source file: mills2.txt
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 1996 14:06:33 -0700

Subject: Young Xenharmonicists

From: HFORTUIN@delphi.com

This quote from Brian's message, "Paul Rapoport's grossly deficient bibliographies-
ies", part 2 of 2 deserves comment:

>>Paul, don't you realize that people like Kami Rousseau and
Matthew Puzan read your bibliographies and search out the
references you cite?  By refusing to cite sources of basic
importance, you prevent these up-and-coming microtonalists
from discovering their heritage. You drive them into the arms
of the  likes of Paul Griffiths...

As someone who could be regarded as a 'young xenharmonicist' (does having
<6 years' experience with xenharmonicity and being 31 years old qualify?),
I think Brian has a legitimate concern which is unfortunately stated with
extreme hyperbole. Anyone, young or old, who is researching a topic will
not simply take one bibliography out of one book as mentioning everything
of relevance or interest--anyone, at least, who has the slightest idea about
how to research something. Hopefully we all are wise enough to examine a number
of sources, most of which have been mentioned on this list at one time or another,
and look at a number of sources as well as do online searches at your local
university library.

I also find the tone of this paragraph condescending, as if being a young adult
must be synonymous with excessive belief in authority and naivete. Given the 
number of older adults who have fallen for Bhagwan Sri Rajneesh, or have sent
their hard-earned cash to TV evangelists, I find this concern unwarranted.

Nevertheless, that message certainly included mention of many sources of 
interest, though I wonder if any of them are concerned with the 3-5-7 limit
theory I'm researching?

>From Paul Rapoport's "Digest 600..." message:
<ETs generally do not allow themselves to be seen as an "outgrowth" of
just intonation.> Many uses of ETs do exactly that, especially the ones
that allow recognizable tonal or modal progressions.

Paul's retort to Brian's assertion is correct, at least as he subsequently
qualifies as referring to JI intervals, as opposed to the historical tunings.
This can be heard by anyone who spends a few minutes constructing approximations
to chords such as 4/5/6/7 in ETs such as 19, 22, 31, etc. YES, 22 too, although
its 5/4 major third, the 7th pitch ascending, is not the same as the "major tr 
third" found in the equation 5x + 2y = 22. Although 22-ET admittedly has its
difficulties in terms of whole-step melodic motion, it has a fine 5/4 major
third, perfect 5th, and the best 7-limit matches among the lower, whole-number
ETs which are reasonably tonal/modal.

Finally, I appreciate Paul Ehrlich's reply to my "No Scales" message, which I
believe further clarifies the importance of not clinging too closely to
the major scale.

I would appreciate any further bibliographic references for those 3-5-7 issues,
especially from those very familiar with a vast body of xenharmonic sources.

Harold Fortuin
hfortuin@delphi.com

Received: from eartha.mills.edu [144.91.3.20] by vbv40.ezh.nl
           with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 05:24 +0100
Received: from  by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
	for <coul@ezh.nl> id UAA18558; Sun, 21 Jul 1996 20:24:49 -0700
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 1996 20:24:49 -0700
Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9607212354.A24346-0100000@email.ir.miami.edu>
Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu