Re: [tuning] Re: theory on possible JI construction of harmony, melody and music

--I'm now going to work yet again on melody having its basis in --segments of the harmonic series.
   I've found in the past that's about the best route possible to take if doing anything related to JI.  Specifically I've found the use of a scale u-tonally linked to either x/12 or y/16 (including subsets of x/12 like x/6 and x/3....and those of x/16 like x/8 and x/4) as sounding very consonant and being the best (or at least among the best) theories for scales up to (but not beyond) 7 tones per 2/1 octave. 
---------------------------------------------
  And, again, I know there are a lot of misconceptions on this board about my view on JI.  And, I support JI a being a (but not the only) premium theory concerning musical consonance...I just think JI is an art developed to near the point of being "about as researched as it can ever be" while other less developed theories in microtonallity can likely benefit/improve more from research.  Which is why I don't do nearly as much JI as I used to, not b/c I think JI is bad or inferior (I don't).

-Michael

--- On Thu, 4/9/09, Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...> wrote:

From: Marcel de Velde <m.develde@...>
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: theory on possible JI construction of harmony, melody and music
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, April 9, 2009, 6:04 PM

After some more thought, I no longer think my theory is as relevant to music as I first thought.Maybe It'll have some use someday, but for now I'm letting this one go.Enjoyed working on it though and don't regret all the work.

I'm now going to work yet again on melody having its basis in segments of the harmonic series.Found a few new opening and things I appear to have done wrong when I left this line of thinking about a year ago.

Marcel