source file: mills3.txt Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 01:04:47 +0100 Subject: Re: vertical/horizontal/motherlode From: Joseph Downing I've noticed that melodies and harmonies don't necessarily have to share the same scales. When I studied with Ben Johnston, it was an assumption that all pitches needed for harmony and melody would be part of the same set. I now questions that. As an example, let us take the tune "Amazing Grace" which is itself pentatonic. it came be harmonized by confining oneself to the pentatonic pitches (anything pretty much goes), or by using other scales. For example, in most hymnbooks, it is harmonized in diatonic harmony, which requires the 4th and 7th scale degrees. In Ben's variations, he goes further along, harmonizing it with 7th partial relationships (and 11th, if I recall correctly.) The piece works, I think! I see no reason why the pitches used for melodic material need to be the same as those used for harmony. Actually, for anyone who has played with scales in just intonation, it is obvious that the second scale degree (let's call it 'Re') which is a perfect fifth above 'Soh' is not the same note as the one that is a minor third below 'Fa.' And it is also true that there are two 'Fa's: the one that is a perfect fifth below 'Doh', and the one that is a minor seventh above 'Soh.' Of course, in equal temperament, we just sort of average out the differences, but if we really want to play in tune, then we need more notes than are in a diatonic scale. Joe Downing, in Syracuse SMTPOriginator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu From: BUYO-BUYO-IGOR Subject: BBCNN searchin for instant networked-microtuned-creation PostedDate: 03-01-98 03:03:03 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: 03-01-98 03:00:40-03-01-98 03:00:41,03-01-98 03:00:00-03-01-98 03:00:01 DeliveredDate: 03-01-98 03:00:01 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 C1256581.000B0981; Sat, 3 Jan 1998 03:02:29 +0100 Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA27949; Sat, 3 Jan 1998 03:03:03 +0100 Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 03:03:03 +0100 Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA26786 Received: (qmail 18911 invoked from network); 2 Jan 1998 18:03:01 -0800 Received: from localhost (HELO ella.mills.edu) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Jan 1998 18:03:01 -0800 Message-Id: <34AE11BA.7DDA@db3.so-net.or.jp> Errors-To: madole@mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu