source file: mills3.txt Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 15:19:17 +0100 Subject: Reply to Paul Rapaport From: Gregg Gibson Gregg Gibson said: > "Paul Ehrlich is not without precedent in his fondness for this system [22 > equal]. This is as far as the most charitable informed person can go in > the way of an open mind." Paul Rapaport said: > Most of us are fairly polite in this forum, so I will continue in that > manner. Some people should seriously admit that their presumptions are > nothing more than that. It is (to put it mildly) perverse to imply that > one system invalidates all others. This may of course come from the > equally damaging view that accepting any other system invalidates one's > own. At least the writer shows impeccable logic on this one point. > > One of the many poor results of such behaviour is that we tend to write > off everything said by such people as nonsense. In the present case that > would be unfortunate indeed. > > With few exceptions, this is not the way this forum has advanced over the > several years of its existence, for good reason. > > Having stirred up the pot in this manner, I will now put the lid back on, > turn down the heat, and leave the room. This is nonsense. The gentleman to whom I was addressing the remark to which you take exception, has adopted an insolent tone from start to finish, in which tone I have never replied to him (until now), even under the most direct provocation, for he does seem to know enough to contribute something. It is no insult to anyone to say a particular system is of little value to music. If this tuning list is nothing more than a mutual admiration society for various kinds of musico-academic hangers-on, designed to rope in the unwary to the idle joys of any one of a number of very dubious tuning systems, it is a fraud, and the progress to which you refer, nothing more than an aimless, desultory meandering. I thank you for your kind remarks concerning my posts. I hope that I have provided people with a few new ideas of interest. My other responsibilities will soon greatly curtail my posts, I fear, so these few individuals who find themselves mortally offended by every other thing I say, will soon be left to nurse their 20-tone equal babies in peace. SMTPOriginator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu From: Gregg Gibson Subject: Reply to Paul Ehrlich PostedDate: 18-12-97 15:35:37 SendTo: CN=coul1358/OU=AT/O=EZH ReplyTo: tuning@eartha.mills.edu $MessageStorage: 0 $UpdatedBy: CN=notesrv2/OU=Server/O=EZH,CN=coul1358/OU=AT/O=EZH,CN=Manuel op de Coul/OU=AT/O=EZH RouteServers: CN=notesrv2/OU=Server/O=EZH,CN=notesrv1/OU=Server/O=EZH RouteTimes: 18-12-97 15:33:26-18-12-97 15:33:27,18-12-97 15:33:03-18-12-97 15:33:04 DeliveredDate: 18-12-97 15:33:04 Categories: $Revisions: Received: from ns.ezh.nl ([137.174.112.59]) by notesrv2.ezh.nl (Lotus SMTP MTA SMTP v4.6 (462.2 9-3-1997)) with SMTP id C1256571.004FF704; Thu, 18 Dec 1997 15:35:22 +0100 Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA26401; Thu, 18 Dec 1997 15:35:37 +0100 Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 15:35:37 +0100 Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA26391 Received: (qmail 17262 invoked from network); 18 Dec 1997 06:35:33 -0800 Received: from localhost (HELO ella.mills.edu) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Dec 1997 06:35:33 -0800 Message-Id: <34999678.1F1D@ww-interlink.net> Errors-To: madole@mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu