Replies

I wrote:
>
>>However, remember that
>>many if not most singers continually imitate ET thirds.

And Paul responded:
>
> Jerry, it is but a small step from there to what I have been trying to say
> -- the major triad with high third may simply be an imitation of an ET
> triad, and the 1/24:1/19:1/16 tuning that seems to be in the range of what
> you consider a "major triad with high third" would be the only way for
> highly skilled, overtone-sensitive singers to "lock in" to an imitation of
> an ET triad -- only with a major third 4�� larger and minor third 2��
> smaller.

Now who isn't listening? If this were true, the "high third" would
occasionally arrive at the ET tuning. It consistently doesn't, therefore the
teeny little four cents(?) _is significant. Also, remember that these
singers (although novices) are aware of the difference between acoustic
(ear) tuning and piano pitch. I'm very reluctant to buy this explanation. It
doesn't seem to fit the experience as I have observed it.

Incidentally, my statement above was in the context of wishing more singers
would become sensitive to "ear" tuning, i.e., JI. Also, remember that the
singers who tend to sing the "high third" are _already sensitive to "ear"
tuning and know not to "settle" for it. So, if you don't want to believe
this we can drop this subject where it is. If you do believe me, you might
want to rethink your conclusion that 12-tET influence is involved.

Perhaps this will be a matter to agree to disagree on, and thrill the hell
out of Mr. Szanto. Your choice.

Jerry

I wrote,

>> Jerry, it is but a small step from there to what I have been trying to
say
>> -- the major triad with high third may simply be an imitation of an ET
>> triad, and the 1/24:1/19:1/16 tuning that seems to be in the range of
what
>> you consider a "major triad with high third" would be the only way for
>> highly skilled, overtone-sensitive singers to "lock in" to an imitation
of
>> an ET triad -- only with a major third 4�� larger and minor third 2��
>> smaller.

>Now who isn't listening? If this were true, the "high third" would
>occasionally arrive at the ET tuning.

It wouldn't, because the condition of locking (which the hypothesis assumes)
precludes it.

>It consistently doesn't, therefore the
>teeny little four cents(?) _is significant.

It's significant, but the 4� sharpness makes for a better approximation to
12-tET than the alternative, a 14� flatness (to achieve a 4:5:6). The latter
seems sometimes to be bothersome to you despite the great degree of
acoustical locking.

The rest of your post seems to indicate a continued misunderstanding of this
theory I have put forth. The theory suggests that the reason vocal music may
have "skipped over" ratios involving numbers like 13 and learned to use
numbers like 17 and 19 is because the latter are suggested by, even "heard"
in, 12-tone equal temperament.