Ambisonance

Hello Daniel and Jacques,

Thanks for writing. I noticed that you spelled this
new word with only one `s': as in `ambisonance'. I
like this spelling very much. The reason I included
two s's is that I wanted to avoid the pronunciation of
a long `i'. But, clearly, to achieve the pronunciation
of a short `i', the second `s' is not necessary. So,
thanks again.

Hello also to Aaron,

Yes, your description ". . . wonder is a gift of being
. . ." very much resonates with my first encounters
with non-tempered tunings.

When I first began to tune my hand-hewn acoustic
instruments, I was overwhelmed by what I was
hearing. I was stunned and unable to categorize my
aural experiences into the standard two packages:
consonance or dissonance.

So, more than thirty years ago, I coined the term
`ambisonance' to give definition to what I do not
fully understand, even though I comprehend the
mathematical ratios and musical interval classes
very well. This basic experience of wonder
continues to this day; it is the primary inspiration of
my art and work.

I am loathe to discuss specifics simply because the
experience of ambisonance cannot be isolated from
timbre and, of course, from a musical context as
well. However, I mostly experience ambisonance in
the outer 11- and 13-limits of my tonality diamond,
and in the music I have composed where I
intentionally avoid a tonal center, or a sense of
"key."

I also coined the term as an intentional barrier
against pseudo-intellectuals and pseudo-
academics who insist that given this or that
"authentic" tuning all can be explained.

Ambisonance in a discovery! It is a flying in the face
of convention by all creative artists. Sure, one, two,
or three hundred years later we may easily identify
trends in any art. But, in all the arts there are
moments of dawn and twilight when two worlds
intersect, and I am not at all sure whether any art
would exist if this intersection is not one of many
primary inspirations.

Cris Forster

The original definitions with the better spelling:

Ambisonance: from the Greek "amphi-" as in
amphibian, and from the Latin "ambi-" as in
ambidextrous, these two prefixes literally mean `on
both sides'. Then for me, figuratively, these two
prefixes mean `partaking of two worlds'. Hence, the
musical experience of ambisonance, the source
that inspires new ways to hear, and then new ways
to tune and to compose.

Ambisonance is the experience of hearing with
awe; hearing the familiar for the first time, with the
sudden realization that what is heard is neither a
consonance nor a dissonance.

Ambisonance is the experience of theory and
practice combined, yet also of theory and practice
transcended. Eventually, even after many years,
ambisonance may resolve to consonance, or to
dissonance.

Ambisonance: I can identify it as a mathematical
ratio, and I can identify it as a musical interval, but I
also know that what I am hearing I do not
completely understand, hence the experience of
awe.

Yes, I have used one "s", my linguistic intuition and Latin knowledge lead me to such decision, so you understand well it was not mistake from my side, but intention. Thanks for accepting it.

Daniel Forro

On 26 Jan 2010, at 1:55 AM, c_ml_forster wrote:

>
> Hello Daniel and Jacques,
>
> Thanks for writing. I noticed that you spelled this
> new word with only one `s': as in `ambisonance'. I
> like this spelling very much. The reason I included
> two s's is that I wanted to avoid the pronunciation of
> a long `i'. But, clearly, to achieve the pronunciation
> of a short `i', the second `s' is not necessary. So,
> thanks again.
>
> Cris Forster
>
> The original definitions with the better spelling:
>
> Ambisonance: from the Greek "amphi-" as in
> amphibian, and from the Latin "ambi-" as in
> ambidextrous, these two prefixes literally mean `on
> both sides'. Then for me, figuratively, these two
> prefixes mean `partaking of two worlds'. Hence, the
> musical experience of ambisonance, the source
> that inspires new ways to hear, and then new ways
> to tune and to compose.
>
> Ambisonance is the experience of hearing with
> awe; hearing the familiar for the first time, with the
> sudden realization that what is heard is neither a
> consonance nor a dissonance.
>
> Ambisonance is the experience of theory and
> practice combined, yet also of theory and practice
> transcended. Eventually, even after many years,
> ambisonance may resolve to consonance, or to
> dissonance.
>
> Ambisonance: I can identify it as a mathematical
> ratio, and I can identify it as a musical interval, but I
> also know that what I am hearing I do not
> completely understand, hence the experience of
> awe.
>

Hi Cris.

Thanks very much for this additional commentary on your
coinage of this word ambisonance. I agree the spelling
with 1 s is the correct one. I also now have a better idea of
what your original meaning was for this term, that for you
it is not so much about being on a fence than being in awe ...

Ambisonance to my way of thinking intuitively leads more
to the notion Jaques described in his response, which is along
the lines of my use of 'ambi' for intervals called 'neutral' by
others. I'll have to elaborate more in response to Jacques's
latest message when I have more time.

Cris, I would never presume to suggest changing something
you have been using for 30-odd years to my way of thinking,
but at the same time, I wonder if maybe a better word for
the phenomenon you describe would use a prefix
expressing transcendence, rather than uncertainty? This
is why the word Suprasonance comes to my mind. I offer it
here as an alternative. I was worried for a moment that
Yasser had maybe used it for his Supra-Diatonic system,
but the word Suprasonance does not appear in the glossary
of his book (although a huge number of other musical terms
using 'supra' are there). I think it's fair game.

Cheers,
Aaron
=====

My conception is more along the lines

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "c_ml_forster" <cris.forster@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Daniel and Jacques,
>
> Thanks for writing. I noticed that you spelled this
> new word with only one `s': as in `ambisonance'. I
> like this spelling very much. The reason I included
> two s's is that I wanted to avoid the pronunciation of
> a long `i'. But, clearly, to achieve the pronunciation
> of a short `i', the second `s' is not necessary. So,
> thanks again.
>
> Hello also to Aaron,
>
> Yes, your description ". . . wonder is a gift of being
> . . ." very much resonates with my first encounters
> with non-tempered tunings.
>
> When I first began to tune my hand-hewn acoustic
> instruments, I was overwhelmed by what I was
> hearing. I was stunned and unable to categorize my
> aural experiences into the standard two packages:
> consonance or dissonance.
>
> So, more than thirty years ago, I coined the term
> `ambisonance' to give definition to what I do not
> fully understand, even though I comprehend the
> mathematical ratios and musical interval classes
> very well. This basic experience of wonder
> continues to this day; it is the primary inspiration of
> my art and work.
>
> I am loathe to discuss specifics simply because the
> experience of ambisonance cannot be isolated from
> timbre and, of course, from a musical context as
> well. However, I mostly experience ambisonance in
> the outer 11- and 13-limits of my tonality diamond,
> and in the music I have composed where I
> intentionally avoid a tonal center, or a sense of
> "key."
>
> I also coined the term as an intentional barrier
> against pseudo-intellectuals and pseudo-
> academics who insist that given this or that
> "authentic" tuning all can be explained.
>
> Ambisonance in a discovery! It is a flying in the face
> of convention by all creative artists. Sure, one, two,
> or three hundred years later we may easily identify
> trends in any art. But, in all the arts there are
> moments of dawn and twilight when two worlds
> intersect, and I am not at all sure whether any art
> would exist if this intersection is not one of many
> primary inspirations.
>
> Cris Forster
>
>
> The original definitions with the better spelling:
>
> Ambisonance: from the Greek "amphi-" as in
> amphibian, and from the Latin "ambi-" as in
> ambidextrous, these two prefixes literally mean `on
> both sides'. Then for me, figuratively, these two
> prefixes mean `partaking of two worlds'. Hence, the
> musical experience of ambisonance, the source
> that inspires new ways to hear, and then new ways
> to tune and to compose.
>
> Ambisonance is the experience of hearing with
> awe; hearing the familiar for the first time, with the
> sudden realization that what is heard is neither a
> consonance nor a dissonance.
>
> Ambisonance is the experience of theory and
> practice combined, yet also of theory and practice
> transcended. Eventually, even after many years,
> ambisonance may resolve to consonance, or to
> dissonance.
>
> Ambisonance: I can identify it as a mathematical
> ratio, and I can identify it as a musical interval, but I
> also know that what I am hearing I do not
> completely understand, hence the experience of
> awe.
>

Cris, in my last post I said "better" when I should have said
"alternative". Again, I would never presume to change how
you are thinking about these things; just thinking myself to
clarify your meaning for myself. Also, 'ambi' is not so much
an 'uncertainty' as I said, but rather a 'double-ness' - that
being of two things at once. Since your definition doesn't
seem to be on two sides, but rather above, for me the term
using 'supra' or something similar ... Supersonance says the
same and maybe is better because 'super' is used more
commonly in traditional music theory whereas 'supra' brings
Yasser to mind, at least for me and probably anyone else
who has read Yasser.

Aaron
====

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "c_ml_forster" <cris.forster@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Daniel and Jacques,
>
> Thanks for writing. I noticed that you spelled this
> new word with only one `s': as in `ambisonance'. I
> like this spelling very much. The reason I included
> two s's is that I wanted to avoid the pronunciation of
> a long `i'. But, clearly, to achieve the pronunciation
> of a short `i', the second `s' is not necessary. So,
> thanks again.
>
> Hello also to Aaron,
>
> Yes, your description ". . . wonder is a gift of being
> . . ." very much resonates with my first encounters
> with non-tempered tunings.
>
> When I first began to tune my hand-hewn acoustic
> instruments, I was overwhelmed by what I was
> hearing. I was stunned and unable to categorize my
> aural experiences into the standard two packages:
> consonance or dissonance.
>
> So, more than thirty years ago, I coined the term
> `ambisonance' to give definition to what I do not
> fully understand, even though I comprehend the
> mathematical ratios and musical interval classes
> very well. This basic experience of wonder
> continues to this day; it is the primary inspiration of
> my art and work.
>
> I am loathe to discuss specifics simply because the
> experience of ambisonance cannot be isolated from
> timbre and, of course, from a musical context as
> well. However, I mostly experience ambisonance in
> the outer 11- and 13-limits of my tonality diamond,
> and in the music I have composed where I
> intentionally avoid a tonal center, or a sense of
> "key."
>
> I also coined the term as an intentional barrier
> against pseudo-intellectuals and pseudo-
> academics who insist that given this or that
> "authentic" tuning all can be explained.
>
> Ambisonance in a discovery! It is a flying in the face
> of convention by all creative artists. Sure, one, two,
> or three hundred years later we may easily identify
> trends in any art. But, in all the arts there are
> moments of dawn and twilight when two worlds
> intersect, and I am not at all sure whether any art
> would exist if this intersection is not one of many
> primary inspirations.
>
> Cris Forster
>
>
> The original definitions with the better spelling:
>
> Ambisonance: from the Greek "amphi-" as in
> amphibian, and from the Latin "ambi-" as in
> ambidextrous, these two prefixes literally mean `on
> both sides'. Then for me, figuratively, these two
> prefixes mean `partaking of two worlds'. Hence, the
> musical experience of ambisonance, the source
> that inspires new ways to hear, and then new ways
> to tune and to compose.
>
> Ambisonance is the experience of hearing with
> awe; hearing the familiar for the first time, with the
> sudden realization that what is heard is neither a
> consonance nor a dissonance.
>
> Ambisonance is the experience of theory and
> practice combined, yet also of theory and practice
> transcended. Eventually, even after many years,
> ambisonance may resolve to consonance, or to
> dissonance.
>
> Ambisonance: I can identify it as a mathematical
> ratio, and I can identify it as a musical interval, but I
> also know that what I am hearing I do not
> completely understand, hence the experience of
> awe.
>

Aaron,

Thanks for your thoughts. I understand the process of
clarification you are undertaking.

I prefer the prefix 'ambi-' because, like I said, in
time ambisonance may resolve to either dissonance
or consonance. In other words, I don't consider
ambisonance in a static ('above'/'below', 'supra/'infra')
context, but in a dynamic context, since I am always
striving to develop my musical skills.

Cris

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "hpiinstruments" <aaronhunt@...> wrote:
>
> Cris, in my last post I said "better" when I should have said
> "alternative". Again, I would never presume to change how
> you are thinking about these things; just thinking myself to
> clarify your meaning for myself. Also, 'ambi' is not so much
> an 'uncertainty' as I said, but rather a 'double-ness' - that
> being of two things at once. Since your definition doesn't
> seem to be on two sides, but rather above, for me the term
> using 'supra' or something similar ... Supersonance says the
> same and maybe is better because 'super' is used more
> commonly in traditional music theory whereas 'supra' brings
> Yasser to mind, at least for me and probably anyone else
> who has read Yasser.
>
> Aaron
> ====
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "c_ml_forster" <cris.forster@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Daniel and Jacques,
> >
> > Thanks for writing. I noticed that you spelled this
> > new word with only one `s': as in `ambisonance'. I
> > like this spelling very much. The reason I included
> > two s's is that I wanted to avoid the pronunciation of
> > a long `i'. But, clearly, to achieve the pronunciation
> > of a short `i', the second `s' is not necessary. So,
> > thanks again.
> >
> > Hello also to Aaron,
> >
> > Yes, your description ". . . wonder is a gift of being
> > . . ." very much resonates with my first encounters
> > with non-tempered tunings.
> >
> > When I first began to tune my hand-hewn acoustic
> > instruments, I was overwhelmed by what I was
> > hearing. I was stunned and unable to categorize my
> > aural experiences into the standard two packages:
> > consonance or dissonance.
> >
> > So, more than thirty years ago, I coined the term
> > `ambisonance' to give definition to what I do not
> > fully understand, even though I comprehend the
> > mathematical ratios and musical interval classes
> > very well. This basic experience of wonder
> > continues to this day; it is the primary inspiration of
> > my art and work.
> >
> > I am loathe to discuss specifics simply because the
> > experience of ambisonance cannot be isolated from
> > timbre and, of course, from a musical context as
> > well. However, I mostly experience ambisonance in
> > the outer 11- and 13-limits of my tonality diamond,
> > and in the music I have composed where I
> > intentionally avoid a tonal center, or a sense of
> > "key."
> >
> > I also coined the term as an intentional barrier
> > against pseudo-intellectuals and pseudo-
> > academics who insist that given this or that
> > "authentic" tuning all can be explained.
> >
> > Ambisonance in a discovery! It is a flying in the face
> > of convention by all creative artists. Sure, one, two,
> > or three hundred years later we may easily identify
> > trends in any art. But, in all the arts there are
> > moments of dawn and twilight when two worlds
> > intersect, and I am not at all sure whether any art
> > would exist if this intersection is not one of many
> > primary inspirations.
> >
> > Cris Forster
> >
> >
> > The original definitions with the better spelling:
> >
> > Ambisonance: from the Greek "amphi-" as in
> > amphibian, and from the Latin "ambi-" as in
> > ambidextrous, these two prefixes literally mean `on
> > both sides'. Then for me, figuratively, these two
> > prefixes mean `partaking of two worlds'. Hence, the
> > musical experience of ambisonance, the source
> > that inspires new ways to hear, and then new ways
> > to tune and to compose.
> >
> > Ambisonance is the experience of hearing with
> > awe; hearing the familiar for the first time, with the
> > sudden realization that what is heard is neither a
> > consonance nor a dissonance.
> >
> > Ambisonance is the experience of theory and
> > practice combined, yet also of theory and practice
> > transcended. Eventually, even after many years,
> > ambisonance may resolve to consonance, or to
> > dissonance.
> >
> > Ambisonance: I can identify it as a mathematical
> > ratio, and I can identify it as a musical interval, but I
> > also know that what I am hearing I do not
> > completely understand, hence the experience of
> > awe.
> >
>

Cris, I think I got it. It's hovering on both sides of the
conventional extremes, itself in a state of non-resolution,
of ambiguity. This is quite subtle. I still conceive of it as
being 'above', surpassing the conventional dichotomy
whilst it enraptures the listener in its other-ness
(xensonority), then possibly descending into a familiarity,
but I am hearing you more clearly now. Little by little : )

Now I am musing:

Strange, new, unknown sound: Xensonority
Ambiguous, uncategorized sound: Ambisonority
Named, known, categorized sound: Gnostisonority... or Xerosonority?

AAH
=====

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "c_ml_forster" <cris.forster@...> wrote:
>
> Aaron,
>
> Thanks for your thoughts. I understand the process of
> clarification you are undertaking.
>
> I prefer the prefix 'ambi-' because, like I said, in
> time ambisonance may resolve to either dissonance
> or consonance. In other words, I don't consider
> ambisonance in a static ('above'/'below', 'supra/'infra')
> context, but in a dynamic context, since I am always
> striving to develop my musical skills.
>
> Cris
>
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "hpiinstruments" <aaronhunt@> wrote:
> >
> > Cris, in my last post I said "better" when I should have said
> > "alternative". Again, I would never presume to change how
> > you are thinking about these things; just thinking myself to
> > clarify your meaning for myself. Also, 'ambi' is not so much
> > an 'uncertainty' as I said, but rather a 'double-ness' - that
> > being of two things at once. Since your definition doesn't
> > seem to be on two sides, but rather above, for me the term
> > using 'supra' or something similar ... Supersonance says the
> > same and maybe is better because 'super' is used more
> > commonly in traditional music theory whereas 'supra' brings
> > Yasser to mind, at least for me and probably anyone else
> > who has read Yasser.
> >
> > Aaron
> > ====
> >
> > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "c_ml_forster" <cris.forster@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Daniel and Jacques,
> > >
> > > Thanks for writing. I noticed that you spelled this
> > > new word with only one `s': as in `ambisonance'. I
> > > like this spelling very much. The reason I included
> > > two s's is that I wanted to avoid the pronunciation of
> > > a long `i'. But, clearly, to achieve the pronunciation
> > > of a short `i', the second `s' is not necessary. So,
> > > thanks again.
> > >
> > > Hello also to Aaron,
> > >
> > > Yes, your description ". . . wonder is a gift of being
> > > . . ." very much resonates with my first encounters
> > > with non-tempered tunings.
> > >
> > > When I first began to tune my hand-hewn acoustic
> > > instruments, I was overwhelmed by what I was
> > > hearing. I was stunned and unable to categorize my
> > > aural experiences into the standard two packages:
> > > consonance or dissonance.
> > >
> > > So, more than thirty years ago, I coined the term
> > > `ambisonance' to give definition to what I do not
> > > fully understand, even though I comprehend the
> > > mathematical ratios and musical interval classes
> > > very well. This basic experience of wonder
> > > continues to this day; it is the primary inspiration of
> > > my art and work.
> > >
> > > I am loathe to discuss specifics simply because the
> > > experience of ambisonance cannot be isolated from
> > > timbre and, of course, from a musical context as
> > > well. However, I mostly experience ambisonance in
> > > the outer 11- and 13-limits of my tonality diamond,
> > > and in the music I have composed where I
> > > intentionally avoid a tonal center, or a sense of
> > > "key."
> > >
> > > I also coined the term as an intentional barrier
> > > against pseudo-intellectuals and pseudo-
> > > academics who insist that given this or that
> > > "authentic" tuning all can be explained.
> > >
> > > Ambisonance in a discovery! It is a flying in the face
> > > of convention by all creative artists. Sure, one, two,
> > > or three hundred years later we may easily identify
> > > trends in any art. But, in all the arts there are
> > > moments of dawn and twilight when two worlds
> > > intersect, and I am not at all sure whether any art
> > > would exist if this intersection is not one of many
> > > primary inspirations.
> > >
> > > Cris Forster
> > >
> > >
> > > The original definitions with the better spelling:
> > >
> > > Ambisonance: from the Greek "amphi-" as in
> > > amphibian, and from the Latin "ambi-" as in
> > > ambidextrous, these two prefixes literally mean `on
> > > both sides'. Then for me, figuratively, these two
> > > prefixes mean `partaking of two worlds'. Hence, the
> > > musical experience of ambisonance, the source
> > > that inspires new ways to hear, and then new ways
> > > to tune and to compose.
> > >
> > > Ambisonance is the experience of hearing with
> > > awe; hearing the familiar for the first time, with the
> > > sudden realization that what is heard is neither a
> > > consonance nor a dissonance.
> > >
> > > Ambisonance is the experience of theory and
> > > practice combined, yet also of theory and practice
> > > transcended. Eventually, even after many years,
> > > ambisonance may resolve to consonance, or to
> > > dissonance.
> > >
> > > Ambisonance: I can identify it as a mathematical
> > > ratio, and I can identify it as a musical interval, but I
> > > also know that what I am hearing I do not
> > > completely understand, hence the experience of
> > > awe.
> > >
> >
>

Aaron,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "hpiinstruments" <aaronhunt@...> wrote:
>
> Strange, new, unknown sound: Xensonority
> Ambiguous, uncategorized sound: Ambisonority
> Named, known, categorized sound: Gnostisonority... or Xerosonority?

That strange, squealing/shrieking sound made by university age girls all living under one roof: Sororitysonority.

Ok, I'll return to lurk mode now... :)

Cheers,
Jon

tee-hee!

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "jonszanto" <jszanto@...> wrote:
>
> Aaron,
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "hpiinstruments" <aaronhunt@> wrote:
> >
> > Strange, new, unknown sound: Xensonority
> > Ambiguous, uncategorized sound: Ambisonority
> > Named, known, categorized sound: Gnostisonority... or Xerosonority?
>
> That strange, squealing/shrieking sound made by university age girls all living under one roof: Sororitysonority.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ok, I'll return to lurk mode now... :)
>
> Cheers,
> Jon
>