Topic: Re: [tuning] Real-life applications of esoteric tunings
1 scales
| File | Description | Notes | Period (ยข) | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| jsmith24 | J. Smith 5-limit JI scale April 8, 2006 tuning@yahoo | 24 | 1200.0 | 5 |
Thread (30 messages)
From: Keenan Pepper (2006-04-07) Subject: Re: [tuning] Real-life applications of esoteric tunings On 4/7/06, J.Smith <jsmith9624@sbcglobal.net> wrote: [...] > everyone wants to compose or perform music with their PC. Suppose I > wish to write a string quartet in 79-ET. How are the performing > musicians to play the pitches I want with any level of accuracy? In > the best of conditions, the ablest of performers may miss the > intended pitches by some cents, even in just intonation. Can anyone > provide me with a fingering chart for my tenor recorder, in such a > scale? How do I find the pitches I want, by ear, on my 'cello's > fingerboard? If I miss the intended pitch but hit the next closest > pitch by ear, then why did I need the first one at all--especially > if even I, the composer, can't discriminate between the two? I argue that it's impossible to write a string quartet in 79-edo that couldn't be better realized in some other system. 79-edo has too many notes and not enough interesting relationships between them. It's possible to use it for magic temperament (the temperament in which four 5/4 major thirds exceed an octave by a 6/5 minor third), but then you wouldn't really be writing in 79-edo, you'd be writing in magic. Notice how I described magic temperament not in terms of homomorphisms and vector spaces, but in terms of relationships between familiar intervals. From that kind of description it should much easier to finger on your cello. [...] > performance? I mean, TODAY. (Let us leave aside also the question > of "new" instruments capable of playing these scales, as any such > acoustic instruments currently in existence would be highly > idiosyncratic, unstandardized, and most probably incapable of > performing anything in my favorite tuning. Or yours.) But that is one of the most important questions, in my opinion. All-purpose instruments like the cello and the trombone are great, but all the other "standardized" instruments are designed around meantone temperament (the temperament in which 3 4/3 perfect fourths exceed an octave by a 6/5 minor third) and its incarnation in 12-edo. To play new music, we must build new instruments. > What exactly, is being searched for here? The ideal temperament? I'd > like to see the piano (not to mention pipe organ) capable of 144-ET. > If we are going to select pitches from this scale to approximate a > 7/6, why not simply use a 7/6? Are theoretically endless modulations > into remote keys the goal? Just how many intervals can dance on the > head of a pin, anyway? Needless to say, different musicians have different goals. The desire for purity of intervals and the desire for freedom of modulation are incompatible, but they create a continuum between just intonation and equal temperaments. Have you read "A Middle Path"? I think I'll write my own introduction to linear temperaments with less emphasis on math and more on musical intuition. [...] Keenan Pepper
From: Gene Ward Smith (2006-04-07) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@...> wrote: > No offense is meant here, but these are practical questions, I would > think. If these tunings are not mere intellectual pastimes, rather > like crossword puzzles, then which of them may immediately be > applied to an orchestral composition, or be used by a soloist in > performance? I mean, TODAY. The existence of electronic means entails that these are not in any case mere intellectual pastimes. If you want to get something performed, the first step is finding someone to do the performing; I'm not an expert on that step. Despite my lack of expertise I'll do recommendations anyway, and recommend sticking with only a few microtonal systems. There is a repertoire which has grown up around 72-et, and 72 is a subdivision of 12. That's a good place to land. There is also a repertoire which has grown up around 31-et, and 31 is a meantone tuning. That is another place to land. > What exactly, is being searched for here? The ideal temperament? I'd > like to see the piano (not to mention pipe organ) capable of 144-ET. Why 144? > If we are going to select pitches from this scale to approximate a > 7/6, why not simply use a 7/6? That gets into yet another approach which has been sucessfully used; get a JI scale you like and stick with it, inventing instruments if needed. There are instruments in existence in JI tunings, so if you could mobilize them on behalf of a performance of your music you'd be in business. Are theoretically endless modulations > into remote keys the goal? It's my experience that modulation in terms of key in high-order mictrotonal systems is less noticable anyway than modulation in terms of moving to another system of chord relations, eg based on another linear temperament, and I've been thinking of using that more than in my few experiments in the past. However, two points: modulation is by no means the only reason you might want to use tempering, and you don't *need* to use tempering if you don't want to. > I'll grant the likelihood of their viability in electronic > compositions, and justifiably so. But I would like to see new tonal > resources put to good musical (not theoretical) use in the material > world of present-day acoustic instruments. Can any such scale of > more than 53 pitches be pointed out? And do we really need another > fixed and permanent-for-all-time scale? 72 pitches is more than 53, and has been used quite a bit. I still think the most obvious thing to try would be 31, however, and that is *less* than 53. 19, 22, 31, and 34 have all been used successfully for acoustic instruments, and 41 and 46 are certainly worth trying.
From: Ozan Yarman (2006-04-07) Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings You did not mention that I am in possession of a life-size 79-tone Qanun that has been certified by at least one master Qanun-player. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@coolgoose.com> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com> Sent: 07 Nisan 2006 Cuma 21:59 Subject: [tuning] Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@...> wrote: > > > No offense is meant here, but these are practical questions, I would > > think. If these tunings are not mere intellectual pastimes, rather > > like crossword puzzles, then which of them may immediately be > > applied to an orchestral composition, or be used by a soloist in > > performance? I mean, TODAY. > > The existence of electronic means entails that these are not in any > case mere intellectual pastimes. If you want to get something > performed, the first step is finding someone to do the performing; I'm > not an expert on that step. Despite my lack of expertise I'll do > recommendations anyway, and recommend sticking with only a few > microtonal systems. There is a repertoire which has grown up around > 72-et, and 72 is a subdivision of 12. That's a good place to land. > There is also a repertoire which has grown up around 31-et, and 31 is > a meantone tuning. That is another place to land. > > > What exactly, is being searched for here? The ideal temperament? I'd > > like to see the piano (not to mention pipe organ) capable of 144-ET. > > Why 144? > > > If we are going to select pitches from this scale to approximate a > > 7/6, why not simply use a 7/6? > > That gets into yet another approach which has been sucessfully used; > get a JI scale you like and stick with it, inventing instruments if > needed. There are instruments in existence in JI tunings, so if you > could mobilize them on behalf of a performance of your music you'd be > in business. > > Are theoretically endless modulations > > into remote keys the goal? > > It's my experience that modulation in terms of key in high-order > mictrotonal systems is less noticable anyway than modulation in terms > of moving to another system of chord relations, eg based on another > linear temperament, and I've been thinking of using that more than in > my few experiments in the past. However, two points: modulation is by > no means the only reason you might want to use tempering, and you > don't *need* to use tempering if you don't want to. > > > I'll grant the likelihood of their viability in electronic > > compositions, and justifiably so. But I would like to see new tonal > > resources put to good musical (not theoretical) use in the material > > world of present-day acoustic instruments. Can any such scale of > > more than 53 pitches be pointed out? And do we really need another > > fixed and permanent-for-all-time scale? > > 72 pitches is more than 53, and has been used quite a bit. I still > think the most obvious thing to try would be 31, however, and that is > *less* than 53. 19, 22, 31, and 34 have all been used successfully for > acoustic instruments, and 41 and 46 are certainly worth trying. > >
From: Kraig Grady (2006-04-07) Subject: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings i think it requires the building of new instruments, at least this has been the successful method for me. i have not had much luck working with traditional instruments. Although i am still pursuing it, but having instruments right there in front of some one to double the pitch if necessary is vastly helpful. In general western musicians have not been trained to have the pitch discernment we see in say India especially. Until this happens we are in trouble, or until we say at least have ensembles dedicated to such intonational practices. while we can have our players put headphones on, i find what this does to players is not what i want to do. One has only to see the faces of players emerging from such sessions, to see what type of energy this creates. Message: 8 Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 17:11:28 -0000 From: "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@sbcglobal.net> Subject: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings : how am I supposed to realize and apply these tunings in the real world of acoustic instruments? -- Kraig Grady North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/> The Wandering Medicine Show KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles
From: Ozan Yarman (2006-04-07) Subject: Re: [tuning] Real-life applications of esoteric tunings Why India especially? Why not Middle East? I smell something rotten, I smell jaundice. LOL ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kraig Grady" <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com> Sent: 07 Nisan 2006 Cuma 22:52 Subject: [tuning] Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > i think it requires the building of new instruments, at least this has been the successful method for me. > i have not had much luck working with traditional instruments. Although i am still pursuing it, but having instruments right there in front of some one to double the pitch if necessary is vastly helpful. > > In general western musicians have not been trained to have the pitch discernment we see in say India especially. > Until this happens we are in trouble, > or until we say at least have ensembles dedicated to such intonational practices. > while we can have our players put headphones on, i find what this does to players is not what i want to do. > One has only to see the faces of players emerging from such sessions, to see what type of energy this creates. >
From: Carl Lumma (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > Let me again publicly announce my algebraic, algorithmic and > logarithmic deficiencies; not to mention my obvious low-brow, Joe > Sixpack anti-intellectual stance. But my questions stand. Practical methods of performance with acoustic instruments have been discussed and debated here ad nauseum for years. I'd tell you to check the archives, but until yahoo ugrades their search, such efforts are sadly unlikely to bear much fruit. -Carl
From: Carl Lumma (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > > Let me again publicly announce my algebraic, algorithmic and > > logarithmic deficiencies; not to mention my obvious low-brow, > > Joe Sixpack anti-intellectual stance. But my questions stand. > > Practical methods of performance with acoustic instruments have > been discussed and debated here ad nauseum for years. I'd tell > you to check the archives, but until yahoo ugrades their search, > such efforts are sadly unlikely to bear much fruit. I'll briefly try to summarize my contributions on this point. 1. As Kraig says, we need to build new instruments. He's done pretty well on that count, as did Partch. Partch left us a great manual on how to do it... http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/030680106X/ Efforts have been made to design new orchestral instruments (Patrick Ozzard-Low's work comes to mind http://www.c21-orch-instrs.demon.co.uk ) and to find new ways of playing traditional ones (Johnny Reinhard and others). But as far as I'm concerned, creating fixed-pitch instruments to guide us is priority one (I've said that Western music is only 12-tET to the extent pianos and guitars are 12-tET). That means guitars and keyboards. In the guitar dept., it's straightforward to make equal temperaments up to 31, and from there approximate what you need. Dave Keenan also showed how to lay out microtemperaments for practical JI on guitar... http://users.bigpond.net.au/d.keenan/Music/MicroGuitar.pdf In the keyboard department, the halberstadt simply has to go. The Fokker organ and generalized-keyboard Scalatron (George Secor can tell you all about it) were unique points in history here, but we're now looking down the face of at least three major breakthroughs: - Dylan Horvath's Terpstra keyboard http://www.cortex-design.com/body-project-terpstra-5.htm - Paul Vandervoort's Daskin keyboard http://www.daskin.com - the Thummer jammer http://www.thummer.com Starr Labs' microzone keyboards have been available for a few years... http://www.starrlabs.com ...but are much more expensive than the three above projects are aiming to be. 2. And indeed, in my mind, ignorance of intonation subtleties in existing musical forms is a huge problem in the microtonal community. It's something of a myth that "microtonality" requires greater precision, for all those microscopic things, than standard music. Sure it's possible to write music that uses tiny intervals or explores new levels of subtlety. But I don't think that's the most interesting ground uncovered by microtonal theory. Rather, a serious palette of new scales, with 5-12 notes, have been uncovered with vastly different behavior than the diatonic scale. New chord progressions, new chord types, new melodic flavors. Too bad so few people on these lists have bothered to check them out. 3. While less interactive than the new instruments discussed above, electronic renderings can be useful in the acoustic realm. Toby Twining used them to guide live performers for his Crysalid Requiem (discussed here and on MMM at length). 4. Musical traditions take time to evolve. While they take less time today than ever before, we should be happy if we only see 5% of the fruits of today's theory in our lifetimes. -Carl
From: Jon Szanto (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote: > I'll briefly try to summarize my contributions on this point. Excellent post, very well done. Ditto Gene's on the subject as well. Cheers, Jon
From: Gene Ward Smith (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote: > 2. And indeed, in my mind, ignorance of intonation subtleties > in existing musical forms is a huge problem in the microtonal > community. It's something of a myth that "microtonality" > requires greater precision, for all those microscopic things, > than standard music. Sure it's possible to write music that > uses tiny intervals or explores new levels of subtlety. But > I don't think that's the most interesting ground uncovered by > microtonal theory. Rather, a serious palette of new scales, > with 5-12 notes, have been uncovered with vastly different > behavior than the diatonic scale. New chord progressions, > new chord types, new melodic flavors. Too bad so few people > on these lists have bothered to check them out. It seems to me the main interest with these is precisely with acoustic instruments. When you have the large palette available electronically, I find it more attractive to explore that. But it remains true that smaller scales are of interest, and I certainly would not confine that to 5-12 notes, either. There are many fine scales with a few more notes than 12 that could be used acoustically. The Heathwaite-Smith piece Marvelous Penta is in a 15 note scale, the 15 note marvelous dwarf scale, for example. Of course the 21 note Blackjack scale has come in for a lot of discussion here, amd Joe Pehrson has done a number of pieces in it; it's a fine scale to compose in, I've found. There are many more scales in an acoustic instrument size range. One thing to bear in mind about 12 notes is that it is an interesting size from a keyboard instrument tuning point of view, and tuning a piano to different scales is a method which has been used successfully, and which is capable of many things.
From: threesixesinarow (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote: > > > > Let me again publicly announce my algebraic, algorithmic and > > > logarithmic deficiencies; not to mention my obvious low-brow, > > > Joe Sixpack anti-intellectual stance. But my questions stand. > > > > Practical methods of performance with acoustic instruments have > > been discussed and debated here ad nauseum for years. > In the keyboard department, the halberstadt simply has to go. Some nonconformists listed here, though Perronet Thompson, of all people convinced Poole to design a special keyboard afterwards http://riters.com/microtonal/index.cgi/piano
From: Carl Lumma (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > > a serious palette of new scales, > > with 5-12 notes, have been uncovered with vastly different > > behavior than the diatonic scale. New chord progressions, > > new chord types, new melodic flavors. Too bad so few people > > on these lists have bothered to check them out. > > It seems to me the main interest with these is precisely with > acoustic instruments. I strongly disagree. > When you have the large palette available electronically, > I find it more attractive to explore that. I like your work very much, but my main interest is generalized diatonic scales, regardless of instrumentation. I'd love to hear you play around in this medium... -Carl
From: Carl Lumma (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > > But as far as I'm concerned, creating fixed-pitch instruments > > to guide us is priority one (I've said that Western music is > > only 12-tET to the extent pianos and guitars are 12-tET). > > That means guitars and keyboards. In the guitar dept., it's > > straightforward to make equal temperaments up to 31, and from > > there approximate what you need. Dave Keenan also showed how > > to lay out microtemperaments for practical JI on guitar... > > More fixed-pitch instruments does seem to be the most direct > route. But that creates another set of problems: intonational > subtleties (see below). How many discrete pitches can such an > instrument produce - in order to accommodate the multitude of > tunings required of it - before becoming too > physically/mechanically cumbersome? Pianos can be built with 31 pitches/octave and still have the octave span about the same as on a conventional piano. Harpsichords can be made even smaller. I dunno about tracker organs, but the sky's the limit with 'trackless' ones. And that raises the notion of 'play by wire' pianos, with cases of strings actuated by solenoids... And synthesizers have no mechanical problems at all. Yes, I know synths aren't acoustic, but they could still serve to guide acoustic performers, and most importantly of all, provide a visual & auditory framework in which composers can think. And let's not leave out button accordions. The parts can be made very small. As for physical limitations, keyboards are apparently feasible up to 41 pitches/octave, and probably beyond. There's some debate about where polyphonic guitar playing becomes impossible. Perhaps around 31, perhaps around 53... And these are notes *at a time*. One can retune his piano, switch guitars, or switch out magnetic fretboards (Mark Rankin), or retune his synth instantly. Further subtleties can be reached with automatic intonation of some kind and/or by letting the performer choose roots with pedals. So I'm not sure what you think is "required", but here I don't see any "problem". Rather, I see an *embarrassment of riches*. > That still leaves the question of woodwinds and brass - > which have a certain amount of intonational leeway - and tuned > percussion instruments. I would hate to abandon these vital > tone-colors for a music comprised of only guitars, strings > and pianos. Who said anything about that? I said making pianos is the way to get microtonal brass. I don't mean concurrently, either. It's a lack of fixed pitch instruments that's holding us back in a very general way. > Say that I require a melodic line to progress so: > > 1/1 - 9/8 - 81/64 - 4/3, then: 4/3 - 5/4 - 10/9 - 1/1 > > The "subtlety " here is the comma, 81/80; without it, the > intention of the composer, and nuance of the melody as > conceived, is destroyed. After hearing it, many competent musicians could perform it. > Nearly all of my microtonal compositions use subsets of > a larger scale. Most music stays largely in a single diatonic key, and many melodies strongly gravitate to a pentatonic or 1/2-triad subset of that. Expanding that is a great frontier, and the above resources are at the ready. *Changing* it is another great frontier, and again the above resources should be plenty. Even the argument that mechanical limitations thwarted microtonality in antiquity is bogus. There isn't much in Norman Henry's piano that couldn't have been in Broadwood's piano. There's no reason 19- or 22-tone guitars/lutes couldn't have been made in antiquity. -Carl
From: Carl Lumma (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > Harps make use of pedals to raise or lower string tension, > thus raising/lowering pitch by a tempered semitone. The same > mechanism, applied to the piano, could raise the pitch of a set > of strings by only the comma 81/80. That's an interesting idea, and it could probably be made to work. Keep in mind, however, that piano strings are under far greater tension than harp strings. So there's an engineering challenge here. However, modern pianos already have a way of selecting different strings for each key -- the una corda pedal. Michael Harrison recorded _From Ancient Worlds_ using a modified grand piano with 24 (non-simultaneous) pitches/octave. Everyone on this list should own that CD. -Carl
From: Gene Ward Smith (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote: > I like your work very much, but my main interest is generalized > diatonic scales, regardless of instrumentation. I'd love to > hear you play around in this medium... So how small does a scale need to be before it is interesting? And does all the harmony need to arise from notes of the scale? To me, the best thing about relatively small scales is fantasizing that they could get a live performance.
From: Gene Ward Smith (2006-04-08)
Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings
--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@...> wrote:
> Gene, could you analyze these pitches for Pythagorean and just tuning
> possibilities in the 12 keys, major and minor?
I'm not sure what you are asking, but it has 15 major triads, twelve
of which are just and three of which are schismatic. It likewise has
twelve just and three schismatic minor triads. It looks good when
compared to Schismatic[24], and is similar to the Euler genus
efg3333333355 in the Scala archive. That might be considered
preferable, having the same number of triads but only one rather than
three schismatic ones of each kind.
Here it is in Scala format:
! jsmith24.scl
J. Smith 5-limit JI scale April 8, 2006 tuning@yahoo
24
!
81/80
256/243
16/15
10/9
9/8
32/27
6/5
5/4
81/64
4/3
27/20
45/32
64/45
40/27
3/2
128/81
8/5
5/3
27/16
16/9
9/5
15/8
243/128
2
The Euler genus:
! efg333333355.scl
!
Genus [333333355]
24
!
81/80
135/128
16/15
10/9
9/8
1215/1024
6/5
5/4
81/64
4/3
27/20
45/32
64/45
3/2
243/160
405/256
8/5
5/3
27/16
16/9
9/5
15/8
243/128
2/1
From: Carl Lumma (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > > I like your work very much, but my main interest is generalized > > diatonic scales, regardless of instrumentation. I'd love to > > hear you play around in this medium... > > So how small does a scale need to be before it is interesting? And > does all the harmony need to arise from notes of the scale? 5-10 notes I'd say, and no, but some of it should. > To me, the best thing about relatively small scales is fantasizing > that they could get a live performance. Except they won't be small then. They'll be inflected by the performers like any other scale. You know, many of your themes use very few notes. -Carl
From: Gene Ward Smith (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote: > Pianos can be built with 31 pitches/octave and still have the > octave span about the same as on a conventional piano. > Harpsichords can be made even smaller. I dunno about tracker > organs, but the sky's the limit with 'trackless' ones. And > that raises the notion of 'play by wire' pianos, with cases > of strings actuated by solenoids... If some brave soul were to wire up a generalized keyboard to six ordinary pianos, tuned in 1/12 tone intervals, he'd be in the 72-et business. That sounds quite doable, if somewhat clumbersome. Of course once you have your piano all you need is a violin and a cello and you have a piano trio. And synthesizers have no > mechanical problems at all. Yes, I know synths aren't acoustic, > but they could still serve to guide acoustic performers, and > most importantly of all, provide a visual & auditory framework > in which composers can think. Joe Pehrson is getting performances by sticking synth sounds with live ones. > And these are notes *at a time*. One can retune his piano, > switch guitars, or switch out magnetic fretboards (Mark Rankin), > or retune his synth instantly. Further subtleties can be > reached with automatic intonation of some kind and/or by > letting the performer choose roots with pedals. By the way, how good are the best electronic pianos these days? > Even the argument that mechanical limitations thwarted > microtonality in antiquity is bogus. There isn't much in > Norman Henry's piano that couldn't have been in Broadwood's > piano. There's no reason 19- or 22-tone guitars/lutes > couldn't have been made in antiquity. Costeley, who invented 19-et, also had a keyboard instrument to play it.
From: Carl Lumma (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > By the way, how good are the best electronic pianos these days? The sounds are really good. The controllers are not. > > Even the argument that mechanical limitations thwarted > > microtonality in antiquity is bogus. There isn't much in > > Norman Henry's piano that couldn't have been in Broadwood's > > piano. There's no reason 19- or 22-tone guitars/lutes > > couldn't have been made in antiquity. > > Costeley, who invented 19-et, also had a keyboard instrument > to play it. Now this I don't know about... -Carl
From: Ozan Yarman (2006-04-08) Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings I understand that Michael managed to arrive at something similar to the Arel-Ezgi system with that unicorda method. On the other hand, the Ultratonal Piano sketch designed by my lowly self could be the candidate to overcome that engineering challenge. I even figured out how to make use of atomic technology to determine the frequency of each individual string instantaneously to extreme precisions surpassing the sensitivity of an ordinary human ear by a factor of 1 to a million. Incredible is not the right word. Oz. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl Lumma" <clumma@yahoo.com> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com> Sent: 08 Nisan 2006 Cumartesi 22:12 Subject: [tuning] Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > > Harps make use of pedals to raise or lower string tension, > > thus raising/lowering pitch by a tempered semitone. The same > > mechanism, applied to the piano, could raise the pitch of a set > > of strings by only the comma 81/80. > > That's an interesting idea, and it could probably be made to > work. Keep in mind, however, that piano strings are under > far greater tension than harp strings. So there's an engineering > challenge here. > > However, modern pianos already have a way of selecting different > strings for each key -- the una corda pedal. Michael Harrison > recorded _From Ancient Worlds_ using a modified grand piano with > 24 (non-simultaneous) pitches/octave. Everyone on this list > should own that CD. > > -Carl > >
From: Yahya Abdal-Aziz (2006-04-09) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings On Sat, 08 Apr 2006, Jon Szanto wrote: > > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote: > > I'll briefly try to summarize my contributions on this point. > > Excellent post, very well done. Ditto Gene's on the subject as well. I heartily second Jon's comment. Jon (Smith), I think you now have plenty of points to consider in answer to your original question! I especially enjoyed Carl's comment that we *have* uncovered a rich new palette of scales with a dozen or fewer notes, and particularly concur with him that they're awaiting our further exploration. Here's to the journey! Regards, Yahya -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.0/305 - Release Date: 8/4/06
From: Ozan Yarman (2006-04-09) Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings Hey Yahya, I listened to your piece from the microtonal podcast by Prent. Impressive modulations on the Phyrigian mode, or else, Maqam Kurdi. Cordially, Oz. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Yahya Abdal-Aziz" <yahya@melbpc.org.au> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com> Sent: 09 Nisan 2006 Pazar 6:21 Subject: [tuning] Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > > On Sat, 08 Apr 2006, Jon Szanto wrote: > > > > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@...> wrote: > > > I'll briefly try to summarize my contributions on this point. > > > > Excellent post, very well done. Ditto Gene's on the subject as well. > > > I heartily second Jon's comment. > > Jon (Smith), I think you now have plenty of points > to consider in answer to your original question! > I especially enjoyed Carl's comment that we *have* > uncovered a rich new palette of scales with a dozen > or fewer notes, and particularly concur with him > that they're awaiting our further exploration. > > Here's to the journey! > > Regards, > Yahya >
From: Yahya Abdal-Aziz (2006-04-10) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings Hi Ozan, On Sun, 9 Apr 2006, Ozan Yarman wrote: > > Hey Yahya, I listened to your piece from the microtonal podcast by Prent. > Impressive modulations on the Phyrigian mode, or else, Maqam Kurdi. Thank you kindly, kind sir! :-) I hasten to point out that the tune is exactly as I remember finding it, many years ago, while living in Malaysia. The arrangement alone is mine. Yes, I did think to myself, "I bet Oz will call the feel of the upper tetrachord 'a modulation'." ;-) It certainly has the *feel* of a mode change, doesn't it? Of course, every one of its notes comes from a white note of the piano keyboard (albeit tuned to Pythagorean intonation on E.) Oz, I have a confession to make! You see, I thought that perhaps you were just being, let's say, "ornery", in persisting in calling this kind of re-centring of a melody on a different note, "modulation". But I have recently visited www.maqamworld.com, and there I find them using the exact same language. I realise that you are justly famed for your musical knowledge and abilities, but even so, I hardly think that Arab musicians will ever be in a rush to take their theoretical terms from a Turk - no matter how knowledgeable he may be! ;-) Therefore, I conclude that you are following an established convention for discussing maqam music in English. Please accept my abject apologies for hastily concluding that you were making difficulties ... I still believe that using the term "modulation" in this kind of context gives it yet another meaning, rather than simply generalising its other meanings. Whether this is too great a burden for the term, only time will tell. I could wish for a separate term to describe "a change of mood without a change of tonic". In terms of melody rather than harmony: - 1. Given that Western modulation involves a change of (seven-note, diatonic) key or a change of the tonic of the key, I think we are invariably talking about a change of seven-note, diatonic key when we use the term in describing Western music. Hmmm? 2. Given that maqam scales are constructed by combining two tetrachords (or occasionally, trichords or pentachords, depending on how one chooses to analyse them), and that a maqam modulation can involve no more than substituting a different upper tetrachord for the usual one, perhaps we are talking about a change of tetrachord (or occasionally, trichords or pentachords), when we use the term in describing Maqam music. What do you think of this characterisation of the way the term "modulation" applies to Western and to Maqam music? In these purely melodic terms, classical Indian music, of both the north and the south, has no modulation at all. It surely has melodic inflections which may use non-scale notes, but never supplant them. And of course the harmonic meanings of "modulation" do not apply to Indian music. Sometimes, as in Bunga Seroja, a melody may have quite different characters in its lower and upper tetrachords. So, at the point the melody moves from the lower to the upper, there is a distinct change of mood. Actually, one can analyse this tune as having two distinct portions, the first having a span of a seventh rooted on E, and the second having a span of a seventh, rooted on A. In each part, the "essential span" of the melody is only a fifth, the upper two notes serving only as parts of an extended ornament. On this analaysis, the tune as a whole does have a change of mode, from E Phrygian to A (?, minor), and one can certainly call this "modulation" - even more so if one chooses to harmonise the two parts with E minor, A minor. So perhaps this round goes to you! :-) Regards, Yahya -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.0/306 - Release Date: 9/4/06
From: Carl Lumma (2006-04-10) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > Therefore, I conclude > that you are following an established convention for > discussing maqam music in English. Didn't I say that like, at least three times? -C.
From: Ozan Yarman (2006-04-10) Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > > > > Hey Yahya, I listened to your piece from the microtonal podcast by Prent. > > Impressive modulations on the Phyrigian mode, or else, Maqam Kurdi. > > Thank you kindly, kind sir! :-) I detect your cynicism brother. > > I hasten to point out that the tune is exactly as I > remember finding it, many years ago, while living in > Malaysia. The arrangement alone is mine. > I thought something was authentic about it so much so that it was probably much older than yourself! > > Yes, I did think to myself, "I bet Oz will call the > feel of the upper tetrachord 'a modulation'." ;-) Why, of course it is. > It certainly has the *feel* of a mode change, > doesn't it? It had the `feel` alright... to say the least. Of course, every one of its notes comes > from a white note of the piano keyboard (albeit > tuned to Pythagorean intonation on E.) > Indeed. > Oz, I have a confession to make! You see, I thought > that perhaps you were just being, let's say, "ornery", ornery \ufffdr\ufffdne\ufffdri, (North American dialect or colloquial) adjective commonplace; inferior, poor, worthless; touchy, cantankerous; stubborn; mean, contemptible. [A variant of ordinary] (c) Larousse plc. All rights reserved > in persisting in calling this kind of re-centring of a > melody on a different note, "modulation". But I have > recently visited www.maqamworld.com, and there I > find them using the exact same language. I realise > that you are justly famed for your musical > knowledge and abilities, Shucks. but even so, I hardly think > that Arab musicians will ever be in a rush to take > their theoretical terms from a Turk - no matter how > knowledgeable he may be! ;-) Maybe I will make my point among the Ehl-i Kitab, considering that I'm a total ignoramus! Therefore, I conclude > that you are following an established convention for > discussing maqam music in English. Please accept my > abject apologies for hastily concluding that you were > making difficulties ... Oh, but I am... ;) > > I still believe that using the term "modulation" in this > kind of context gives it yet another meaning, rather > than simply generalising its other meanings. Whether > this is too great a burden for the term, only time will > tell. I could wish for a separate term to describe "a > change of mood without a change of tonic". > You don't necessariliy need to change the `tonic` to change the key. Drones and common-tones come to mind. > In terms of melody rather than harmony: - > 1. Given that Western modulation involves a change of > (seven-note, diatonic) key or a change of the tonic > of the key, I think we are invariably talking about > a change of seven-note, diatonic key when we use the > term in describing Western music. Hmmm? > Not necessarily. This is the tuning list for gosh sakes! Even 3-tET could involve modulation. > 2. Given that maqam scales are constructed by > combining two tetrachords (or occasionally, trichords > or pentachords, depending on how one chooses to > analyse them), and that a maqam modulation can > involve no more than substituting a different upper > tetrachord for the usual one, perhaps we are talking > about a change of tetrachord (or occasionally, > trichords or pentachords), when we use the term in > describing Maqam music. Ah... but I insist that principal Maqam scales are all but diatonical, unless they are octatonal or else. > > What do you think of this characterisation of the way > the term "modulation" applies to Western and to > Maqam music? > Even tetrachodal modulation is modulation per se. > In these purely melodic terms, classical Indian music, > of both the north and the south, has no modulation at > all. It surely has melodic inflections which may use > non-scale notes, but never supplant them. And of > course the harmonic meanings of "modulation" do not > apply to Indian music. Really now... all that requires is to harmonize a piece. But tell me, if I were to play only the upper voice of the first invention of J.S. Bach for duo voci, would you say that there is no modulation and the few non-scale notes are just alterations of the same mode? > > Sometimes, as in Bunga Seroja, a melody may have > quite different characters in its lower and upper > tetrachords. So, at the point the melody moves from > the lower to the upper, there is a distinct change of > mood. Actually, one can analyse this tune as having > two distinct portions, the first having a span of a > seventh rooted on E, and the second having a span of > a seventh, rooted on A. In each part, the "essential > span" of the melody is only a fifth, the upper two > notes serving only as parts of an extended ornament. > On this analaysis, the tune as a whole does have a > change of mode, from E Phrygian to A (?, minor), and > one can certainly call this "modulation" - even more so > if one chooses to harmonise the two parts with E > minor, A minor. So perhaps this round goes to you! :-) > Since you are the arranger, I expect you to harmonise it to disprove my claims! > Regards, > Yahya > > Cordially, O. wizard
From: George D. Secor (2006-04-10) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@...> wrote: > > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@> wrote: > > > But as far as I'm concerned, creating fixed-pitch instruments > > to guide us is priority one (I've said that Western music is > > only 12-tET to the extent pianos and guitars are 12-tET). > > That means guitars and keyboards. In the guitar dept., it's > > straightforward to make equal temperaments up to 31, and from > > there approximate what you need. Dave Keenan also showed how > > to lay out microtemperaments for practical JI on guitar... > > More fixed-pitch instruments does seem to be the most direct route. > But that creates another set of problems: intonational subtleties > (see below). How many discrete pitches can such an instrument > produce - in order to accommodate the multitude of tunings required > of it - before becoming too physically/mechanically cumbersome? > Keyboards can be retuned (I have a thought on that, but later); > guitars and bowed strings can return to the use of moveable frets or > ligatures. That still leaves the question of woodwinds and brass - > which have a certain amount of intonational leeway ... For a few of my ideas regarding *generalized* (multi-tuning) microtonal brass instruments, please see: http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/tuning/message/45966 http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/tuning/message/45990 The first link mentioned an instrument under development incorporating a thumb-operated (analog) slide; this referred to Steve Altoft's 19-tone trumpet, which I mentioned in this later posting (along with a number of other microtonal instrument possibilities): http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/MakeMicroMusic/message/8310 For a few thoughts on how instruments built for the 19, 31, or 38 octave divisions might be used to achieve even more refinement in pitch (approaching JI), see footnote 15 on page 20 of the following article on a generalized system of microtonal notation: http://users.bigpond.net.au/d.keenan/sagittal/Sagittal.pdf --George Secor
From: Yahya Abdal-Aziz (2006-04-11) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings Hi Carl, On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 "Carl Lumma" wrote: > > > Therefore, I conclude > > that you are following an established convention for > > discussing maqam music in English. > > Didn't I say that like, at least three times? If you did, I must have either missed all three, or misunderstood you. Normally, I pay better attention, but there was such a welter of posts on the subject, and the repetition of the same points was becoming a little tedious. So I'm sorry if you were saying something meaningful and I failed to listen! Where else (on the net) might I find informed discussion of modulations in maqam music? Regards, Yahya
From: Ozan Yarman (2006-04-11) Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings Sorry to barge in like that, but I believe the answer to be: way way away from me. ROFWL SNIP > > Where else (on the net) might I find informed > discussion of modulations in maqam music? > > Regards, > Yahya >
From: Carl Lumma (2006-04-11) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings > Where else (on the net) might I find informed > discussion of modulations in maqam music? Can't remember. Oriental tunes, maybe? Try google. -C.
From: Yahya Abdal-Aziz (2006-04-11) Subject: Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings Hi Ozan, On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Ozan Yarman wrote: > > Sorry to barge in like that, but I believe the answer to be: way way away > from me. But why ever would you say so? I understood that you not only have a theoretical grasp of what maqam music was about, but were also a competent performer. Or did my ears deceive me when I heard your improvisation on the new, improved, Ozan Yarman Qanun? > > Where else (on the net) might I find informed > > discussion of modulations in maqam music? You realise that this question was aimed at finding further sources of information, which would surely reduce my demands on your time. Even the most patient teacher eventually tires of explaining the same thing to a block-headed pupil. And being block-headed, this pupil feels the need to take himself off to learn a little more from some other master, lest by his persistent, wearying attentions he completely tire out his first teacher and render him unable to function to his best ability. Since it seems I am unable to learn from you, I would rather reserve your energy for making more of that delightful music I've enjoyed in the past. Very selfish of me, I know! ;-) But I'm sure we could both benefit from a break. Regards, Yahya -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.1/307 - Release Date: 10/4/06
From: Ozan Yarman (2006-04-16) Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Real-life applications of esoteric tunings Dear Yahya, > > Sorry to barge in like that, but I believe the answer to be: way way away > > from me. > > But why ever would you say so? I understood > that you not only have a theoretical grasp of > what maqam music was about, but were also a > competent performer. Or did my ears deceive > me when I heard your improvisation on the new, > improved, Ozan Yarman Qanun? > Perhaps... I make no claims toward being an expert on this genre. I merely believe to have a grasp of some of its fundamentals, that's all. And we don't seem to be able to make progress based on them. > > > Where else (on the net) might I find informed > > > discussion of modulations in maqam music? > > You realise that this question was aimed at > finding further sources of information, which > would surely reduce my demands on your time. > Even the most patient teacher eventually tires > of explaining the same thing to a block-headed > pupil. And being block-headed, this pupil feels > the need to take himself off to learn a little > more from some other master, lest by his > persistent, wearying attentions he completely > tire out his first teacher and render him unable > to function to his best ability. I would not tire of repetitions lest you - having at first succumbed to my presumptuous tutelage - resist my teachings, which include (but are not limited to) all our futile arguments on keys, modes and modulation. Since it seems > I am unable to learn from you, I would rather > reserve your energy for making more of that > delightful music I've enjoyed in the past. Very > selfish of me, I know! ;-) But I'm sure we could > both benefit from a break. > A break it is you want, a break it is you get. Unfortunately, I dare not suggest any source in Turkish written hereabouts that would muddle your delicate understanding of the situation. Nay, I propound my own doctrines on this matter and have summarized more than once other schools by which you could gain insight should you wish to inquire further. However, I strongly recommend otherwise, because: 1. The diverse tuning methods thus far proposed are hardly compelling for the layman. 2. Without an instrumental instruction, the theoretical pursuit is endless, if not inconclusive. 3. Nobody has yet reached a clear consensus about Perdes, Maqams and Usuls. 4. A myriad of traditions have sprung up since the past 150 years that will only serve to confuse the inquisitive mind. 5. Experiments and frequency measurement tests have commenced only recently. 6. A wholesome temperament solution based on the above-mentioned premises has just been developed, however lacking. 7. Notation and Solfege is still a great problem. 8. The gateway to Microtonal Polyphony has not been achieved to our satisfaction. > Regards, > Yahya > Cordially, Oz.