On Nov 6, 12:22 pm, Bohgosity BumaskiL
(snip)> Again I ask, what is the relevance of your pentatonic ratios as
Post by LJSapplied to music?
(snip)
Ratios were in place before equal temperament (circa 1920).
12tet was in place a long time before that. Like centuries before.
Sometime in
the spring, I managed to abbreviate, approximate, and perhaps improve
upon a Bocherini piece with a Just Intonation, JI being about musical
ratios.
Great. Most musicians just use their ear. But what ever floats your
boat.
It is the background sound onhttp://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/finance/Manual_Spam_Control.htmI won't post
source without naming ratios, and I hav a graphics project with priority
over that.
So? You think ratios are important, and as a mathematician you may be
right. A musician uses his ear. That is one of the differences of
Mathematicians and Musicians. But a music ethnologist might use them
to describe what was actually done in practice to describe something
like the various application of a scale through the ages. The problem
is, if the performers at the time used their ears or anything other
than ratios to choose their pitches, there is no way of knowing what
exact pitches they used in actual practice. Thus, I still ask, what is
the relevance of your ratios that you seemed to be applying to
permutations of what is called in Zoltan Kodaly's studies of
Hungarian Folk music as the pentatons built upon Do, La, Sol, Mi, Re.
Kodaly strongly suggests and uses in his methodology, the same actual
tones that are produced with the Do Pentaton or the "standard"
pentatonic scale generally referred to as the tones with the ratios
defined as C D E G A.
In his methodology, the standard ratios are generally accepted as
being built upon the perfect fifths that stem from Protagoras but may
vary by some to be the scale produced by the first five different
tones (compressed into the octave) that occur in the Harmonic Series
with the 7th partial being referred to as La (slightly sharp when
referenced to the ET scale ratios instead of the somewhat default
naming of this as a very flat m7th.
In either case, the ratios or what ever system you use to get these
tones form what we generally know as the "major pentatonic" scale and
once these tones are set, all subsets and modal tonalities of these
scales will be used with these same pitches if you go into the
modality of the Do, Re, Mi, Sol, La pentatons as used in folk music.
So as I understood your trying to change the ratios to suit your
personal tastes, I asked and still ask, "What is the relevance of what
you are doing with the ratios of the pentatonic scale?"
So quit acting like a spoiled child during their "terrible twos" with
your name calling, lying, changing contexts, insults and just plain
acting like a total fool and answer the question or simply say you
don't know and stop acting like a total idiot! You are really
embarrassing yourself. You can call me what you like. I think it would
be funny if not so sad. I know how out of touch you are and
personally. I could care less what you think of me. You have a lot of
studying and living to do before you have any clue as to what I know
and don't know about music. Ratios? I really don't care much for them,
they are for the math nerds that like to hang around musicians and
pretend that they understand music. Some do and some don't. Some have
relevance and some do not. Judging by your own answers and words since
I asked you the question, which group to YOU think you belong to?
Some choices are to make that might improve a pentatonic piece. For
instance, at least three ratios will function az a minor seventh: 7:4,
16:9, and 9:5. One of them will probably sound better than the other two
for a particular piece. It iz even possible that a single constant ratio
system like untempered Pythagorean would work best for a particular
piece. In Pythagorean, according to the table, a major third iz 81:64
(versus 5:4). Ratios like that would boost equivalent naturals on a
pentatonic scale relatively into the sky. That iz not to say that a
non-linear dynamicist wiL not come up with a feedback loop for a
Pythagorean-pentatonic piece that makes it _look_ beautiful, then go on
to expand upon it with cousins to hiz first feedback loop for more
parts, or more length.
This is at least an attempt to answer the question. I am glad that
you are finally seeing how idiotic your past responses have been.
Weather I think that this is relevant or not is not the important
thing. It shows at least that you at least have a purpose in doing
this. That would have been an acceptable answer to my question as it
now seems that maybe you actually read my post or someone pointed out
to you that I did not criticize you at all, (You did that all by
yourself!) but simply asked the question.
Personally, I don't think it is relevant for the reasons I stated
above. The Pentatonic scale does not need to be improved. In fact, the
history of the scale's use through out the entire world (at least the
vast majority of the world) indicates that it was not really analyzed
that critically by most of the societies that made extensive use of
the scale although some did.
In order for me to consider your study to be relevant, you would have
to show me that you studied, lets say the Chinese and their studies of
the scale and its tunings, and then maybe discuss the differences of
their use of the scale compared to say the Kodaly approach and
methodology or some other culture that had done specific studies and
have recorded their studies in a society that actually knew about
their studies and was educated enough to make use of these principles
in their passing from generation to generation the folk songs that
make up so much of our musical heritage in the Western European
culture.
If you have actual knowledge of the Chinese systems, I would be
interested in that to at least some degree as I found it very
difficult to get any reliable scholarly knowledge that seems to have
been discovered during some of the more ancient dynasties. There are
some bells, and some instructions on tunings for some of them, but
even though I was in touch with at least some of the musical scholars,
I found that there simply was not a lot of interest in these ancient
practices as the traditional musicians used their ears as taught to
them by their elders and the more modern musicians used the Western
European tradition as their focus for playing more modern music.
I have no doubt that there were pretty close to the same number of
different tunings that were acutally sung as there were singers that
had the responsibility of carrying the tunes and traditions from
generation to generation. Musicians are more likely to be concerned
with transferring the feelings and emotion and the text of the folk
songs rather than the ratios involved and they sung them in a manner
that sounded good to them.
So, if that is what you are trying to do, and that "floats your boat",
well that's fine. All I ever asked was what did you think was the
relevance of your posts. You have supplied that and I have answered
with my reasons for disagreeing. The choice is still yours. Will you
continue to act like a two year old and continue with your inane
insults, misunderstandings, and basically idiotic comments or do you
want to discuss the relevance more, in a civil and proper manner, or
you can just go on with your agenda as it seems to amuse you and seems
to be something that you use to play with your programs or "code".
Maybe some day I will hear what you have posted as music or see the
relevance of the "world according to ratios". In the meantime, I will
continue with my musical life which is more concerned with the music
itself and what makes it work and not work and how it can transcend
all of the various tunings and all the differences of the ways that
performers play the music and somehow it still proves to be a work of
ART, no matter if they use your ratios, 12tet or simply their own ear.
To me, all of the above is something that is of concern to the
scientist (or mathematician) as the musician is concerned with the
message or emotion that is transmitted with the music and the ratios,
or lack of them are irrelevant. Only the ART is relevant. When you
learn to see that, then I will accept you as a musician even if you
are playing the ART on a computer using "code" that spells out the
ratios. Without the ART, to me it is irrelevant.
LJS
_______
Yoh mommuh so short she gotta use a ladder to pick up a dime.
I will ignore this as it is really rather lame and childish and I
won't even comment on your choosing the spelling that makes this a
"racial" comment. (oops, I mentioned it!)