source file: mills2.txt Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 07:08:50 -0800 Subject: Why Systematize? From: Gary Morrison <71670.2576@CompuServe.COM> Oop. I intended this to go to the entire list, not just Johnny. --------------- Forwarded Message --------------- From: Gary Morrison, 71670,2576 To: Johnny Reinhard, INTERNET:reinhard@styx.ios.com Date: 28 Oct 1996 , 12:36 PM RE: Re: TUNING digest 875 > Re: systems, I don't believe there is any virtue in sticking to a > particular system of tuning, per se. Speaking for myself, I see a lot of value in systematizing tuning. Operating within a framework of limitations, and possibilities of course, stimulates creativity. Waving a magic wand over every problem we encounter, rather than solving them by ingeniously combining limited resources within our grasp, is boring. Also, tuning systems prioritize certain resources over others. That strongly affects the results. The traditional modes within a 12TET framework provide a close analogy: The fact that our culture divides 12 otherwise indistinct pitch classes into 7 meat-and-potatoes pitches with 5 spice pitches has had a strong effect upon Western music. Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:17 +0200 Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA06963; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 01:25:23 +0100 Received: from eartha.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA06991 Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI) for id QAA12118; Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:25:19 -0800 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:25:19 -0800 Message-Id: <3273FAA5.1761@cavehill.dnet.co.uk> Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu