source file: m1559.txt Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 20:12:56 -0700 Subject: TD 1558/ Danielou/ Brian Lee From: monz@juno.com I sent two messages to Tuning Digest and my server gave me a message that they were not transferred, although my email program classified them as "sent". Apologies if they appear here twice. -Monzo =================================== re: Topic No. 1: Brian Lee wrote: >I am not a practising Indian Classical Musician (although I love the >music) and when I said that the Indian Classical Musicians don't go >along with Danielou's 5 limit ratio theory, all I was doing was >reporting what the musicians themselves had said. There are ratio >analyses of ICM which give prime limits up to 31 and if anyone's >interested I'll be happy to dig out the references. I'm extremely interested -- please, dig. I should perhaps state that it is my belief (as expounded in my book) that the original Indian tuning was a string of 22 4/3s and 3/2s, and that because some of the resulting intervals were only a schisma (roughly 2 cents) away from some 5-limit intervals which could be inferred, the result in practice was damn close to a 5-limit system. (Although I haven't done a serious study of Indian music, this tuning does agree with the oldest Indian theoretical writings I've read.) >Secondly, I have no argument with the idea of the quality of prime >numbers. Danielou's writing was the thing that got me into thinking >in those terms. I'm sorry if my posting made it sound like that was your position -- and glad to know that you agree with the idea of prime qualities. I mentioned your name only because of what you reported about the relevance of Danielou's work to actual Indian practice. Scott Makeig's reference to Danielou was what got *me* into thinking in terms of prime qualities. My whole interest in just-intonation theory started because I wanted to find a better way to notate the ratios. 16 years later, it has evolved into something far deeper and broader than that -- to the point where I feel that prime qualities, whether actually present or merely implied by the tuning, are the basic cognitive archtype behind the harmonic and melodic aspects of music-making, whatever the actual tuning used (be it just, 12- or other- equal, well-tempered, meantone, non-octave, roots of pi, or other more exotic number-play). This is not meant to be a dogmatic assertion that primes are the only justifiable tuning system or analytical methodology, but merely a statement that the feelings and sounds evoked by the bewildering variety of intervals actually heard in music are most *simply* analyzed by studying the prime qualities present in or implied by those intervals, by reduction of the frequency-ratios to prime factors and their exponents. (Thanks to Paul Erlich's endless debates with me in his pursuit of precision, that's the clearest statement of my position I've ever come up with.) >What I cannot go along with however in Danielou's work is that >anything over prime 5 takes you into potentially dangerous areas >metaphysically. There are many musical cultures which tune to >higher prime limits than five. > >I hope this makes my position clearer. My microtonal analysis of a Robert Johnson blues song (see my website) was done by ear, and although I believe that I came as close as I could in my MIDI sequence to what he actually sings on the CD, I will admit that that some of the ratios in the vocals may indeed be quite different from the ones I chose. However, it is indisputable to me that Delta Blues guitar parts implied 7, and vocal parts used 7, all over the place, and that the vocals used primes far higher than that. I wouldn't be so fast to discredit the idea that "anything over prime 5 takes you into potentially dangerous areas metaphysically" though -- perhaps that's exactly what makes the blues "the Devil's music"! Although Danielou didn't accept 7, maybe he was on to something here. - Joe Monzo joe_monzo@hotmail.com http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/homepage.html ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]