Any tone can succeed any other tone, any tone can sound simultaneously with any other tone or tones.... Successful projection will depend upon the contextual and formal conditions that prevail, and upon the skill and the soul of the composer."

Naturally, he had 12-ET in mind when writing that, but it applies just as well to non-12 music. Since relatively little music has been written in many of these tunings, a good understanding of the "contextual and formal conditions" is not easy to achieve.

I think harmonic entropy is as good an approximation to consonance as any, but there's really only one rule for consonance that matters as far as I'm concerned -- Debussy's "whatever pleases the ear". All the math, as useful as it may be, is just a means to an end.

I also like the challenge of the "bad" tunings on occasion. Getting anything at all musical out of them is a nice achievement.

Graham Breed wrote:
> Michael Sheiman wrote:
>> Maybe Orwell's MOS scales are different somehow (and or one of Wilson's scale >> I haven't heard yet fits the bill)...I'm not quite sure...but I'd like to at >> least hear his scales and give them a shot. > > The 9 note orwell must have been in there. But did you have > it tuned right? It has a fair bit harmonically and plenty > more chords when you extend it up to 22 notes. I haven't > done anything with it myself. If it isn't close enough for > you, then you can try miracle.
> > I know the 10 note miracle scale, and it's got some harmony, > but it's boring melodically. I have used a pentatonic > subset, though. (Close to pygmie.scl in the Scala archive.)

For orwell (named after, but not created by, George Orwell by the way), I'd recommend at least 13 notes, and you'll probably want the 22-note set for more traditional kinds of harmony. I don't know if it's something "average Joe" musicians would immediately find much use for -- it takes some playing around with (and a generalized keyboard would help). Miracle is usable with 21 notes, but you really need at least 31 for more traditional progressions.

Injera is one that might be more accessible. An older name for it is "double diatonic" -- essentially two 6-note scales in meantone-type tuning, a half octave apart. So it's a 12-note scale, it has some recognizable properties, and yet it goes beyond 12-ET to approximate some 7-limit harmonies.

From there, you could go on to something like a hanson scale, based on a chain of minor thirds. 19 notes of hanson temperament is a great system, and you can do a lot with just 11 notes. Lecuona's _Malague�a_ can be played in hanson[11].

big agree:

-marketable: ugh
-Persichetti
-ear
-getting something from any tuning

On Feb 12, 2009, at 9:27 PM, Herman Miller wrote:

> Michael Sheiman wrote:
> > --with all due respect, this *is* the 21st century and all notes are
> > fair ---game.
> > And they are...only with the restriction certain sets of them can be
> > used "at once" IF you want to get a market-able level of > consonance. I
> > agree with you trying to randomly make chords in 24TET without at > least
> > reserving 12 of those notes for harmony (and using the others only > as
> > neighboring tones) is very hard to do.
>
> Marketable, ugh. I find very little of the sorts of things I actually
> like to listen to in the aisles of Target or Best Buy.
>
> I like the introductory paragraph of Vincent Persichetti's book
> _Twentieth-Century Harmony_. "Any tone can succeed any other tone, any
> tone can sound simultaneously with any other tone or tones....
> Successful projection will depend upon the contextual and formal
> conditions that prevail, and upon the skill and the soul of the > composer."
>
> Naturally, he had 12-ET in mind when writing that, but it applies just
> as well to non-12 music. Since relatively little music has been > written
> in many of these tunings, a good understanding of the "contextual and
> formal conditions" is not easy to achieve.
>
> I think harmonic entropy is as good an approximation to consonance as
> any, but there's really only one rule for consonance that matters as > far
> as I'm concerned -- Debussy's "whatever pleases the ear". All the > math,
> as useful as it may be, is just a means to an end.
>
> I also like the challenge of the "bad" tunings on occasion. Getting
> anything at all musical out of them is a nice achievement.
>
>
>

---Marketable, ugh. I find very little of the sorts of things I actually 
---like to listen to in the aisles of Target or Best Buy.

   My point is, much as I respect those who can use ingenius mathematics and sense of tone/emotion to turn crap into gold far as making pieces from bad tunings...it might be an idea to get micro-tonal at least popular enough that more musicians choose to compose in it and thus we'd have more micro-tonal music to choose from.  For the record, I haven't bought a major label release in about a decade...my entire collection comes from white indie labels with the exception of Way Out West (and their stuff is still pretty wierd).

>>>>>>>>
    Listen to this song http://cdbaby.com/cd/marcussatellite2/
   To me it represents a happy medium between microtonal and understandable to most people.
<<<<<<<<<<

    It doesn't really sound pop...more like the sort of pseudo-underground stuff from at-many-times-avant-garde electronic artists like BT or Way Out West. And it's based on one of Wilson's MOS scales, not JI, meantone, or 12TET. 
  Not saying everything should be markettable but...it would greatly help to spread the good word about microtonal if we could at least have a few outstanding examples that say "microtonal can both sound relaxed like 12TET and have different feel....you can actually, say, play microtonal at a dance party as a DJ and still be respected for it".

-Michael

--- On Fri, 2/13/09, caleb morgan <calebmrgn@...> wrote:

From: caleb morgan <calebmrgn@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Musts: Tunings to Compose in Before I Pass?
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, February 13, 2009, 1:50 AM

big agree:
-marketable: ugh-Persichetti-ear-getting something from any tuning

On Feb 12, 2009, at 9:27 PM, Herman Miller wrote:
Michael Sheiman wrote:
> --with all due respect, this *is* the 21st century and all notes are 
> fair ---game.
> And they are...only with the restriction certain sets of them can be 
> used "at once" IF you want to get a market-able level of consonance. I 
> agree with you trying to randomly make chords in 24TET without at least 
> reserving 12 of those notes for harmony (and using the others only as 
> neighboring tones) is very hard to do.

Marketable, ugh. I find very little of the sorts of things I actually 
like to listen to in the aisles of Target or Best Buy.

I like the introductory paragraph of Vincent Persichetti' s book 
_Twentieth-Century Harmony_. "Any tone can succeed any other tone, any 
tone can sound simultaneously with any other tone or tones.... 
Successful projection will depend upon the contextual and formal 
conditions that prevail, and upon the skill and the soul of the composer."

Naturally, he had 12-ET in mind when writing that, but it applies just 
as well to non-12 music. Since relatively little music has been written 
in many of these tunings, a good understanding of the "contextual and 
formal conditions" is not easy to achieve.

I think harmonic entropy is as good an approximation to consonance as 
any, but there's really only one rule for consonance that matters as far 
as I'm concerned -- Debussy's "whatever pleases the ear". All the math, 
as useful as it may be, is just a means to an end.

I also like the challenge of the "bad" tunings on occasion. Getting 
anything at all musical out of them is a nice achievement.