Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning any ideas on a new web host for tonalsoft.com

Hello all,

Since 2005, when i migrated most of my webpages
to tonalsoft.com and changed their format from
.html to .aspx, i have been paying a rather heftly
monthly fee to the current web host for the website,
which includes the entire Encyclopedia.

We expected Tonescape to go commercial sometime
in 2007, but unfortunately it has been stuck in
alpha development phase since then. So the cost
for the web hosting is something i've just had to
bear out of my own personal income.

I'm feeling the effects of the global economic meltdown
just like everyone else, and it has become too great
of a burden for me to pay this cost for the tonalsoft site.

Obviously, with the .aspx format, our web host uses
Windows Server. We do have plans to migrate the site
to a FreeBSD server whose hosting would incur minimal
costs to us, but that means changing each one of the
hundreds of webpages again, back to .html or .php or
some such. That is a big job that will take a long time.

We need to keep our dedicated server, which is why it's
so expensive. Is anyone able to provide a free or
minimal-cost Windows host for the interim? I'll provide
details of how much space we need if anyone can do it.

If anyone would like to donate any money toward the
costs of maintaining the Encyclopedia, please email
me privately about it.

joemonz(AT)yahoo(DOT)com

-monz
http://tonalsoft.com/tonescape.aspx
Tonescape microtonal music software

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

Hi monz,

Sorry, I don't know of any cheap Windows hosts.

Have you considered putting the contents of your
encyclopedia into a wiki? I think it would make a lot
of sense.

Maintaining all those pages is clearly a mammoth tusk
for one person. You've done a fantastic job but many
of the articles are in need of updates, and frequently
you've mentioned articles that you would like to update
but don't have the time to. Well, a wiki would allow
you to divide that work.

I notice you smartly put revision history notes at the
bottom of most pages. But manually tracking this on
each page is another mammoth undertusking. Wikis track
history automatically.

Much of the content in the encyclopedia was taken from
this list, and some of us may like to revise comments
we made, which weren't necessarily originally written
to encyclopedia-quality. I know you worked with Paul
to update a lot of his stuff, but again, that process
proved cumbersome. With a wiki, he could do it himself.

In recent years it's been wonderful to have some of the
alternative tunings content be accepted on Wikipedia.
But much of it is too niche, or too speculative, to
survive there. There's clearly a need for a dedicated
microtonal wiki. And indeed, there is one:

http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/

And its editors have done a fantastic job (I've edited on
only a few occasions). But wikispaces is a proprietary
service, with advertising. And it is (or was in the past)
frequently down (not available).

I would suggest we start a new wiki, merging the content
from your encyclopedia and the wikispaces wiki. I bet it
would take off like crazy from there.

Unlike wikipedia, we could control who has what level of
access. You and the top editors from wikispaces (Jacob
I think) and maybe Graham and I could have admin privileges.
Other microtonalists could have normal privileges, and
the general public would have read-only privileges.

I am happy to pay for 100% of the cost of such a project
for the first two years, up to US$4,000. Beyond that, we
could take donations from other microtonalists or consider
opening up to advertising.

What do you think?

-Carl

🔗Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...>

Check brinkster.com out - I remember them being pretty cheap.
-Mike

On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 12:47 PM, monz <joemonz@...> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Since 2005, when i migrated most of my webpages
> to tonalsoft.com and changed their format from
> .html to .aspx, i have been paying a rather heftly
> monthly fee to the current web host for the website,
> which includes the entire Encyclopedia.
>
> We expected Tonescape to go commercial sometime
> in 2007, but unfortunately it has been stuck in
> alpha development phase since then. So the cost
> for the web hosting is something i've just had to
> bear out of my own personal income.
>
> I'm feeling the effects of the global economic meltdown
> just like everyone else, and it has become too great
> of a burden for me to pay this cost for the tonalsoft site.
>
> Obviously, with the .aspx format, our web host uses
> Windows Server. We do have plans to migrate the site
> to a FreeBSD server whose hosting would incur minimal
> costs to us, but that means changing each one of the
> hundreds of webpages again, back to .html or .php or
> some such. That is a big job that will take a long time.
>
> We need to keep our dedicated server, which is why it's
> so expensive. Is anyone able to provide a free or
> minimal-cost Windows host for the interim? I'll provide
> details of how much space we need if anyone can do it.
>
> If anyone would like to donate any money toward the
> costs of maintaining the Encyclopedia, please email
> me privately about it.
>
> joemonz(AT)yahoo(DOT)com
>
> -monz
> http://tonalsoft.com/tonescape.aspx
> Tonescape microtonal music software
>
>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

Hi Monz,

I would only suggest that if you didn't expect Tonalsoft to reach full commercial viability, that you perhaps merge your content with Jacob's wikispaces pages on microtonality, that way, the tuning community would have one central reference place? Just a thought....

.aspx is evil, especially if it's no small task to script-convert it to html. Another reason to hate Windows.

Best,
Aaron.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@...> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
>
> Since 2005, when i migrated most of my webpages
> to tonalsoft.com and changed their format from
> .html to .aspx, i have been paying a rather heftly
> monthly fee to the current web host for the website,
> which includes the entire Encyclopedia.
>
> We expected Tonescape to go commercial sometime
> in 2007, but unfortunately it has been stuck in
> alpha development phase since then. So the cost
> for the web hosting is something i've just had to
> bear out of my own personal income.
>
> I'm feeling the effects of the global economic meltdown
> just like everyone else, and it has become too great
> of a burden for me to pay this cost for the tonalsoft site.
>
> Obviously, with the .aspx format, our web host uses
> Windows Server. We do have plans to migrate the site
> to a FreeBSD server whose hosting would incur minimal
> costs to us, but that means changing each one of the
> hundreds of webpages again, back to .html or .php or
> some such. That is a big job that will take a long time.
>
> We need to keep our dedicated server, which is why it's
> so expensive. Is anyone able to provide a free or
> minimal-cost Windows host for the interim? I'll provide
> details of how much space we need if anyone can do it.
>
> If anyone would like to donate any money toward the
> costs of maintaining the Encyclopedia, please email
> me privately about it.
>
> joemonz(AT)yahoo(DOT)com
>
> -monz
> http://tonalsoft.com/tonescape.aspx
> Tonescape microtonal music software
>

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

Monz,

I can host you - but it would be a Linux host and it is on a shared server.

go to www.soonlabel.com = it is not slow. Hostgator is a good provider.

I have my host paid through August and I should have the money for another
year by then.

Technically I have unlimited traffic but there are some limits - like number
of simultaneous streams.

Did you happen to keep a backup of the HTML pages prior to conversion?

If it sounds like I can help you out contact me off list and we can talk
about it.

Chris

On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 12:47 PM, monz <joemonz@...> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> Since 2005, when i migrated most of my webpages
> to tonalsoft.com and changed their format from
> .html to .aspx, i have been paying a rather heftly
> monthly fee to the current web host for the website,
> which includes the entire Encyclopedia.
>
> We expected Tonescape to go commercial sometime
> in 2007, but unfortunately it has been stuck in
> alpha development phase since then. So the cost
> for the web hosting is something i've just had to
> bear out of my own personal income.
>
> I'm feeling the effects of the global economic meltdown
> just like everyone else, and it has become too great
> of a burden for me to pay this cost for the tonalsoft site.
>
> Obviously, with the .aspx format, our web host uses
> Windows Server. We do have plans to migrate the site
> to a FreeBSD server whose hosting would incur minimal
> costs to us, but that means changing each one of the
> hundreds of webpages again, back to .html or .php or
> some such. That is a big job that will take a long time.
>
> We need to keep our dedicated server, which is why it's
> so expensive. Is anyone able to provide a free or
> minimal-cost Windows host for the interim? I'll provide
> details of how much space we need if anyone can do it.
>
> If anyone would like to donate any money toward the
> costs of maintaining the Encyclopedia, please email
> me privately about it.
>
> joemonz(AT)yahoo(DOT)com
>
> -monz
> http://tonalsoft.com/tonescape.aspx
> Tonescape microtonal music software
>
>
>

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

Hi Aaron and Carl,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Monz,
>
> I would only suggest that if you didn't expect Tonalsoft
> to reach full commercial viability, that you perhaps merge
> your content with Jacob's wikispaces pages on microtonality,
> that way, the tuning community would have one central
> reference place? Just a thought....

Yes, merging it with the already-existing wiki makes
a whole lot of sense in some ways. But there are some
issues, not least of which is that i no longer have
100% control of the website.

I formed Tonalsoft with a partner, who invested a
considerable amount of his own money, and even more of
his time and effort, into starting up the company and
actually creating the beautiful wonder that is Tonescape,
even in its unfinished current form.

So it's impossible for me to make decisions like this
without his consent, and for now he is unwilling to
make any move that will remove the possibility of
future compensation for his work.

If we could get the investment money we need to
continue working on Tonescape, things could move
along nicely again. But in today's economic climate
i'm a bit pessimistic about getting any serious
investment capital.

> .aspx is evil, especially if it's no small task to
> script-convert it to html. Another reason to hate Windows.

Yes, i know. We made a deliberate business decision
to create Tonescape for the Windows platform, and
the software was eventually supposed to be tightly
integrated into our website.

(This would be another problem with merging the
Encyclopedia with the current wiki. Readers would
have to have some form of Tonescape installed
- and working properly - to view the content we
envision having in the Encyclopedia.)

I really hate .aspx too. It was much easier for me
to maintain my webpages when they were just the
plain vanilla .html that i used to create them.

I'm in the process of finally learning python now,
in the hope that i might be able to write python
scripts which can convert the .aspx into whatever
we need on a Linux or BSD host.

But learning python is going to be a very slow process
for me, in part because now i have a child who is my
number one priority.

The biggest disappointment for me has been the lack
of interest in Tonescape from the people in this
community, since we did make the alpha release
publicly available at no cost.

I realize that there have been issues with getting
it installed or working correctly, and mostly that is
the fault of Microsoft/Windows, because of changes they
keep making in DirectX that are not backwards-compatible.

Even on my own Windows Vista laptop, on which Tonescape
runs perfectly and looks absolutely gorgeous, there was
one point at which an automatic Windows update broke Tonescape,
and it wouldn't even start up. I had to do a restore to a
backed-up version of Vista from before that update, and
luckily i still had exactly _one_ version from before
the update. So now Tonescape is working perfectly again.

... and Vista will never again be connected to the
internet on that machine. So that's how i solve that
problem: use Linux all the time on that machine unless
i want to run Tonescape, then i use Windows Vista.

It's unfortunate that because we ran out of development
money just when we needed it the most, my partner had
to get a job which keeps him extremely busy, and he
could no longer offer the support to users who had
problems with installing Tonescape. And he is the
only person on the planet who has the source code
and knows how it works. Tonescape was entirely my
idea, but he's the one who actually built it.

-monz
http://tonalsoft.com/tonescape.aspx
Tonescape microtonal music software

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗chrisvaisvil@...

I hate to say this - unless you have a release from every contributing author it might be a nightmare trying to make money. If you get one author upset they could potentially shut you down legally. At least that's how I understand the bizarre world of intellectual property.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: "Carl Lumma" <carl@lumma.org>

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 23:09:30
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [tuning] Re: any ideas on a new web host for tonalsoft.com

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@...> wrote:

> I formed Tonalsoft with a partner, who invested a
> considerable amount of his own money, and even more of
> his time and effort, into starting up the company and
> actually creating the beautiful wonder that is Tonescape,
> even in its unfinished current form.
>
> So it's impossible for me to make decisions like this
> without his consent, and for now he is unwilling to
> make any move that will remove the possibility of
> future compensation for his work.

Hi monz,

Are you saying that Chris sees the encyclopedia content
as Tonalsoft property? That would certainly be an
unfortunate position, since much of it is sourced from
posts on these lists. There's certainly a huge value-add
in your putting together the encyclopedia, but for Tonalsoft
to try to monetize the content is a different subject
entirely, ESPECIALLY if your plans for further improving
the encyclopedia are indefinitely on hold.

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

Hi Carl and everyone else,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, chrisvaisvil@ wrote:
> >
> > I hate to say this - unless you have a release from every
> > contributing author it might be a nightmare trying to make money.
> > If you get one author upset they could potentially shut you down
> > legally. At least that's how I understand the bizarre world of
> > intellectual property.
>
> It's not so severe as that. A disgruntled author would first
> send a cease-and-desist. Monz & Chris could then simply take
> the author's material down. If they had already made a significant
> amount of money and said material constituted a significant
> portion of the encyclopedia, the author might have a case to
> sue for some compensation.
>
> I personally do not foresee taking any of these actions as
> an author, nor would I expect Paul, Gene, etc. to do so.
> My concern is what is best for this community. If we have
> people monetizing content from this list, I think it's a
> disservice to the community. If we miss out on the opportunity
> to create this wiki, that we've talked about for so long
> but couldn't really do until now (with the hindsight we now
> have on what happened here '99-06), that'll be a big loss.
> The tuning group is always changing, but over the past 1-2
> years it's changed more than usual, and it seems like a good
> time to make some next steps.

I've said this before, but i will say it again ...

The Tonalsoft Encyclopedia is my creation, and the
vast majority of the material in it is my own work.

I consider the quoted material by other authors to be
in the nature of citations which support my main text,
and they are always presented exactly as such, with
author's name, tuning group message number, and timestamp,
and the message number reference is almost always a link
which points to the original source message itself in
the yahoo groups archive.

I think our Terms of Use are pretty fair:
http://tonalsoft.com/terms.aspx

They give users and contributors plenty of options,
including complete exclusion from our website
if that is what's desired.

I'm at least as interested in presenting the history
of tuning, as i am about exploring the manifestations
of new ideas in microtonality (or xenharmony).
I'm trying really hard to see the big picture, and
with my interest in the Sumerians i feel that i've
at least gone back as far as i can in human history.

As i said, we envisioned transforming the static graphics
which exist now on the current Encyclopedia pages
into real-time animated-video-with-audio, illustrating
particular topics in the world of tuning-theory and
history.

These graphics would use a minimal version of
Tonescape to produce the video and audio,
running in the webpage, with all notes
portrayed in both Pitch Height and Lattice video,
and i would also include any available staff-notation
and other diagrams.

Thus, the greatest strength of Tonescape
-- its ability to represent musical data as, simultaneously:

* points in multi-dimensional genera in lattice-space,
in one window

* lines representing pitch (vertical) and duration (horizontal)
on a regular cartesian graph, in another window

* audio representing the particular tuning used in the
.tonescape file and portrayed visually in the 2 windows,
to the resolution of tuning available in the soundcard
hardware

-- would be utilized on the webpages to illustrate
particular examples being discussed in the webpage article.

Tonescape aims to bridge the gaps in the conceptions
of tuning which were enforced by lack of technology
in the pre-computer eras. It can show any possible
conception of tuning -- whether a just-intonation,
temperament, or something other -- within one frame
of reference: the main navigation window which contains
the Pitch-Height and Lattice windows and their accessory
windows.

Tonescape takes advantage of the computer's ability
to represent at least 3 very different experiences
of music concurrently and in real-time.

I think all 3 of those representations are important
and each has different aspects to illuminate in
my quest to understand the effect and affect of tuning data
on human emotional response to music.

I welcome and encourage everyone else to participate
in that quest, on each person's own terms. We will
always be willing to negotiate individual contracts fairly.

We strongly believe that Tonescape is an entirely unique
new kind of software, and would like Tonalsoft to be a
special force in the tuning community.
I think that sums up our position.

-monz
http://tonalsoft.com/tonescape.aspx
Tonescape microtonal music software

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

Hi Carl,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@> wrote:
> >
> > I've said this before, but i will say it again ...
> >
> > The Tonalsoft Encyclopedia is my creation, and the
> > vast majority of the material in it is my own work.
> > I consider the quoted material by other authors to be
> > in the nature of citations which support my main text,
>
> I'm afraid I can't agree with this assessment, monz,
> but I won't argue about it here. The encyclopedia is
> there for all to see.

I most cases where a particular webpage's content
as it stands right now consists mainly of a quote
of work by someone else, it's because that quote was
an inspiration to me to create that webpage, and i
plan eventually (but i can't really say when) to
elaborate greatly on that quote.

Think about it ... if a page about a certain temperament
which was invented by Gene consists entirely or almost
entirely of content written by him, you now that it's
going to be all tables and text, and perhaps some
extremely technical mathematical explanation.

In my elaborated version of that page, there will be
a window on the webpage with a Lattice of the tuning,
and with an example Musical Piece (i.e., .tonescape file)
running, playing the audio and both the real-time
Pitch-Height and Lattice windows.

I know that's not what these pages look like now,
but that's my plan for some future version of the website.

> > and they are always presented exactly as such, with
> > author's name, tuning group message number, and timestamp,
> > and the message number reference is almost always a link
> > which points to the original source message itself in
> > the yahoo groups archive.
>
> That's true.
>
> -Carl
>

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Aaron and Carl,
>
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Monz,
> >
> > I would only suggest that if you didn't expect Tonalsoft
> > to reach full commercial viability, that you perhaps merge
> > your content with Jacob's wikispaces pages on microtonality,
> > that way, the tuning community would have one central
> > reference place? Just a thought....
>
>
> Yes, merging it with the already-existing wiki makes
> a whole lot of sense in some ways. But there are some
> issues, not least of which is that i no longer have
> 100% control of the website.

I think you could argue, as Carl did, that the encyclopedia is really problamatic for you to make money with.

> The biggest disappointment for me has been the lack
> of interest in Tonescape from the people in this
> community, since we did make the alpha release
> publicly available at no cost.

Do you blame the community? Or have you thought about why they might not have had an interest more than you expected? I would offer three theories: one is that people are used to their tools, find them sufficient, and don't need Tonescape. 2nd reason might be lack of Linux and Mac binaries. 3rd reason might be the price, measured against what people perceive they are able to do without it.

It looks great, with a nice GUI, etc., but as for MIDI, the same limitations apply: if one wants to use MIDI for microtonality, it's a pain anyway, but still less painful for most than typing note values in, or point-an-clicking note events. Then, there is the limitations of MIDI regarding tuning--you need software or hardware that recognize tables, preferably multiple tables, and then there's the pitch bend problem.

BTW, does Tonescape output Csound score files?

> It's unfortunate that because we ran out of development
> money just when we needed it the most, my partner had
> to get a job which keeps him extremely busy, and he
> could no longer offer the support to users who had
> problems with installing Tonescape. And he is the
> only person on the planet who has the source code
> and knows how it works. Tonescape was entirely my
> idea, but he's the one who actually built it.

You could implement a non-for-profit foundation model under open source, which accepts donations. Ardour (a great open-source DAW) works this way...and I've donated money to the Ardour project. I would donate to Tonescape, and might use it, if it were open source and available for Linux. If you or Chris say "no way", consider how much money you are making now on it, and consider how many are using Tonescape now. I would bet that you'd have more users and more money right now under an open source, non-for-profit scheme. Plus, people couldtake donations to you as tax-deductible if you get NFP status.

You'd also have something else--more people helping Chris hack and work out bugs and a quicker development model.

Best,
Aaron.

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

Hi Aaron,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...> wrote:

> I think you could argue, as Carl did, that the
> encyclopedia is really problamatic for you to make money with.

We never planned on actually making any money from
the Encyclopedia itself. The whole idea is for
the Encyclopedia to be, first, an easily accessible
repository for the online world of what for me was a
tremendous amount of very hard-to-find information,
and second, a vehicle to show off how great Tonescape is.
We planned to make money by selling Tonescape.

Of course we are still far from that goal, one reason
being that the current version of Tonescape is
available for free.

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@...> wrote:
>
> > The biggest disappointment for me has been the lack
> > of interest in Tonescape from the people in this
> > community, since we did make the alpha release
> > publicly available at no cost.
>
> Do you blame the community? Or have you thought about
> why they might not have had an interest more than you
> expected? I would offer three theories: one is that
> people are used to their tools, find them sufficient,
> and don't need Tonescape.

I think that is probably our biggest hurdle.
Tonescape is indeed a new way of creating tunings
and microtonal pieces. Pretty much the only thing
about the user interface which it has in common with
currently available tools, other than the audio
playback controls, is that you can enter notes
into your score by clicking them on the approprate
place on the computer screen.

> 2nd reason might be lack of Linux and Mac binaries.

As i said, that was a deliberate business decision,
which now i wish we could remedy. Having become a
bit of a Linux guru myself in the past year, i'd really
love to have Tonescape running under Linux.

And no, it won't run under Wine. I've tried it many
times and have yet to get it installed, let alone running.

> 3rd reason might be the price, measured against what
> people perceive they are able to do without it.

But as it is right now, this is a non-issue, because
Tonescape is currently zero cost - the alpha version
is available as a free download.

> BTW, does Tonescape output Csound score files?

Yes.

It currently only produces one Csound .orc instrument,
having an acoustic guitar sound. So you would have to
manually coordinate your own .orc file with the .sco
file exported by Tonescape.

But all of the pitch and rhythmic data produced by
Tonescape is rendered faithfully in the Csound score file.

> You could implement a non-for-profit foundation model
> under open source, which accepts donations. Ardour
> (a great open-source DAW) works this way...and I've
> donated money to the Ardour project. I would donate
> to Tonescape, and might use it, if it were open source and
> available for Linux. If you or Chris say "no way",
> consider how much money you are making now on it, and
> consider how many are using Tonescape now. I would bet
> that you'd have more users and more money right now under
> an open source, non-for-profit scheme. Plus, people
> couldtake donations to you as tax-deductible if you
> get NFP status.
>
> You'd also have something else--more people helping
> Chris hack and work out bugs and a quicker development model.

Of course i would like to be earning some money from
Tonescape, but honestly the main thing i'd like to see
is ongoing development of it. That's exactly why i wish
there was an open-source version of it for Linux ...
well, there's also the fact that i use Linux all the
time now, and the only reason i ever boot into Windows
is to use Tonescape!

-monz
http://tonalsoft.com/tonescape.aspx
Tonescape microtonal music software

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

Dear Monz,

Really sorry to hear about the current state of affairs with Tonescape. Working on software for microtonal composition myself I really regret its stalled status.

On Apr 1, 2009, at 9:36 PM, monz wrote:
> The whole idea is for the Encyclopedia to be, first, an easily > accessible
> repository for the online world of what for me was a
> tremendous amount of very hard-to-find information,

It does indeed a great job for this purpose!

> > 2nd reason might be lack of Linux and Mac binaries.
>
> As i said, that was a deliberate business decision,
> which now i wish we could remedy. Having become a
> bit of a Linux guru myself in the past year, i'd really
> love to have Tonescape running under Linux.
>
> And no, it won't run under Wine. I've tried it many
> times and have yet to get it installed, let alone running.

I take it you also considered using Mono? But probably some libraries are missing on which the current development depends...
> It currently only produces one Csound .orc instrument,
> having an acoustic guitar sound. So you would have to
> manually coordinate your own .orc file with the .sco
> file exported by Tonescape.
>

This should be a non-issue to any Csound user :) It would also be easy to make it more convenient by allowing the user to set an ORC file.
> well, there's also the fact that i use Linux all the
> time now, and the only reason i ever boot into Windows
> is to use Tonescape!
>

Hm, that is somewhat ironic that you software does not even suit you own needs anymore :) Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Best
Torsten

--
Torsten Anders
Interdisciplinary Centre for Computer Music Research
University of Plymouth
Office: +44-1752-586219
Private: +44-1752-558917
http://strasheela.sourceforge.net
http://www.torsten-anders.de

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

On Apr 1, 2009, at 9:57 PM, Torsten Anders wrote:
> Working on software for microtonal composition myself

BTW: I should perhaps mention that Strasheela meanwhile supports adaptive JI. In the composition process, the software can generate an explicit harmonic structure (quasi a harmonic analysis) which restricts the actual note pitches (e.g. note pitch classes are either harmonic tones of their related chord, or non-harmonic tones which are specially treated, e.g., stepwise resolved). So, as I have the underlying harmonic structure anyway, I can then use it for adaptive JI. (I also have some first promising results in automatic analysis of existing music, but that matter is unfinished)

I generalised Vicentino's idea in the following way. The root of a chord is tuned as defined by the current tuning table (by default an ET depending on the current number of notes per octave, but the user can freely define it, in a format similar to the Scala scale format). In other words: the root is left tempered. Any non-root chord tone is tuned using this chord root and the note's respective ratio specified for the related chord: all possible chords are specified in a list with features such as untransposed root and untransposed pitch classes. These features can be ratios, but also integer pitch classes (in which case adaptive JI will leave them the pitch of the tuning table -- so you can have progressions of both JI chords and tempered chords). Finally, non-chord tones are tuned using again the related chord's root and a mapping of the pitch class interval between this tone and the related chord root to JI intervals (e.g., in 31 ET, 18 maps to 3/2). Alternatively, non-chord tones can also follow the tuning table.

I did some tests with decatonic chord progressions (e.g., using Erlich's dynamic symmetrical major): quite a difference compared with 22 ET :)

Best
Torsten

PS: Just in case: the model described is currently only available in the SVN repository, the last release contains an older version.

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

Hi Torsten,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...> wrote:

> I take it you also considered using Mono? But probably
> some libraries are missing on which the current development
> depends...

Tonescape is a huge program, with a vast amount of code,
most of it written in C#. So Mono would be the obvious
alternative if we were to rewrite it.

But i'm just talking about trying to install the current
install file which can be downloaded from our website,
but in Wine running under Linux, instead of in Windows.
And i have not been able to make it work yet.

> > well, there's also the fact that i use Linux all the
> > time now, and the only reason i ever boot into Windows
> > is to use Tonescape!
> >
>
> Hm, that is somewhat ironic that you software does not
> even suit you own needs anymore :) Thanks for sharing
> your thoughts.

The very first computer operating system i learned was
Unix on a PDP-11, back in 1984 when i took the computer
music course at Brooklyn College with Charles Dodge.
Up until then my only computer experience had been
with BASIC.

In 1986 i bought my first IBM PC, and over the next
9 years became quite a power DOS user. I enjoyed tinkering
with the OS back then.

Around 1994 i installed Windows 3.1, and i liked that too.

But when i upgraded to Windows 95, i started having
so many OS problems that i decided to pay someone else
to do work on my computers. And that's how it stayed
right thru my move to San Diego. I lost all interest
in dealing with the OS.

Then in 2006 i took a course in C/C++ programming
with a teacher who really loves Linux, and it seemed
like i had reconnected with an old friend.

Then exactly a year ago i began my current love affair
with Linux. So i'm enjoying becoming a system administrator
again. :)

Windows just doesn't do it for me anymore.
But as i've said, building Tonescape on the Windows
platform was a business decision, because at the time
something like 95% of the world's computers were
running Windows.

-monz
http://tonalsoft.com/tonescape.aspx
Tonescape microtonal music software

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

Torsten,

I've looked into Strasheela, and I'm VERY interested in what it does, but it seems confusing and hard to learm, and the documentation, as I recall, was not much help, or very sparse at explaining things...I don't remember if there was a tutorial, or example files, but that would really be helpful.

Or, some kind of front-end?

Best,
Aaron.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...> wrote:
>
> On Apr 1, 2009, at 9:57 PM, Torsten Anders wrote:
> > Working on software for microtonal composition myself
>
> BTW: I should perhaps mention that Strasheela meanwhile supports
> adaptive JI. In the composition process, the software can generate an
> explicit harmonic structure (quasi a harmonic analysis) which
> restricts the actual note pitches (e.g. note pitch classes are either
> harmonic tones of their related chord, or non-harmonic tones which
> are specially treated, e.g., stepwise resolved). So, as I have the
> underlying harmonic structure anyway, I can then use it for adaptive
> JI. (I also have some first promising results in automatic analysis
> of existing music, but that matter is unfinished)
>
> I generalised Vicentino's idea in the following way. The root of a
> chord is tuned as defined by the current tuning table (by default an
> ET depending on the current number of notes per octave, but the user
> can freely define it, in a format similar to the Scala scale format).
> In other words: the root is left tempered. Any non-root chord tone is
> tuned using this chord root and the note's respective ratio specified
> for the related chord: all possible chords are specified in a list
> with features such as untransposed root and untransposed pitch
> classes. These features can be ratios, but also integer pitch classes
> (in which case adaptive JI will leave them the pitch of the tuning
> table -- so you can have progressions of both JI chords and tempered
> chords). Finally, non-chord tones are tuned using again the related
> chord's root and a mapping of the pitch class interval between this
> tone and the related chord root to JI intervals (e.g., in 31 ET, 18
> maps to 3/2). Alternatively, non-chord tones can also follow the
> tuning table.
>
> I did some tests with decatonic chord progressions (e.g., using
> Erlich's dynamic symmetrical major): quite a difference compared with
> 22 ET :)
>
> Best
> Torsten
>
> PS: Just in case: the model described is currently only available in
> the SVN repository, the last release contains an older version.
>
> --
> Torsten Anders
> Interdisciplinary Centre for Computer Music Research
> University of Plymouth
> Office: +44-1752-586219
> Private: +44-1752-558917
> http://strasheela.sourceforge.net
> http://www.torsten-anders.de
>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@...> wrote:

> Of course i would like to be earning some money from
> Tonescape, but honestly the main thing i'd like to see
> is ongoing development of it. That's exactly why i wish
> there was an open-source version of it for Linux ...
> well, there's also the fact that i use Linux all the
> time now, and the only reason i ever boot into Windows
> is to use Tonescape!

Sounds like you and Chris are at odds over where to go, eh?

Maybe you can convince him that if he can't make money right away with a commercial Windows model, he can at least recoup some cash from donations, and have cache as a killer open-source developer? And, know that it's getting at least some use in the community.

Anyway, what else are the options? Might as well use that code/open it up to other to use.

My guess is that tying the code to such a proprietary language and library as C# was a bad move that may have 'killed the code' in some sense. If you ever decide to open the code up, there are going to be some migration problems for certain. But, it's best to build on a real cross-platform GUI library if possible.

Manuel Op de Coul would be of real help with advice here, since SCALA runs on anything at this point. BTW, ages ago, I was the first to convince him to port the then non-GUI version to Linux! I think that was like 1997 or 1998....

-A.

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

Dear Carl,

On Apr 2, 2009, at 8:17 AM, Carl Lumma wrote:
> Could you post samples of the decatonic adaptive JI you did?

I just uploaded a two examples in a few versions.

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

The first example is a five-voice homophonic chord progression using chords of dynamic symmetrical major in C. There are mp3 files and pdf files of the score. The scores uses my version of 22 ET notation, for an explanation see http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/ET22/ET22-notation.pdf.

First a chord progression in adaptive JI, the chord roots are tempered in 22 ET (see my previous mail).
http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-adaptiveJI-from22ET.mp3
http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-adaptiveJI-from22ET.pdf

Note that the score notates the pitch inflections under the notes. The upper number is always the deviation from 22 ET in cent, and the lower number is the absolute pitch as a "Midi float".

Now this progression in 22 ET.
http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-22ET.mp3

For completeness, now the progression in Pajara (RMS optimisation). I must confess that I have problems hearing the difference to 22 ET in this context.
http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-PajaraRMS.mp3

Finally, adaptive JI where the roots are tempered in Pajara.
http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-adaptiveJI-fromPajaraRMS.mp3
http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-adaptiveJI-fromPajaraRMS.pdf

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

The second example features some non-harmonic tones over a plain I IV V I progression (all harmonic 7th chords :) Again, the same notation is used.

The adaptive JI version, chord roots are again tempered in 22 ET.
http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/DecatonicCadence1/DecatonicCadence1-adaptiveJI.mp3
http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/DecatonicCadence1/DecatonicCadence1-adaptiveJI.pdf

Now the 22 ET version
http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/DecatonicCadence1/DecatonicCadence1-ET22.mp3

Of course, comments are welcome.

Best
Torsten

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

Sorry that all links are rather long and broken -- nevertheless, I confirmed that all are working.

Best
Torsten

On Apr 3, 2009, at 12:22 AM, Torsten Anders wrote:
> Dear Carl,
>
> On Apr 2, 2009, at 8:17 AM, Carl Lumma wrote:
> > Could you post samples of the decatonic adaptive JI you did?
>
> I just uploaded a two examples in a few versions.
>
> -----------------------
>
> The first example is a five-voice homophonic chord progression using
> chords of dynamic symmetrical major in C. There are mp3 files and pdf
> files of the score. The scores uses my version of 22 ET notation, for
> an explanation see http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/
> StrasheelaExample/ET22/ET22-notation.pdf.
>
> First a chord progression in adaptive JI, the chord roots are
> tempered in 22 ET (see my previous mail).
> http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/
> DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-adaptiveJI-from22ET.mp3
> http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/
> DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-adaptiveJI-from22ET.pdf
>
> Note that the score notates the pitch inflections under the notes.
> The upper number is always the deviation from 22 ET in cent, and the
> lower number is the absolute pitch as a "Midi float".
>
> Now this progression in 22 ET.
> http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/
> DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-22ET.mp3
>
> For completeness, now the progression in Pajara (RMS optimisation). I
> must confess that I have problems hearing the difference to 22 ET in
> this context.
> http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/
> DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-PajaraRMS.mp3
>
> Finally, adaptive JI where the roots are tempered in Pajara.
> http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/
> DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-adaptiveJI-fromPajaraRMS.mp3
> http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/
> DecatonicProgression1/Decatonic1-adaptiveJI-fromPajaraRMS.pdf
>
> -------------------------------
>
> The second example features some non-harmonic tones over a plain I IV
> V I progression (all harmonic 7th chords :) Again, the same notation
> is used.
>
> The adaptive JI version, chord roots are again tempered in 22 ET.
> http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/
> DecatonicCadence1/DecatonicCadence1-adaptiveJI.mp3
> http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/
> DecatonicCadence1/DecatonicCadence1-adaptiveJI.pdf
>
> Now the 22 ET version
> http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/tanders/StrasheelaExample/adaptiveJI/
> DecatonicCadence1/DecatonicCadence1-ET22.mp3
>
> Of course, comments are welcome.
>
> Best
> Torsten
>
> --
> Torsten Anders
> Interdisciplinary Centre for Computer Music Research
> University of Plymouth
> Office: +44-1752-586219
> Private: +44-1752-558917
> http://strasheela.sourceforge.net
> http://www.torsten-anders.de
>

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

Dear Aaron,

On Apr 2, 2009, at 6:26 PM, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
> I've looked into Strasheela, and I'm VERY interested in what it > does, but it seems confusing and hard to learm, and the > documentation, as I recall, was not much help, or very sparse at > explaining things...I don't remember if there was a tutorial, or > example files, but that would really be helpful.
>
>
Thank you for your interest. I must confess that Strasheela was designed for programmers, and I am certainly aware that it has a steep learning curve.

The reference documentation is actually rather complete, but I agree that the tutorial is leaves a lot to be desired. The first part of the tutorial is finished: it introduces the subset of the Oz programming language which is required to the started (Oz serves as user interface and implementation language). The actual introduction of Strasheela itself, however, is unfinished in the tutorial.

Nevertheless, there are many examples which are extensively commented. My hope is that they can complement the lacking tutorial. A subset of these examples is even documented in HTML (http://strasheela.sourceforge.net/strasheela/doc/StrasheelaExamples.html).

Also, the underlying concepts are explained in much detail in my thesis.

Best
Torsten

>
> Best,
> Aaron.
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...> > wrote:
> >
> > On Apr 1, 2009, at 9:57 PM, Torsten Anders wrote:
> > > Working on software for microtonal composition myself
> >
> > BTW: I should perhaps mention that Strasheela meanwhile supports
> > adaptive JI. In the composition process, the software can > generate an
> > explicit harmonic structure (quasi a harmonic analysis) which
> > restricts the actual note pitches (e.g. note pitch classes are > either
> > harmonic tones of their related chord, or non-harmonic tones which
> > are specially treated, e.g., stepwise resolved). So, as I have the
> > underlying harmonic structure anyway, I can then use it for adaptive
> > JI. (I also have some first promising results in automatic analysis
> > of existing music, but that matter is unfinished)
> >
> > I generalised Vicentino's idea in the following way. The root of a
> > chord is tuned as defined by the current tuning table (by default an
> > ET depending on the current number of notes per octave, but the user
> > can freely define it, in a format similar to the Scala scale > format).
> > In other words: the root is left tempered. Any non-root chord > tone is
> > tuned using this chord root and the note's respective ratio > specified
> > for the related chord: all possible chords are specified in a list
> > with features such as untransposed root and untransposed pitch
> > classes. These features can be ratios, but also integer pitch > classes
> > (in which case adaptive JI will leave them the pitch of the tuning
> > table -- so you can have progressions of both JI chords and tempered
> > chords). Finally, non-chord tones are tuned using again the related
> > chord's root and a mapping of the pitch class interval between this
> > tone and the related chord root to JI intervals (e.g., in 31 ET, 18
> > maps to 3/2). Alternatively, non-chord tones can also follow the
> > tuning table.
> >
> > I did some tests with decatonic chord progressions (e.g., using
> > Erlich's dynamic symmetrical major): quite a difference compared > with
> > 22 ET :)
> >
> > Best
> > Torsten
> >
> > PS: Just in case: the model described is currently only available in
> > the SVN repository, the last release contains an older version.
> >
>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

Dear Carl,

On Apr 3, 2009, at 9:42 AM, Torsten Anders wrote:
> On Apr 3, 2009, at 7:40 AM, Carl Lumma wrote:
> > Can I convince you to move the pitch
> > down um, 3 octaves or so? :)
>
> Do you perhaps have a problem with this organ registration? The
> pitches are in the range of a mixed choir.

Below please find the content of the related CSound *.sco files, so you can render them to a sound of your preference (or simply transpose them down :). The file names exactly match the names of in previous mail, except for the extension.

Best
Torsten

============================
Example 1: chord progression
============================

------------------------------------------------------------
Decatonic1-adaptiveJI-from22ET.sco

t 0 60.0

i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 75.863
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 73.091
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 72.975
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 79.091
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 72.0
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 71.884
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 70.954
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 72.975
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 72.0
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 67.02
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 68.817
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 72.975
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 70.954
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 67.02
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 68.727
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 70.954
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 67.149
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 67.02
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 60.0
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 64.954
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 64.838
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 62.817
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 63.863
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 63.747
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 62.817
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 60.975
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 63.863
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 57.688
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 56.817
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 55.149
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 57.688
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 54.059
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 52.838
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 57.688
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 48.0
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 49.091
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 45.818
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 43.091
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 48.0
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 44.727
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 43.091
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 45.818
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 48.0

------------------------------------------------------------
Decatonic1-22ET.sco

t 0 60.0

i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 75.818
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 73.091
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 73.091
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 79.091
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 72.0
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 72.0
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 70.909
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 73.091
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 72.0
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 67.091
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 68.727
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 73.091
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 70.909
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 67.091
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 68.727
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 70.909
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 67.091
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 67.091
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 60.0
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 64.909
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 64.909
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 62.727
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 63.818
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 63.818
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 62.727
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 61.091
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 63.818
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 57.818
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 56.727
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 57.818
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 54.0
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 52.909
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 57.818
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 48.0
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 49.091
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 45.818
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 43.091
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 48.0
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 44.727
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 43.091
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 45.818
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 48.0

------------------------------------------------------------
Decatonic1-adaptiveJI-fromPajaraRMS.sco

t 0 60.0

i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 75.863
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 73.088
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 72.95
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 79.088
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 72.0
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 71.862
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 70.951
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 72.95
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 72.0
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 67.02
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 68.814
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 72.95
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 70.951
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 67.02
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 68.705
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 70.951
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 67.125
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 67.02
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 60.0
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 64.951
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 64.813
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 62.814
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 63.863
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 63.725
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 62.814
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 60.95
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 63.863
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 57.688
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 56.814
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 55.125
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 55.088
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 57.688
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 54.036
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 55.088
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 52.813
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 57.688
i1 0.0 2.0 0.50394 48.0
i1 2.0 2.0 0.50394 49.088
i1 4.0 2.0 0.50394 45.793
i1 6.0 2.0 0.50394 43.088
i1 8.0 2.0 0.50394 48.0
i1 10.0 2.0 0.50394 44.705
i1 12.0 2.0 0.50394 43.088
i1 14.0 2.0 0.50394 45.793
i1 16.0 2.0 0.50394 48.0

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

==================================
Example 2: with non-harmonic tones
==================================

------------------------------------------------------------
DecatonicCadence1-adaptiveJI.sco

t 0 60.0

i1 0.0 0.5 0.50394 75.863
i1 0.5 0.5 0.50394 67.02
i1 1.0 0.5 0.50394 75.863
i1 1.5 0.5 0.50394 76.98
i1 2.0 0.5 0.50394 75.863
i1 2.5 0.5 0.50394 74.669
i1 3.0 0.5 0.50394 76.909
i1 3.5 0.5 0.50394 71.929
i1 4.0 0.5 0.50394 73.046
i1 4.5 0.5 0.50394 74.597
i1 5.0 0.5 0.50394 71.929
i1 5.5 0.5 0.50394 69.89
i1 6.0 0.5 0.50394 70.954
i1 6.5 0.5 0.50394 67.091
i1 7.0 0.5 0.50394 70.954
i1 7.5 0.5 0.50394 72.071
i1 8.0 0.5 0.50394 70.954
i1 8.5 0.5 0.50394 67.091
i1 9.0 0.5 0.50394 69.688
i1 9.5 0.5 0.50394 67.02
i1 10.0 0.5 0.50394 69.688
i1 10.5 0.5 0.50394 70.883
i1 11.0 0.5 0.50394 69.688
i1 11.5 0.5 0.50394 67.02
i1 0.0 3.0 0.50394 67.02
i1 0.0 3.0 0.50394 60.0
i1 0.0 3.0 0.50394 57.688
i1 0.0 3.0 0.50394 55.02
i1 3.0 3.0 0.50394 64.909
i1 3.0 3.0 0.50394 62.597
i1 3.0 3.0 0.50394 59.929
i1 3.0 3.0 0.50394 56.772
i1 6.0 3.0 0.50394 67.091
i1 6.0 3.0 0.50394 62.11
i1 6.0 3.0 0.50394 58.954
i1 6.0 3.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 9.0 3.0 0.50394 67.02
i1 9.0 3.0 0.50394 63.863
i1 9.0 3.0 0.50394 60.0
i1 9.0 3.0 0.50394 55.02
i1 0.0 3.0 0.50394 48.0
i1 3.0 3.0 0.50394 52.909
i1 6.0 3.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 9.0 3.0 0.50394 48.0

------------------------------------------------------------
DecatonicCadence1-ET22.sco

t 0 60.0

i1 0.0 0.5 0.50394 75.818
i1 0.5 0.5 0.50394 67.091
i1 1.0 0.5 0.50394 75.818
i1 1.5 0.5 0.50394 76.909
i1 2.0 0.5 0.50394 75.818
i1 2.5 0.5 0.50394 74.727
i1 3.0 0.5 0.50394 76.909
i1 3.5 0.5 0.50394 72.0
i1 4.0 0.5 0.50394 73.091
i1 4.5 0.5 0.50394 74.727
i1 5.0 0.5 0.50394 72.0
i1 5.5 0.5 0.50394 69.818
i1 6.0 0.5 0.50394 70.909
i1 6.5 0.5 0.50394 67.091
i1 7.0 0.5 0.50394 70.909
i1 7.5 0.5 0.50394 72.0
i1 8.0 0.5 0.50394 70.909
i1 8.5 0.5 0.50394 67.091
i1 9.0 0.5 0.50394 69.818
i1 9.5 0.5 0.50394 67.091
i1 10.0 0.5 0.50394 69.818
i1 10.5 0.5 0.50394 70.909
i1 11.0 0.5 0.50394 69.818
i1 11.5 0.5 0.50394 67.091
i1 0.0 3.0 0.50394 67.091
i1 0.0 3.0 0.50394 60.0
i1 0.0 3.0 0.50394 57.818
i1 0.0 3.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 3.0 3.0 0.50394 64.909
i1 3.0 3.0 0.50394 62.727
i1 3.0 3.0 0.50394 60.0
i1 3.0 3.0 0.50394 56.727
i1 6.0 3.0 0.50394 67.091
i1 6.0 3.0 0.50394 62.182
i1 6.0 3.0 0.50394 58.909
i1 6.0 3.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 9.0 3.0 0.50394 67.091
i1 9.0 3.0 0.50394 63.818
i1 9.0 3.0 0.50394 60.0
i1 9.0 3.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 0.0 3.0 0.50394 48.0
i1 3.0 3.0 0.50394 52.909
i1 6.0 3.0 0.50394 55.091
i1 9.0 3.0 0.50394 48.0

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

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

On Apr 3, 2009, at 11:18 AM, Torsten Anders wrote:
> Below please find the content of the related CSound *.sco files, so
> you can render them to a sound of your preference (or simply
> transpose them down :).

Sorry for a multiple replies: I forgot to mention that p5 is the pitch as a "Midi float" (although it might have been obvious). Below is a simple Karplus-Strong OSC file. Simply replace the pluck opcode by whatever you please :)

Some brief remark to the examples themselves. I can easily create zillions of similar examples (transposed up or down if you please :). Nevertheless, what I liked about this particular chord progression is how it makes very clear not only the harmonic but also the melodic effect of the adaptive JI.

There are two quasi note repetitions in the soprano (2rd-3nd and then 5th-6th tone) where the second tone is slightly lower than the first. The exact amount depends on the underlying tuning table for the bass, it is -11.6 cent for 22 ET. This interval is clearly noticeable, about double the 1/4 comma shifts of Vincentino's adaptive JI approach with 5-limit harmony over Meantone.

In contrast to Vincentino, we have to deal with multiple shift sizes in the case of adaptive JI with decatonic scales, and some shifts are much larger than a 1/4 syntonic comma. It might be interesting to minimise the size of these by selecting a different tuning table for the bass, though I lack the tuning math required for doing so. This tuning table would probably try to equally distribute the errors for all JI intervals involved (at least for all 7-limit intervals of the decatonic scales). If I understand it correctly, this would be something like the opposite of the RMS optimisation (so using Pajara optimised this way is not really a good idea, I only made these examples to show the effect of changing the underlying tuning table). Any idea?

Actually, I like how the soprano quasi "moves" into the next chord, but nevertheless it would be interesting to know what the alternatives are.

Best
Torsten

===========================
pluck.orc

sr = 44100
kr = 4410
ksmps = 10
nchnls = 2

isin ftgen 1, 0, 8193, 10, 1

instr 1
;; Description of Arguments:
idur = p3 ; Duration
iamp = p4 * 30000 ; normalised amp (0.0-1.0)
ifqc = 440.0 * semitone(p5-69) ; Keynumber

kamp linseg iamp, p3*0.99, iamp, p3*0.01, 0
a1 pluck kamp, ifqc, ifqc, 0, 1
outs a1, a1
endin

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