source file: mills2.txt Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 12:49:40 -0700 Subject: Re: Why ET-x? From: Brian Belet On Fri, 2 May 1997 18:31:31 -0700 said: >consistent with natural principles (acoustics, psycho-acoustics, etc.). Why >continue exploring various equal temperaments? What is the value in it? These are good questions. In the electronic domain, I abandoned any semblance to ET many years ago. I fail to see the need nor use if it, whether 12, 19, or more divisions to the octave. Using direct digital soft- ware synthesis, I by-pass the entire keyboard-driven paradigm and work freely (and delightfully) in open frequency space guided only by various projections of just intonation. However, I still use ancient 12-ET when writing for piano, winds, etc., in order to get music performed by the majority of musicians. I am either not willing or simply don't have the strength that Ben Johnston does to demand that all performs learn JI to perform my music. Within the ET paradigm, I employ pitch bends (etc.) to approximate the intervals I'm after, but I don't think it's realistic to expect live performers to be absolutely accurate, when such precision is physically impossible anyway in performance. Nonetheless, your question regarding the focus of our on-line discussions is well placed. We should discuss non-ET issues more, since they are more interesting (IMHO). -- Brian Belet Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Sat, 3 May 1997 23:17 +0200 Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA03737; Sat, 3 May 1997 23:16:59 +0200 Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA03734 Received: from by ella.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI) id OAA11784; Sat, 3 May 1997 14:15:16 -0700 Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 14:15:16 -0700 Message-Id: Errors-To: madole@mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@ella.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@ella.mills.edu