Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Does Darreg's assertion that 17-ET has the "ULTIMATE DISSONANCE" still hold H20?

Hey Guys,

Just wondering if you fully agreed with Ivor Darreg and the
statement he made at: http://sonic-arts.org/darreg/XHB10.htm

If you scroll way down to the "DISADVANTAGES" section
under "Advantages and Disadvantages of the 17-Tone Equal
Temperament", you'll see where Darreg states, rather blatantly, that:

"Seventeen-tone equal temperament possesses the ULTIMATE DISSONANCE:
the cluster of ALL 17 TONES is more dissonant than all 12 or all 19
or all 22 or 31--dissonance DECREASES beyond 17".

This paper was written in 1981. Does everyone still believe, like
Darreg, that 17-ET has the (so-called) "ULTIMATE" dissonance when
compared to ALL other equal temperaments AND ALL other
tuning systems such as Just, Well, MeanTone, Pythagorean, Arabic,
and all the rest??

I'm just curious about your guys' comments on this topic.

Thanks in advance,

Dr. Frank Wilson (Musicology)

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Daniel Forro <dan.for@...>

The more tones, the near we are to a white noise, which means dissonance can really decrease when step siye decreases.

But why exactly 17ET should be something like a limit tuning for this effect? For me there's a continuum from two notes sounding together (depending on their selection they can be pretty dissonant) to white noise.

Besides we shouldn't ignore timbre of the sound. There are also inharmonic and clangorous timbres where even one single tone can be pretty dissonant and out of tune.

Daniel Forro

On 9 Feb 2009, at 11:11 AM, micro_piano wrote:

> Hey Guys,
>
> Just wondering if you fully agreed with Ivor Darreg and the
> statement he made at: http://sonic-arts.org/darreg/XHB10.htm
>
> If you scroll way down to the "DISADVANTAGES" section
> under "Advantages and Disadvantages of the 17-Tone Equal
> Temperament", you'll see where Darreg states, rather blatantly, that:
>
> "Seventeen-tone equal temperament possesses the ULTIMATE DISSONANCE:
> the cluster of ALL 17 TONES is more dissonant than all 12 or all 19
> or all 22 or 31--dissonance DECREASES beyond 17".
>
> This paper was written in 1981. Does everyone still believe, like
> Darreg, that 17-ET has the (so-called) "ULTIMATE" dissonance when
> compared to ALL other equal temperaments AND ALL other
> tuning systems such as Just, Well, MeanTone, Pythagorean, Arabic,
> and all the rest??
>
> I'm just curious about your guys' comments on this topic.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Dr. Frank Wilson (Musicology)
>

🔗micro_piano <frankw802@...>

Okay Graham, I will rephrase my enquiry.

Does everyone agree with Darreg that 17ET is the most dissonant, out-
of-tune sounding temperament when compared to all other equal
temperaments, or even all other whole FAMILIES of temperaments such
as Just, Well, Meantone, Pythagorian, Arabic, etc??

What do you guys think??

Is 17ET the most dissonant, out-of-tune sounding temperament we
have, or can someone come up a better example, using any temperament
in the family of equals or one out of the other temperament
families??

Again, thanks in advance for your answers.

Frank

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "micro_piano" <frankw802@...> wrote:

Hey Guys,

Just wondering if you fully agreed with Ivor Darreg and the
statement he made at: http://sonic-arts.org/darreg/XHB10.htm

If you scroll way down to the "DISADVANTAGES" section
under "Advantages and Disadvantages of the 17-Tone Equal
Temperament", you'll see where Darreg states, rather blatantly, that:

"Seventeen-tone equal temperament possesses the ULTIMATE DISSONANCE:
the cluster of ALL 17 TONES is more dissonant than all 12 or all 19
or all 22 or 31--dissonance DECREASES beyond 17".

I'm just curious about your guys' comments on this topic.

Thanks in advance,

Dr. Frank Wilson (Musicology)

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

Hell Frank!
I don't think anyone believes what Derrig says unconditionally, nor anyone else for that matter. This is not a religion.

I would take the assumption that Derrig came to this conclusion by empirical means.
I am sure he tried it with many different timbres as he investigated different ETs over a very long period of time.
I haven't heard a 17 tone cluster so i can't say. But if this is what i was looking for, i would look there first.
This is the advantage of people investigating various things. I will take heed of empirical experience over "logic"
as what happens with a tuning is too complex to fit in the shallow ideas there are about it. Only by using the ears can anything useful be said.
things happen that "explanations" only follow.
--

/^_,',',',_ //^ /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/>

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

🔗Daniel Wolf <djwolf@...>

I believe that Darreg's assertion was that scales with more than 17 tones cross a certain threshold, past which mid-register clusters will be heard not as (dissonant) chordal structures but as noise bands, for which a consonance-dissonance characterization is not relevant. This was something that Ivor would have demonstrated either with recordings of his amplifying clavichord or organ, or with sets of metallophones. While I personally don't know if 17 is the precise answer to the question, I'm fairly well convinced the answer would have to be in the neighborhood of 17, i.e. with scale steps somewhere midway between those of 12 and 24, if due only to critical band considerations.

Daniel Wolf

🔗Mark Rankin <markrankin95511@...>

Kraig et al,

The "Subject" box spells Ivor's last name, Darreg, correctly, but the e-mails thereafter spell it incorrectly, several times, as Derreg.

It may amuse some younger tuning listers to learn that Ivor's Darreg's name used to be
Ivor Gerrard. First he reversed Gerrard, yielding Ivor Drarreg, then later he shortened
Ivor Drarreg to Ivor Darreg because he thought Ivor Drarreg sounded unnaturally strange and hard for people to remember. Ivor was eccentric, there's no doubt about that!

-- Mark Rankin

--- On Mon, 2/9/09, Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...> wrote:

From: Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>
Subject: [tuning] Re:Darreg's assertion that 17-ET has the "ULTIMATE DISSONANCE"
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, February 9, 2009, 11:56 PM

Hell Frank!
I don't think anyone believes what Derrig says unconditionally, nor
anyone else for that matter. This is not a religion.

I would take the assumption that Derrig came to this conclusion by
empirical means.
I am sure he tried it with many different timbres as he investigated
different ETs over a very long period of time.
I haven't heard a 17 tone cluster so i can't say. But if this is what i
was looking for, i would look there first.
This is the advantage of people investigating various things. I will
take heed of empirical experience over "logic"
as what happens with a tuning is too complex to fit in the shallow ideas
there are about it. Only by using the ears can anything useful be said.
things happen that "explanations" only follow.
--

/^_,',',',_ //^ /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/>

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

🔗George D. Secor <gdsecor@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "micro_piano" <frankw802@...> wrote:
>
> Hey Guys,
>
> Just wondering if you fully agreed with Ivor Darreg and the
> statement he made at: http://sonic-arts.org/darreg/XHB10.htm
>
> If you scroll way down to the "DISADVANTAGES" section
> under "Advantages and Disadvantages of the 17-Tone Equal
> Temperament", you'll see where Darreg states, rather blatantly,
that:
>
> "Seventeen-tone equal temperament possesses the ULTIMATE
DISSONANCE:
> the cluster of ALL 17 TONES is more dissonant than all 12 or all 19
> or all 22 or 31--dissonance DECREASES beyond 17".
>
> This paper was written in 1981. Does everyone still believe, like
> Darreg, that 17-ET has the (so-called) "ULTIMATE" dissonance when
> compared to ALL other equal temperaments AND ALL other
> tuning systems such as Just, Well, MeanTone, Pythagorean, Arabic,
> and all the rest??
>
> I'm just curious about your guys' comments on this topic.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Dr. Frank Wilson (Musicology)

My response:

/tuning/topicId_38179.html#38268

--George

🔗chrisvaisvil@...

This brings to mind a question - do beats beat against each other?

And I would think the ultimate answer to this question would be found in the beat frequecy of the smallest step of an ET. Subjective as to which best frequency is most disagreeable - or another angle is the fact that as you cram more notes into an octave the more tones are available to beat at the fundamental ET beat tone. Until beats disappear when you get close enough.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: "George D. Secor" <gdsecor@yahoo.com>

Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 19:15:08
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [tuning] Re: Does Darreg's assertion that 17-ET has the "ULTIMATE DISSONANCE" still hold H20?

My response:

/tuning/topicId_38179.html#38268

--George

🔗micro_piano <frankw802@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, chrisvaisvil@... wrote:
>
> This brings to mind a question - do beats beat against each other?
>
> And I would think the ultimate answer to this question would be
found in the beat frequecy of the smallest step of an ET. Subjective
as to which best frequency is most disagreeable - or another angle
is the fact that as you cram more notes into an octave the more
tones are available to beat at the fundamental ET beat tone. Until
beats disappear when you get close enough.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

I like your solution Chris. The only problem is, how do you go about
finding the beat frequency of the smallest step of an ET sent via
Blackberry from T-Mobile??

LOL...Frank

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

with a great deal of ingenuity I suppose :-)

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 6:41 PM, micro_piano <frankw802@...> wrote:

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com <tuning%40yahoogroups.com>, chrisvaisvil@...
> wrote:
> >
> > This brings to mind a question - do beats beat against each other?
> >
> > And I would think the ultimate answer to this question would be
> found in the beat frequecy of the smallest step of an ET. Subjective
> as to which best frequency is most disagreeable - or another angle
> is the fact that as you cram more notes into an octave the more
> tones are available to beat at the fundamental ET beat tone. Until
> beats disappear when you get close enough.
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> I like your solution Chris. The only problem is, how do you go about
> finding the beat frequency of the smallest step of an ET sent via
> Blackberry from T-Mobile??
>
> LOL...Frank
>
>
>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗Herman Miller <hmiller@...>

micro_piano wrote:
> Okay Graham, I will rephrase my enquiry.
> > Does everyone agree with Darreg that 17ET is the most dissonant, out-
> of-tune sounding temperament when compared to all other equal > temperaments, or even all other whole FAMILIES of temperaments such > as Just, Well, Meantone, Pythagorian, Arabic, etc??
> > What do you guys think??
> > Is 17ET the most dissonant, out-of-tune sounding temperament we > have, or can someone come up a better example, using any temperament > in the family of equals or one out of the other temperament > families??
> > Again, thanks in advance for your answers.
> > Frank

The claim as I read it in your original message was that the cluster of all 17 notes together was the most dissonant, not that 17-ET sounds out of tune. I don't use large clusters like that, so I don't have the experience to evaluate them.

I think it's likely that Darreg may have overlooked scales that don't repeat at the octave. I suspect that some arbitrary scale, e.g. one built from repeated intervals of 73 cents, will end up sounding more dissonant, but a more interesting question to me might be something along the lines of "which tuning has the least pleasant 4-note chords".

🔗micro_piano <frankw802@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Herman Miller <hmiller@...> wrote:

>micro_piano wrote:

>Okay Graham, I will rephrase my enquiry.

>Does everyone agree with Darreg that 17ET is the most dissonant,
>out-of-tune sounding temperament when compared to all other equal
>temperaments, or even all other whole FAMILIES of temperaments such
>as Just, Well, Meantone, Pythagorian, Arabic, etc??

>What do you guys think??

>Is 17ET the most dissonant, out-of-tune sounding temperament we
>have, or can someone come up a better example, using any
>temperament in the family of equals or one out of the other
>temperament families??

>Again, thanks in advance for your answers.

>Frank.

The claim as I read it in your original message was that the cluster
of all 17 notes together was the most dissonant, not that 17-ET
sounds out of tune. I don't use large clusters like that, so I don't
have the experience to evaluate them.

I think it's likely that Darreg may have overlooked scales that
don't repeat at the octave. I suspect that some arbitrary scale,
e.g. one built from repeated intervals of 73 cents, will end up
sounding more dissonant, but a more interesting question to me might
be something along the lines of "which tuning has the least pleasant
4-note chords".

Herman,

You might just be correct that Darreg may have not have looked at
every scale that repeats at the octave, and if you look at George
Secor's (brilliant as usual) earlier reply to this post,
he mentioned that from some previous studies he did, repeated
intervals of about 70 cents were about as dissonant as he could
achieve at the time (you said 73 cents, so you seem to be in
agreement with that).

As far as 17ET being the most out-of-tune temperament we have, I was
simply going by the idea that Darreg had said that 17ET was the most
dissonant temperament, in my book meaning "sour" or "out-of-tune",
and I was simply asking people if they agreed with him on this.

Earlier, Graham said that I should have used "Family of
Temperaments" instead of "Other Tuning Systems" (to which Carl
thankfully replied "Will you give it a rest?").

I think some folks on this board have become so concerned with
semantics that they have forgotten the real issue at hand, which is
discussing and sharing the beauty of the various tuning systems that
exist in our world.

What a pity.

Frank

🔗micro_piano <frankw802@...>

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Herman Miller <hmiller@> wrote:
>
> >micro_piano wrote:
>
> >Okay Graham, I will rephrase my enquiry.
>
> >Does everyone agree with Darreg that 17ET is the most dissonant,
> >out-of-tune sounding temperament when compared to all other equal
> >temperaments, or even all other whole FAMILIES of temperaments
> >such as Just, Well, Meantone, Pythagorian, Arabic, etc??
>
> >What do you guys think??
>
> >Is 17ET the most dissonant, out-of-tune sounding temperament we
> >have, or can someone come up a better example, using any
> >temperament in the family of equals or one out of the other
> >temperament families??
>
> >Again, thanks in advance for your answers.
>
> >Frank.

The claim as I read it in your original message was that the cluster
of all 17 notes together was the most dissonant, not that 17-ET
sounds out of tune. I don't use large clusters like that, so I don't
have the experience to evaluate them.

I think it's likely that Darreg may have overlooked scales that
don't repeat at the octave. I suspect that some arbitrary scale,
e.g. one built from repeated intervals of 73 cents, will end up
sounding more dissonant, but a more interesting question to me might
be something along the lines of "which tuning has the least pleasant
4-note chords".

Herman,

You might just be correct that Darreg may have not have looked at
every scale that repeats at the octave, and if you look at George
Secor's (right on the nose as usual) earlier reply to this post,
he mentioned that from some previous studies he did, repeated
intervals of about 70 cents were about as dissonant as he could
achieve at the time (you said 73 cents, so you seem to be in
agreement with that).

As far as 17-ET being the most out-of-tune temperament we have, I
was simply going by the idea that Darreg had said that 17-ET was the
most dissonant temperament, in my book meaning "sour" or "out-of-
tune", and I was simply asking people if they agreed with him on
this.

Earlier, Graham said that I should have used "Family of
Temperaments" instead of "Other Tuning Systems" (to which Carl
thankfully replied "Will you give it a rest already?"--or some
remark like that).

What a pity.

Frank