Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning 22 inequal sections in the octave

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "anton_pann" <anton_pann@...> wrote:
>
> Anybody knows something about origins of 22 sections in the octave? I am very courios about that because i can't find much informations.
> In 1840 Anton Pann, romanian musician, proposed to have 22 sections in octave, similarity with hindy sruti. I thought maybe Al Farabi's can be the link between hindy music and Anton Pann? or other musician from Orient?

Very interesting. Is there a cite for that in English? Bosanquet talked about it much later in the a9th century.

🔗anton_pann <anton_pann@...>

No, unfortunatly the Anton Pann's books are only in romanian but i think existing some studies about him in english, french or germany.
It's very interesting for oriental music and for the JI searcher because Anton Pann have much originaly concepts about the divisions in the octave, about the psiho-pedagogical learning sistem and more.
Maybe, somebody have the Bosanquet theory about 22 sections?

Thanks.

P.S. Maitre Ozan, may i ask you more about the atraction law in oriental music's theories?

sory for my bad english

🔗gregggibson <gregggibson@...>

This is the first I have heard of Anton Pann. Is there perhaps some reference on him in French?

Je regrette, mais je n'ai jamais entendu parler de Anton Pann. Est-ce qu'il y un livre ou un article sur cet homme en français peut-être?

I have read the Arab theorists in the French compilation La musique arabe, and do not recall any reference to 22-tone equal temperament or anything resembling it.

J'ai lu les théoriciens arabes dans la compilation française La musique arabe, mais je ne me rappelle en ce moment aucune référence au temperament égal à 22 tons, ou quelque chose de semblable.

It is usually asserted that the ancient Indians tuned by ear 22 equal 1/4 tones within the octave, but that this system has died out in northern India.

On dit le plus souvent que les Hindous anciens utilisaient 22 sons égaux, ou presque, fixés par oreille, mais que ce système est tombé hors d'usage dans la plupart de l'Inde.

The 22-tone equal temperament has very dissonant thirds and sixths in the cycle of its fifths, which are about 1/3 comma wider than just. If one chooses as thirds and sixths the consonant versions present within the temperament, a wolf fifth is produced, meaning that this temperament can have no more than 5 consonant triads within the diatonic scale. These problems may have contributed to its early abandonment in most of India.

Le tempérament à 22 tons égaux souffre de tierces et sixtes très dissonnantes dans le cycle de quintes, lesquelles sont environ 1/3 comma plus larges que la quinte juste. Si d'ailleurs on tente d'utiliser des autres degrés plus consonants quand il s'agit des tierces et sixtes, ceci produite une quinte trés diminuée, c-à-d. le fameux loup, ce qui réduit le nombre de triades consonantes de l'échelle diatonique à 5 seulement. Ces divers problèmes ont peut-être produit son abandon définitif, sauf parmi les Dravidiens.

Gregg Gibson

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗anton_pann <anton_pann@...>

🔗Petr Parízek <petrparizek2000@...>

Gene wrote:

> > Here it is:
> > http://www.webcitation.org/5kjJcrhEx

Before someone lays into me for my interpretation, let me say that about 90% of what I'm going to say is of someone else's view.

In the past, the shrutis were thought to be of equal sizes. Later, this turned out to be false. Then some theorists suggested 5-limit ratios. Unfortunately, this brought more questions than answers, like "why were there no 7-limit intervals" or "why these 5-limit intervals and not others". A couple of papers on the subject were full of statements like "Bharata was incorrect as the shrutis should be 23 of them and not 22" (or even 25) or "some fifths are pure and others need to be adjusted" or "one can't take Bharata's words literally because this sentence just doesn't make sense or contradicts what he said before". For several years already, there's some new evidence arising (although very faintly by this time) that Bharata, most probably, meant the "ideal" fifths to be pure and that his suggestion was to use the 2D Pythagorean system to sort of imitate a 3D system (5-limit JI). Of course, it's now pointless to speculate whether he cared about the ~2 cent nistuning from pure thirds or not. Interestingly enough, in contrast to the past vague statements, 1) the given explanations are fully logical and 2) possible translations of Bharata suddenly seem to start making sense even in those formerly condemned "critical" passages. And just because of these logical explanations, even if it later turns out that the shrutis were still something else, I'm probably going to stick to this interpretation for quite some time. I won't go into great detail right now but just to stress the point, we shouldn't forget that an octave is said to have 12 "swarastanas". On the Anaphoria website, there's one such article where the author describes these as a chain of pure fifths, the difference being that he sets it from Fb to A and renders the "C major scale" as "C_D_Fb_F_G_A_Cb_C". To make transposition possible, since there's the rule that every scale should include a pure fifth, one extreme is -10 to +1 fifth and another is 0 to +11 fifths. And if we use all of these tones to get all the desired intervals, we get a 22-tone scale and there's absolutely no need to "adjust" anything.

Petr

🔗anton_pann <anton_pann@...>

Thanks. Can be a posibility but how that theory pased from India to the Europe in XIXth century? And which is the treatise that had inspired Anton Pann in 1845, Bosanquet in 1882 or Ioannes Tzetzes in 1875 to adopte this divisions for the octave?
And, I suppose, that divisonare systems wasn't identically with the hindi shrutis.
Maybe Al Farabi, who adopted the 22 divisions for duble-octave or somebody else?
Too much questions for that problem.
I try to discover the source of the XIXth century byzantine musical treatise.

Thank oyu for help and for answers. My topic it's still open for discutions.

🔗Petr Parízek <petrparizek2000@...>

> Thanks.

Don't know if you meant me but you're welcome.

> Can be a posibility but how that theory pased from India to the Europe in > XIXth century?
> And which is the treatise that had inspired Anton Pann in 1845, Bosanquet > in 1882 or Ioannes Tzetzes in 1875
> to adopte this divisions for the octave?

I've never heard of Anton Pann and I don't know the answers to your questions.

> And, I suppose, that divisonare systems wasn't identically with the hindi > shrutis.
> Maybe Al Farabi, who adopted the 22 divisions for duble-octave or somebody > else?

Not sure what you're saying. Nevertheless, I believe Al-Farabi used a 17-tone scale rather than 22.

> Too much questions for that problem.
> I try to discover the source of the XIXth century byzantine musical > treatise.

Don't know anything about that either.

> Thank oyu for help and for answers. My topic it's still open for > discutions.

Not sure what others have here to say but most things you're talking about sound completely unfamiliar to me so I'm afraid I can't be very helpful to you in this regard.

Petr

🔗Andy <a_sparschuh@...>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "anton_pann" <anton_pann@...> wrote:
>
> Anybody knows something about origins of 22 sections in the octave?

Hi Anton,
just try the approach of the indian expert Dr. Oke

http://www.22shruti.com/research_topic_24.asp

see also the discusssion in that list about that topic

/tuning/topicId_74961.html#75009

bye
A.S.