X-Envelope-to: ALLMUSIC@AUVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"ALLMUSIC@AUVM.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.allmusic
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 08:37:00 GMT
From:         "OUT,
              OUT - YOU'LL NOT FEEL THE FALL-OUT..." <OLIVOTTO@ITNCISCA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Tunnel hearing

>From: Michael <MASUDA@SJSUVM1.BITNET>
>Subject: Tunnel hearing

Mike, what a question...!

>What would music be like if equal temperment tuning was not standardized?

        There are two main observations I have to make:
1) a book would be necessary to answer;
2) had I the time :(, I wouldn't have the proper culture to write it anyway :).
        But, in general:

>We grew up on equal temperment.
>From a young age, we were constantly bombarded with the 12 tone scale
>  fashioned from a logarithmic equation.

        Just for those less musically/mathematically oriented: Mike is simply
stating that if you pick a note and the correspondent note one octave higher
(two C's on a piano for instance) the frequency of the 12 semitones that lie
between these are "computed" on a certain equation which involves logarithms.
        This is not the only way to tune an instrument, and I think that this
system was introduced by Bach.
        It has several positive features and also several problems. One of
the positive features is that it allows you to play any scale without tuning
the instrument again (more later). The worst problem is that it rarely gives
you the chance to have perfectly sounding intervals, since frequencies are ap-
proximated and don't build up perfectly matching bichords.
        In the past some classical musicians insisted to use different tunings,
with the result that, say, a piece written in the key of C could not ever be
played in the key of F# (or whatever): if you play a major C scale on a piano
with the correct tuning for that scale ["correct" means simply that thirds
are thirds and fifths are fifths, and all the notes are therefore built on
subsequent harmonics - i.e. integer multiples of the fundamental frequency],
that piano may never play another scale correctly.
        Equal temperament resolves this problem and at the same time forces
a dose of standardisation which is not the best for tuning.

>This music is as valid as any other music that we hear.
>This is one prejudice that we as westerners ignore everyday.
>We take it for granted that there are other tuning scales and modes
>  out there in the world.

        I wouldn't put it that bad. Most of us are more or less involved in
ethnic music, and even if not, please all those who NEVER heard a sitar play
raise a hand... no hands, I see :).
        Just to say that *standard* music (99% of what you hear around) re-
lies on that system. But it's not always true.
        I would even push myself to say that some western music (and I include
a bit of everything: Gershwin's opening to "Rhapsody in Blue", Wakeman's deli-
ria on minimoogs with full portamento, quite a few passages in today's House
Music) completely lacks scales. As far as I know, the stiffest instrument is
the piano (and yet one of the most expressive, too), but guitars are actually
tuned on harmonics, and since the frets are relatively large the micro-devia-
tions which the strings may suffer from an hypothetical central note make the
tuning sort of go banana. It is not SO well defined as one may think (and this
is one of the reasons why a fair guitar with good tuning doesn't always sound
perfectly in tune with a good piano - it also depends on the key one uses).
Virtually, every instrument which can do vibrato has a narrow but clear escape
way from equal temperament.
        That a lot of western music doesn't always use this - well, it's ano-
ther problem.

>Born into this world listening to equal temperment, and bombarded with it
>  everywhere and from all sides, it's a mass conditioning that goes
>  unnoticed.  This is where our musical tunnel vision comes from.
>We don't realise it, but it's there.  We westerners are all guilty of
>  having tunnel ears to some extent.
>It sort of sheds new light on the phrase "it sounds out of tune".
>Someone from Indonesia is probably saying the same thing about
>  what you listen to everyday.

        One of the last records I have bought is a collection of recordings
made on location in Ghana and Kenya - tribal chants and prayers, with very
wild passages both on percussion and "harmonic" instruments.
        I enjoy it a lot - though of course that stuff sounds weird to my
ear. But, I assume, it's just a problem of multi-cultural attitude: I would
not say that any tuning system is better than any other.
        I mean, equal temperament is a code, but so is our alphabet if you
think. The mere fact that Arabian people write using those funny signs that
obviously don't mean a thing to me... well, that doesn't quite shed new
light on the phrase "it looks unreadable" to me :) [hey - Mike, not a flame
of course, I am just joking!].
        On something I guess we all can agree: our Mike is able to prompt
very interesting subjects, which most of the times are under-considered
by - because they probably look "difficult".
        But they're damn deep, hell. Thanks, Mike.

>Mike M. Masuda, or my new handle:
> 3
>M

        I forgot, Mike - I've meant to tell you for a while: I am writing some
new music these days, and I like to put a work-title to the bunch of song. It
doesn't last, but anyway... Well, this time it comes from a song I have written
a few weeks ago which is called "Samsara". Doesn't that ring a bell in your
head? Thanks a lot, anyway...

        Ciao, Marco
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.allmusic