Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Dropping by

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <equiton@...> wrote:
>
> to say I haven't been reading the list for a long long while.
> Just wondering where everyone is at since 2002-3...?
>
> Mark

Hi Mark! The list has gone through several phases over
the years. Most notably absent these days are Paul Erlich
and Gene Smith, who both decided to quit in 2007 I think.

There are some new faces too, and time marches on.
Microtonality has been growing by leaps and bounds, and no
longer fits on a single list where the internet is
concerned. There are microtonal entries in Wikipedia,
there's a dedicated xenharmonic wiki, there's a company
devoted to microtonal instruments (H-Pi), a Chicago-based
microtonal events org (Untwelve), and even a microtonal
social network site (xenharmonic.ning.com). Plus groups
on facebook. etc.

What have you been up to?

-Carl

🔗Mark <equiton@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@...> wrote:
>
> What have you been up to?
>
> -Carl
>
Very very little. My job finally caved in this year after 14 years. So presently unemployed. Got to find something to do.

No progress at all with microtonality. I don't have the dough for all these fancy controllers, and though I get the basics of MIDI, I really don't want to have to shoehorn my thinking by bending MIDI about (pardon the pun). I want to have a keyboard - like an erv wilson generic, that I can just program using a user interface and I can say - I want this note (specified by fundamental frequency) on this key or that key...

You send it to the keyoard and it does all the rest, or there's some mapping that goes on so all I need to do is devise my scale, compose my music by sequencing with it in some way (notation is just way too much to expect) using virtual instruments...

Too much to ask I expect.

I've not been on list because I felt and largely still do feel that Microtonality is still the neglected step-child of music, and that what I really want to do creatively is hampered severely by 12-tone tyrrany...

I'm sad that Paul and Gene have gone. Hope they're doing OK tho.

Mark

🔗cpertsinides <cpertsinides@...>

> Very very little. My job finally caved in this year after 14 years. So presently unemployed. Got to find something to do.
>
> No progress at all with microtonality. I don't have the dough for all these fancy controllers, and though I get the basics of MIDI, I really don't want to have to shoehorn my thinking by bending MIDI about (pardon the pun). I want to have a keyboard - like an erv wilson generic, that I can just program using a user interface and I can say - I want this note (specified by fundamental frequency) on this key or that key...
>
> You send it to the keyoard and it does all the rest, or there's some mapping that goes on so all I need to do is devise my scale, compose my music by sequencing with it in some way (notation is just way too much to expect) using virtual instruments...
>
> Too much to ask I expect.

Mark, it's been strange to have the list founder absent for so long. Very sorry to hear about your job, a lot of good, talented people I know are out of work.

I have monitored this list for a long time but haven't posted. If you've not been following the development of microtonal music and tools the last years, you really should be happy. As to your wish list, that is available, but no it is not free. The prices for gear out there is very reasonable though when you think about what you are getting and the size of the market. No one is getting rich making generalized keyboards and the makers deserve the support of this community.

> I've not been on list because I felt and largely still do feel that Microtonality is still the neglected step-child of music, and that what I really want to do creatively is hampered severely by 12-tone tyrrany...

That's no longer the case at all. Microtonality has become quite widespread. There are dozens of instruments with integrated support, and thousands of others that can be retuned.

Anyone who wants to work microtonally in 2009, there is nothing stopping them.

🔗Mark <equiton@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

> Mark, it's been strange to have the list founder absent for so
> long.

You may be thinking of Mark Nowitzky. I think this is
Mark Gould.

And who are you? Incidentally, your posts were delayed
because you hadn't posted before from that account. I've
fixed this now, so your posts should appear instantly.

>Anyone who wants to work microtonally in 2009, there is nothing
>stopping them.

There are still some barriers. Only two reasonably-priced
generalized keyboards available (AXiS and Tonal Plexus),
compared to hundreds of halberstadts down to $500. Getting
your favorite guitar in an ET like 22 or 31 will be a
custom job and more than likely a refretting, so you're
paying for the fretting twice. No flexible microtonal score
editor exists. No established microtonal music school
programs.

But you're right- there's been tremendous improvement on all
these fronts recently.

-Carl

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

Hi Mark (Gould) and Carl,

Good to hear from you again, Mark.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <equiton@> wrote:
> >
> > to say I haven't been reading the list for a long long while.
> > Just wondering where everyone is at since 2002-3...?
> >
> > Mark
>
> Hi Mark! The list has gone through several phases over
> the years. Most notably absent these days are Paul Erlich
> and Gene Smith, who both decided to quit in 2007 I think.

Gee, i'm not missed much around here, eh?

(It's true that i didn't "quit", but since i became a daddy
2 years ago, my presence here has been extremely scarce ...)

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@> wrote:
> >
> > What have you been up to?
> >
> > -Carl
> >
> Very very little. My job finally caved in this year after 14 years.
> So presently unemployed. Got to find something to do.
>
> No progress at all with microtonality. I don't have the dough for
> all these fancy controllers, and though I get the basics of MIDI,
> I really don't want to have to shoehorn my thinking by bending
> MIDI about (pardon the pun). I want to have a keyboard - like an
> erv wilson generic, that I can just program using a user interface
> and I can say - I want this note (specified by fundamental frequency)
> on this key or that key...

Mark, if you don't already know about Tonescape, and you have
a windows XP machine, you can try out our free alpha of it:

http://tonalsoft.com

On Windows Vista, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't,
and even on XP several people have had problems either getting
it to install in the first place, or getting it to run fully.

Its predominant feature is the real-time Lattice, which provides
you with a geometric model of the mathematics of your tuning,
and also gives the pitch of each Lattice point when you mouse over it.

But a lot of times when the installation of Tonescape does complete
correctly, the Pitch-Height (i.e., score) window works fine but the
Lattice window is blank.

Tonalsoft ran out of investment capital at the beginning of 2006
and so we cannot currently provide any support. If it works, have
fun with it! If it doesn't, sorry. And i am not aware of it running yet
on Mac or Linux.

> I'm sad that Paul and Gene have gone. Hope they're doing OK tho.

I haven't had any contact with Paul in quite a while. Gene's health
has not been so good, but his entire website (which disappeared
several years ago) is now back online as part of my Encyclopedia:

http://tonalsoft.com/gws/home.aspx

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

🔗Mark <equiton@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Mark (Gould) and Carl,
>
>
> Good to hear from you again, Mark.
>

In short, I hate MIDI. For all sorts of reasons. Doing everything as pitch bends sucks. really really sucks. I got so cross trying to write an orchestral work that it put me off microtonal music for years. I don't have the resources (skill and money) to make instruments in umpteen possible tunings.

So much software these days is geared to MIDI savvy people. I want the kind of interface that asks the following questions

1. What notes are you going to use?
2. How would you like to notate them (complex, but see below for an easy option)
3. Are there any other notational things that are important?
then:
4. Open a new score with these settings
5. Add instruments
6. write score/with playback a la Sibelius/Cubase or most sequencers
7. Print score for live performance/generate audio-file sampler.
8. Put stuff on the internet.

Even if the system was only 'piano-roll' I would be happy. You'll notice I don't mention midi or things like that. I just don't want to think about it. That's what computer sounds systems are for. All of the playback crap should be hidden, but also transparent - i.e. if I write a chord in a part, the synth should just handle it. No crapping about with channels n stuff. Yes I might want to tell my software what 'sound' I want associating with which line of music (and even if it changes mid-music)

Without a fundamental reconceptualisation of the pitch/channels/instruments element of MIDI, my ideal won't happen. I've never been able to map scales to keyboards because I can't 'see' the scale when it's been lost in translation to Halberstädt...

I'd really love to work on software notation of new scales. My own opinion is to devise a stave for each scale, and for non-octave scales a 'raster', which amounts to the same thing. But piano-roll will do. I really like the custom controller idea in Scordatura, but it's been geekified. It should ask musical questions like:

Add a 'key' - what note do you want it to play? From the scale you just devised...

Presently, everything is just too 'under the hood' stuff.

In the real world, Ask an ordinary violinist to play a piece with microtones, and they first think you've got a misprint symbol in the score (you have some flats printed the wrong way round, typical computer print music', I've heard one member of an amateur orchestra say - and that's despite a description at the top of the part). Better is to make instruments of course, but you need lots of skills which I know I don't have.

Some are going to say that I'm asking for it on a plate. Not really. I just think so much microtonal music technology is aimed at the MIDI/electronics/mathematics aware user. I'm not, despite spending years computer programming. When I'm being 'creative', I like to forget all the theory and complex things and just write.

I want to catch the butterfly of inspiration, not perform DNA analysis on it.

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <equiton@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mark (Gould) and Carl,
> >
> >
> > Good to hear from you again, Mark.
> >
>
> In short, I hate MIDI. For all sorts of reasons. Doing
> everything as pitch bends sucks. really really sucks. I got
> so cross trying to write an orchestral work that it put me
> off microtonal music for years. I don't have the resources
> (skill and money) to make instruments in umpteen possible
> tunings.

No self-respecting microtonalist likes MIDI, but it isn't
as bad as all that. You aren't limited to pitch bends if
your synth supports microtuning. Then, the only limit is
the 128 notes/channel restriction, and you can always use
multiple channels (at the expense of violating the whole
point of the "channel" abstraction).

> So much software these days is geared to MIDI savvy people.
> I want the kind of interface that asks the following questions
>
> 1. What notes are you going to use?
> 2. How would you like to notate them (complex, but see below
> for an easy option)
> 3. Are there any other notational things that are important?
> then:
> 4. Open a new score with these settings
> 5. Add instruments
> 6. write score/with playback a la Sibelius/Cubase or most sequencers
> 7. Print score for live performance/generate audio-file sampler.
> 8. Put stuff on the internet.

You and me both. There is a group where we tried to get
a project going to build it, but it hasn't been active in
a while:

http://groups.google.com/group/microtools

Scordatura looks very promising. Tonescape is probably
the best try to date, but the development ecosystem never
got off the ground, and is currently grounded.

-Carl

🔗Daniel Forro <dan.for@...>

On 2 Jul 2009, at 5:07 PM, Mark wrote:
> In short, I hate MIDI. For all sorts of reasons. Doing everything
> as pitch bends sucks. really really sucks. I got so cross trying to
> write an orchestral work that it put me off microtonal music for
> years. I don't have the resources (skill and money) to make
> instruments in umpteen possible tunings.
>
MIDI is not so bad, besides there's nothing better yet. It's just a
tool, only the user creativity is important. Of course it needs some
mental effort to get from it what you want, and to find a ways how to
trick all the limitations. To use pitch bend for microtonal detuning
is not the best idea, there are better ways, even easier.
> Even if the system was only 'piano-roll' I would be happy. You'll
> notice I don't mention midi or things like that. I just don't want
> to think about it. That's what computer sounds systems are for.
>
Don't forget that usable sound from computer came later than MIDI,
and MIDI is still here and it's easy way.
> Without a fundamental reconceptualisation of the pitch/channels/
> instruments element of MIDI, my ideal won't happen. I've never been
> able to map scales to keyboards because I can't 'see' the scale
> when it's been lost in translation to Halberstädt...
>
Then problem is not MIDI, it must be somewhere at your side :-)
> In the real world, Ask an ordinary violinist to play a piece with
> microtones, and they first think you've got a misprint symbol in
> the score (you have some flats printed the wrong way round, typical
> computer print music', I've heard one member of an amateur
> orchestra say - and that's despite a description at the top of the
> part).
>
Yes, that's the reason why some of us use perfect electronic devices
under MIDI control, not such unskilled human performers. Skilled are
still exceptional.
> I just think so much microtonal music technology is aimed at the
> MIDI/electronics/mathematics aware user. I'm not, despite spending
> years computer programming. When I'm being 'creative', I like to
> forget all the theory and complex things and just write.
>
You can be enough creative with recent technology, without necessity
to know anything about computer programming and mathematics. After
setting the instruments to proper tunings you want to use you can
just improvise into MIDI sequencer. I don't see any limitation.
> I want to catch the butterfly of inspiration, not perform DNA
> analysis on it.
>
> M
>
Yes, but to get some results always means to invest some time,
energy, knowledge, skill and creativity. What do you expect with near
zero input? It was written somewhere, I forgot where, that wide and
comfortable road will bring us directly to the hell, and narrow
thorny paths to the heaven :-)

Daniel Forro

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

Dear Mark,

If a piano-roll editor is fine for your purposes then have a look at
the Csound editor blue (http://www.csounds.com/stevenyi/blue/).

With Csound you can specify your pitches in formats like frequency or
Midi-cents (e.g., 60.5 is middle C raised by 50 cent). Blue's piano-
roll editor supports Scala scale files, and yes, there don't need to
be 12 pitches per octave with it.

http://www.csounds.com/stevenyi/blue/usermanual/html/pianoRoll.html

Best
Torsten

On Jul 2, 2009, at 9:07 AM, Mark wrote:

>
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mark (Gould) and Carl,
> >
> >
> > Good to hear from you again, Mark.
> >
>
> In short, I hate MIDI. For all sorts of reasons. Doing everything
> as pitch bends sucks. really really sucks. I got so cross trying to
> write an orchestral work that it put me off microtonal music for
> years. I don't have the resources (skill and money) to make
> instruments in umpteen possible tunings.
>
> So much software these days is geared to MIDI savvy people. I want
> the kind of interface that asks the following questions
>
> 1. What notes are you going to use?
> 2. How would you like to notate them (complex, but see below for an
> easy option)
> 3. Are there any other notational things that are important?
> then:
> 4. Open a new score with these settings
> 5. Add instruments
> 6. write score/with playback a la Sibelius/Cubase or most sequencers
> 7. Print score for live performance/generate audio-file sampler.
> 8. Put stuff on the internet.
>
> Even if the system was only 'piano-roll' I would be happy. You'll
> notice I don't mention midi or things like that. I just don't want
> to think about it. That's what computer sounds systems are for. All
> of the playback crap should be hidden, but also transparent - i.e.
> if I write a chord in a part, the synth should just handle it. No
> crapping about with channels n stuff. Yes I might want to tell my
> software what 'sound' I want associating with which line of music
> (and even if it changes mid-music)
>
> Without a fundamental reconceptualisation of the pitch/channels/
> instruments element of MIDI, my ideal won't happen. I've never been
> able to map scales to keyboards because I can't 'see' the scale
> when it's been lost in translation to Halberstädt...
>
> I'd really love to work on software notation of new scales. My own
> opinion is to devise a stave for each scale, and for non-octave
> scales a 'raster', which amounts to the same thing. But piano-roll
> will do. I really like the custom controller idea in Scordatura,
> but it's been geekified. It should ask musical questions like:
>
> Add a 'key' - what note do you want it to play? From the scale you
> just devised...
>
> Presently, everything is just too 'under the hood' stuff.
>
> In the real world, Ask an ordinary violinist to play a piece with > microtones, and they first think you've got a misprint symbol in
> the score (you have some flats printed the wrong way round, typical
> computer print music', I've heard one member of an amateur
> orchestra say - and that's despite a description at the top of the
> part). Better is to make instruments of course, but you need lots
> of skills which I know I don't have.
>
> Some are going to say that I'm asking for it on a plate. Not> really. I just think so much microtonal music technology is aimed
> at the MIDI/electronics/mathematics aware user. I'm not, despite
> spending years computer programming. When I'm being 'creative', I
> like to forget all the theory and complex things and just write.
>
> I want to catch the butterfly of inspiration, not perform DNA
> analysis on it.
>
> M
>
>
>

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

🔗Mark <equiton@...>

Very nice. My only complaint is about the instruments - I haven't a lot of idea how I would set this up unless I don't have to type in all that code for different instruments??

I see that csound is primarily a machine for algorithmic composition - you write code that produces csound output and then you can process that into a audio form. Very nice I have to say.

I am now figuring out how to write a .scl file for a number of overtones... of a fixed frequency...

I did originally consider creating an instrument with freq as a parameter - like the simple sinewave example - and doing it this way. I may well give it a go over the weekend...

But it's still a ways from what I would prefer, but it's a start!

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

Open Mod Plug tracker supports microtonal tuning natively if you are open to
working with samples and a tracker.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/modplug/

its solution is to expand the "musical alphabet" beyond "G"

it supports ET and non ET tunings

However, it does take some work to make realistic sounding music - not like
say kontakt and a purchased sample set.

the price is really good though and it is very kind on system resources

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Mark <equiton@...> wrote:

>
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com <tuning%40yahoogroups.com>, Torsten Anders
> <torsten.anders@...> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Mark,
> >
> > If a piano-roll editor is fine for your purposes then have a look at
> > the Csound editor blue (http://www.csounds.com/stevenyi/blue/).
> >
> > With Csound you can specify your pitches in formats like frequency or
> > Midi-cents (e.g., 60.5 is middle C raised by 50 cent). Blue's piano-
> > roll editor supports Scala scale files, and yes, there don't need to
> > be 12 pitches per octave with it.
> >
> > http://www.csounds.com/stevenyi/blue/usermanual/html/pianoRoll.html
> >
> > Best
> > Torsten
>
> Very nice. My only complaint is about the instruments - I haven't a lot of
> idea how I would set this up unless I don't have to type in all that code
> for different instruments??
>
> I see that csound is primarily a machine for algorithmic composition - you
> write code that produces csound output and then you can process that into a
> audio form. Very nice I have to say.
>
> I am now figuring out how to write a .scl file for a number of overtones...
> of a fixed frequency...
>
> I did originally consider creating an instrument with freq as a parameter -
> like the simple sinewave example - and doing it this way. I may well give it
> a go over the weekend...
>
> But it's still a ways from what I would prefer, but it's a start!
>
>
>

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

Hi Mark, Torsten, and Carl,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <equiton@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Mark,
> >
> > If a piano-roll editor is fine for your purposes
> > then have a look at the Csound editor blue (http://www.csounds.com/stevenyi/blue/).
>
>
> Very nice. My only complaint is about the instruments
> - I haven't a lot of idea how I would set this up unless
> I don't have to type in all that code for different
> instruments??

I haven't been doing much with Csound since around 2006,
just before Tonescape got "grounded" as Carl says. I was
using it then to attempt to create the Tonescape instrument
ensemble.

Anyway, i discovered a terrific front-end for assisting
in creating Csound instruments (i.e., .orc files).
It's called Patchwork. You can download it, and some
other Csound front-end tools, here:

http://ems.music.utexas.edu/dwnld/index.php

This version works on Windows. Back in '06 i was using
Windows, now i'm pretty much a Linux geek. Patchwork
is cool: it present each Csound opcode as an item in
a flowchart, and then you just patch the items together
to create your instrument.

> I see that csound is primarily a machine for algorithmic
> composition - you write code that produces csound output
> and then you can process that into a audio form.
> Very nice I have to say.

Csound is actually far more powerful than that.
Essentially, it is the ultimate computer audio environment.
The learning curve can be pretty steep, because if you're
really using Csound straight and not one of the front-ends,
then what you're really doing is writing programs in the
Csound audio programming language. But it can do basically
anything you want it to.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@...> wrote:
>
> Scordatura looks very promising. Tonescape is probably
> the best try to date, but the development ecosystem never
> got off the ground, and is currently grounded.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Carl!

Note that in addition to its native .tonescape file format
for "Musical Pieces", Tonescape can also export a composition
to MIDI (i know you hate MIDI, Mark) and Csound. The Csound
export is to the unified .csd file format, which is simply
a text file which concatenates .orc and .sco files together
and also provides some header information.

The caveat with Csound export is that we only ever completed
a single Csound instrument, with an acoustic guitar timbre.
But if you can create your own .sco file, you can simply
paste it into the .sco section of the .csd file exported
by Tonescape, and voila, there's your microtonal piece.

The main point is that Tonescape makes it very easy to
deal with all of the tuning parameters. You simply load
your .tuning file (or easily create a new one), and then
either click new pitches directly onto the Pitch-Height
(i.e., microtonal "piano-roll") score, or drag them over
to the score from the Lattice.

The Lattice makes it easy to mouse-over and click on
lattice-points until you hear the chord or notes you want,
then bring them right into your score.

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

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗Mark <equiton@...>

🔗Andrew Fillebrown <AMiltonF@...>

AudioCarver is also not far off from entering beta testing (I'm thinking early August at this point, but it may be later if I keep picking up composition projects). For those unfamiliar with my "baby", it's an ANS type synth and 3d piano-roll type sequencer originally written as a plug-in for AutoCAD. Nobody ever used it for obvious reasons (3000+ space-bucks was a bit much for a plugin that, quite frankly, sucked :) but I have successfully transitioned the entire project to open-source over the past year with it now being based on Csound for the audio generation, OpenGL via the Open-Inventor clone Coin3d, and everything else being taken care of by the Qt framework.

It may be a bit early to start talking it up again but since the conversation has moved to microtonal software I thought I'd throw a reminder out there that AudioCarver is coming, and it will cost nothing to get started using it when it enters beta!

The beta release will be bare-bones and there's still a lot of infrastructure needed before the gui's start getting really cool, but once that gets rolling the "fun" stuff, like microtonal tunings, real-time input, etc, etc, will start popping into place rapidly.

Stay tuned...

Regards,
-andy.f

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Mark,
>
> If a piano-roll editor is fine for your purposes then have a look at
> the Csound editor blue (http://www.csounds.com/stevenyi/blue/).
>
> With Csound you can specify your pitches in formats like frequency or
> Midi-cents (e.g., 60.5 is middle C raised by 50 cent). Blue's piano-
> roll editor supports Scala scale files, and yes, there don't need to
> be 12 pitches per octave with it.
>
> http://www.csounds.com/stevenyi/blue/usermanual/html/pianoRoll.html
>
> Best
> Torsten
>
> On Jul 2, 2009, at 9:07 AM, Mark wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Mark (Gould) and Carl,
> > >
> > >
> > > Good to hear from you again, Mark.
> > >
> >
> > In short, I hate MIDI. For all sorts of reasons. Doing everything
> > as pitch bends sucks. really really sucks. I got so cross trying to
> > write an orchestral work that it put me off microtonal music for
> > years. I don't have the resources (skill and money) to make
> > instruments in umpteen possible tunings.
> >
> > So much software these days is geared to MIDI savvy people. I want
> > the kind of interface that asks the following questions
> >
> > 1. What notes are you going to use?
> > 2. How would you like to notate them (complex, but see below for an
> > easy option)
> > 3. Are there any other notational things that are important?
> > then:
> > 4. Open a new score with these settings
> > 5. Add instruments
> > 6. write score/with playback a la Sibelius/Cubase or most sequencers
> > 7. Print score for live performance/generate audio-file sampler.
> > 8. Put stuff on the internet.
> >
> > Even if the system was only 'piano-roll' I would be happy. You'll
> > notice I don't mention midi or things like that. I just don't want
> > to think about it. That's what computer sounds systems are for. All
> > of the playback crap should be hidden, but also transparent - i.e.
> > if I write a chord in a part, the synth should just handle it. No
> > crapping about with channels n stuff. Yes I might want to tell my
> > software what 'sound' I want associating with which line of music
> > (and even if it changes mid-music)
> >
> > Without a fundamental reconceptualisation of the pitch/channels/
> > instruments element of MIDI, my ideal won't happen. I've never been
> > able to map scales to keyboards because I can't 'see' the scale
> > when it's been lost in translation to Halberstädt...
> >
> > I'd really love to work on software notation of new scales. My own
> > opinion is to devise a stave for each scale, and for non-octave
> > scales a 'raster', which amounts to the same thing. But piano-roll
> > will do. I really like the custom controller idea in Scordatura,
> > but it's been geekified. It should ask musical questions like:
> >
> > Add a 'key' - what note do you want it to play? From the scale you
> > just devised...
> >
> > Presently, everything is just too 'under the hood' stuff.
> >
> > In the real world, Ask an ordinary violinist to play a piece with
> > microtones, and they first think you've got a misprint symbol in
> > the score (you have some flats printed the wrong way round, typical
> > computer print music', I've heard one member of an amateur
> > orchestra say - and that's despite a description at the top of the
> > part). Better is to make instruments of course, but you need lots
> > of skills which I know I don't have.
> >
> > Some are going to say that I'm asking for it on a plate. Not
> > really. I just think so much microtonal music technology is aimed
> > at the MIDI/electronics/mathematics aware user. I'm not, despite
> > spending years computer programming. When I'm being 'creative', I
> > like to forget all the theory and complex things and just write.
> >
> > I want to catch the butterfly of inspiration, not perform DNA
> > analysis on it.
> >
> > M
> >
> >
> >
>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

Mark,

Csound has what are called "p-fields" in the score file, and the first 3 are always:
1) instrument number,
2) on time in seconds, and
3) duration in seconds.

p4 and above are user-definable, so they can access any variable within your instrument that you care to control from the score during a rendering, including for example pitch, amplitude, panning, filter cutoff, etc...since there is no effective limit to the number of p-fields, the sky is the limit, and this all really depends on the design of the instrument being accessed.

I should also mention at this point that I have a frontend to CSound that I've written in Python for microtonal composition that addresses the specific needs of a composer frustrated by MIDI; I'll announce it on the list shortly in the future, be on the lookout...

RE: MIDI, in spite of it's limitations, it's an understood standard, as well as having the advantage of efficiently capturing realtime expression data, expressivity being hard to sculpt, although not altogether impossible, in a non-MIDI, non-realtime scenario like typing text, etc. Besides, MIDI tends to have similar limitations to the acoustic keyboard instruments that it was decended from, like limited keys, etc, and that never stopped clever folks from doing microtonal music from within those limits!

Best,
Aaron

In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <equiton@...> wrote:
>
> I was playing with csound last night.
>
> I understand a bit more now. Not quite algorythmic but I suspect note parameters can be used in the oscillators not just to set pitch duration/loudness info but panning placement?
>
> I know this is all off topic. But one thing I need to look up is the format of the scala scl files.
>
> will have another go over the weekend.
>
> Mark
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <joemonz@> wrote:
>

🔗Mark <equiton@...>

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

As I said, have a look at Blue (http://www.csounds.com/stevenyi/blue/). It has Csound under the hood, so understanding Csound definitely helps. Nevertheless, it gives you quasi a microtonal Pianoroll editor.

> notes I could understand, but it's all 'time' stuff not music > related...

Time is not music-related?

> Sorry, it's not for me.

Fair enough. However, I am afraid you have to go back to MIDI land then. There are a number of other options (like Max/MSP), but they all involve some form of programming...

Best
Torsten

On Jul 6, 2009, at 2:08 PM, Mark wrote:

>
>
> Well I tried to understand CSound and I'm sorry but it's just > fazing me completely.
>
> It's not what I was looking for.
>
> I'm looking for a micrototonal sequencer, with sounds I can > understand. I'm sorry but all that talk of oscillators and filters > just lost me completely. I couldn't even figure out how to get an > instrument together... notes I could understand, but it's all > 'time' stuff not music related... Sorry, it's not for me.
>
> Mark
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson" <aaron@...> > wrote:
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > Csound has what are called "p-fields" in the score file, and the > first 3 are always:
> > 1) instrument number,
> > 2) on time in seconds, and
> > 3) duration in seconds.
>
>
>

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

Dear Mark,

Here is a simple example to give you a start for doing microtonal music with plain Csound. Attached is a file pluck.csd. It contains a very simple microtonal plucked string instrument definition and a score for this instrument that first plays a harmonic 7th chord, then the same chord as arpeggio. Pitches are specified as MIDI floats (i.e. 60.5 is a quartertone above middle C). See comments in this file for further details.

You can render this example directly at the command line (DOS box). Move into the directory where you saved the file. Then enter the following (see below), and you directly here the output (realtime output). Alternatively, you can use some editor like QuteCsound, Blue ...

csound pluck.csd

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

🔗Mark <equiton@...>

🔗Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...>

🔗Mark <equiton@...>

I'm now devising a matlab program to output microtonal notes based on a distribution function for tones...

A lot of what I've come up with sounds like bad sound effects for a 1950's B-movie... *grin*

I've also looked at reverb and pan too...

My brain hurts...

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...> wrote:
>
> On 6 Jul 2009, at 17:11, Mark wrote:
> > Have no idea when I get 'samples out of range' tho.
>
> Oh, the sum of all tones played together in a chord was a bit too
> high then, you can simply reduce them to avoid that error. Anyway, I
> just retried it -- it is only a single sample that is out of range,
> something you can't even hear and savely ignore :)
>
> 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 Mark,

If you are fine with Matlab, then you should get the hang of Csound :)

There are a few books on the topic that might help you, besides those tutorials ( http://www.csounds.com/tutorials).

http://books.google.com/books?id=szwfRU9DqwYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=csound&ei=kQgfSqysGZS0zgTSlujADw

http://books.google.com/books?id=_Li7AAAAIAAJ&q=csound&dq=csound&lr=&ei=qgwfSsHfCImkzASr-sWrDw&pgis=1

http://books.google.com/books?id=JBKeWs2aoPIC&printsec=frontcover&dq=csound

Best
Torsten

On 6 Jul 2009, at 17:56, Mark wrote:

>
>
> I'm now devising a matlab program to output microtonal notes based > on a distribution function for tones...
>
> A lot of what I've come up with sounds like bad sound effects for a > 1950's B-movie... *grin*
>
> I've also looked at reverb and pan too...
>
> My brain hurts...
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Torsten Anders <torsten.anders@...> > wrote:
> >
> > On 6 Jul 2009, at 17:11, Mark wrote:
> > > Have no idea when I get 'samples out of range' tho.
> >
> > Oh, the sum of all tones played together in a chord was a bit too
> > high then, you can simply reduce them to avoid that error. Anyway, I
> > just retried it -- it is only a single sample that is out of range,
> > something you can't even hear and savely ignore :)
> >
> > 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
> >
>
>
>>