Home: Difference between revisions

Line 1:

<h2>IMPORTED REVISION FROM WIKISPACES</h2>

This is an imported revision from Wikispaces. The revision metadata is included below for reference:<br>

: This revision was by author [[User:xenjacob|xenjacob]] and made on <tt>2006-03-31 16:42:51 UTC</tt>.<br>

: This revision was by author [[User:xenjacob|xenjacob]] and made on <tt>2006-03-31 16:48:10 UTC</tt>.<br>

: The original revision id was <tt>~~468836~~</tt>.<br>

: The original revision id was <tt>468864</tt>.<br>

: The revision comment was: <tt></tt><br>

The revision contents are below, presented both in the original Wikispaces Wikitext format, and in HTML exactly as Wikispaces rendered it.<br>

Line 9:

There has not been a successful tuning wiki...yet. But this shall try to be. Here's what Jacob wrote about the idea a year ago on [[http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/MakeMicroMusic/|MMM]]:

----

//I think that having one is a good idea, for many reasons. Dredging through archives of Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of specific information. Doubtless we can make things easier for first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective

knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here.

~~//I think that having one is a good idea, for~~ many ~~reasons. Dredging through archives~~ of ~~Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of specific~~ information. ~~Doubtless we can make~~ things ~~easier for first-timers,~~ everyone ~~really~~, ~~if we can free our collective//~~

Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place

~~//knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here~~.//

that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it.

//Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place//

A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community.

~~//that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it.~~ A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community. The ones I think of include://

The ones I think of include:

* "microtonal solutions" as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, andperhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them want this)

* lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.

* a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and discussion, sound examples of them.

* one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.

~~//But ultimately~~ the ~~content~~ of a ~~wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's//~~

•"microtonal solutions" as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, and

~~//no need~~ for ~~a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.//~~

perhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them want this)

~~There~~'s one at [[http://riters.com/microtonal/|riters]], but ~~I think~~ it's ugly. So let's try this one, shall we?</pre></div>

•lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.

•a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and discussion, sound examples of them.

•one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.

But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's

no need for a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.

//----

So there you have it. A year later, there's one at [[http://riters.com/microtonal/|riters]], but no one uses it, it gets spammed, and it's ugly besides. So let's try this one, shall we?</pre></div>

<h4>Original HTML content:</h4>

<div style="width:100%; max-height:400pt; overflow:auto; background-color:#f8f9fa; border: 1px solid #eaecf0; padding:0em"><pre style="margin:0px;border:none;background:none;word-wrap:break-word;width:200%;white-space: pre-wrap ! important" class="old-revision-html"><html><head><title>home</title></head><body><h2 id="toc0"><a name="x-This is a wiki about microtonal (xenharmonic) musics, alternate tunings, and the means of achieving them."></a>This is a wiki about microtonal (xenharmonic) musics, alternate tunings, and the means of achieving them.</h2>

<br />

There has not been a successful tuning wiki...yet. But this shall try to be. Here's what Jacob wrote about the idea a year ago on <a class="wiki_link_ext" href="http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/MakeMicroMusic/" rel="nofollow">MMM</a>:<br />

<hr />

<em>I think that having one is a good idea, for many reasons. Dredging through archives of Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of specific information. Doubtless we can make things easier for first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective<br />

knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here.<br />

<br />

Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place<br />

that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it.<br />

<br />

A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community.<br />

The ones I think of include:<br />

<br />

•&quot;microtonal solutions&quot; as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, and<br />

perhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them want this)<br />

<br />

•lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.<br />

<br />

~~<em>I think~~ that ~~having one is a good idea~~, ~~for many reasons~~. ~~Dredging through archives of Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort~~ of ~~specific information. Doubtless we can make things easier for first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective</em><br />~~

•a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and discussion, sound examples of them.<br />

~~<em>knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here~~.~~</em>~~<br />

<br />

<em>Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place</em><br />

•one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.<br />

<em>that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it. A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community. The ones I think of include:</em><br />

<ul><li>&quot;microtonal solutions&quot; as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, andperhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them want this)</li><li>lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.</li><li>a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and discussion, sound examples of them.</li><li>one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.~~</li></ul><br />~~

~~<em>But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's</em><br />~~

~~<em>no need for a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.</em>~~<br />

<br />

~~There~~'s one at <a class="wiki_link_ext" href="http://riters.com/microtonal/" rel="nofollow">riters</a>, but ~~I think~~ it's ugly. So let's try this one, shall we?</body></html></pre></div>

But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's<br />

no need for a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.<br />

</em>----<br />

So there you have it. A year later, there's one at <a class="wiki_link_ext" href="http://riters.com/microtonal/" rel="nofollow">riters</a>, but no one uses it, it gets spammed, and it's ugly besides. So let's try this one, shall we?</body></html></pre></div>

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 <h2>IMPORTED REVISION FROM WIKISPACES</h2>
 This is an imported revision from Wikispaces. The revision metadata is included below for reference:<br>
-: This revision was by author [[User:xenjacob|xenjacob]] and made on <tt>2006-03-31 16:42:51 UTC</tt>.<br>
+: This revision was by author [[User:xenjacob|xenjacob]] and made on <tt>2006-03-31 16:48:10 UTC</tt>.<br>
-: The original revision id was <tt>468836</tt>.<br>
+: The original revision id was <tt>468864</tt>.<br>
 : The revision comment was: <tt></tt><br>
 The revision contents are below, presented both in the original Wikispaces Wikitext format, and in HTML exactly as Wikispaces rendered it.<br>
@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 There has not been a successful tuning wiki...yet. But this shall try to be. Here's what Jacob wrote about the idea a year ago on [[http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/MakeMicroMusic/|MMM]]:
+----
+//I think that having one is a good idea, for many reasons. Dredging through archives of Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of specific information. Doubtless we can make things easier for first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective
+knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here.
-//I think that having one is a good idea, for many reasons. Dredging through archives of Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of specific information. Doubtless we can make things easier for first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective//
+Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place
-//knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here.//
+that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it.
-//Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place//
+A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community.
-//that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it. A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community. The ones I think of include://
+The ones I think of include:
-* "microtonal solutions" as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, andperhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them want this)
-* lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.
-* a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and discussion, sound examples of them.
-* one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.
-//But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's//
+•"microtonal solutions" as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, and
-//no need for a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.//
+perhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them want this)
-There's one at [[http://riters.com/microtonal/|riters]], but I think it's ugly. So let's try this one, shall we?</pre></div>
+•lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.
+•a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and discussion, sound examples of them.
+•one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.
+But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's
+no need for a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.
+//----
+So there you have it. A year later, there's one at [[http://riters.com/microtonal/|riters]], but no one uses it, it gets spammed, and it's ugly besides. So let's try this one, shall we?</pre></div>
 <h4>Original HTML content:</h4>
 <div style="width:100%; max-height:400pt; overflow:auto; background-color:#f8f9fa; border: 1px solid #eaecf0; padding:0em"><pre style="margin:0px;border:none;background:none;word-wrap:break-word;width:200%;white-space: pre-wrap ! important" class="old-revision-html">&lt;html&gt;&lt;head&gt;&lt;title&gt;home&lt;/title&gt;&lt;/head&gt;&lt;body&gt;&lt;!-- ws:start:WikiTextHeadingRule:0:&amp;lt;h2&amp;gt; --&gt;&lt;h2 id="toc0"&gt;&lt;a name="x-This is a wiki about microtonal (xenharmonic) musics, alternate tunings, and the means of achieving them."&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;!-- ws:end:WikiTextHeadingRule:0 --&gt;This is a wiki about microtonal (xenharmonic) musics, alternate tunings, and the means of achieving them.&lt;/h2&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
 There has not been a successful tuning wiki...yet. But this shall try to be. Here's what Jacob wrote about the idea a year ago on &lt;a class="wiki_link_ext" href="http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/MakeMicroMusic/" rel="nofollow"&gt;MMM&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;br /&gt;
+&lt;hr /&gt;
+&lt;em&gt;I think that having one is a good idea, for many reasons. Dredging through archives of Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of specific information. Doubtless we can make things easier for first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective&lt;br /&gt;
+knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here.&lt;br /&gt;
+&lt;br /&gt;
+Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place&lt;br /&gt;
+that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it.&lt;br /&gt;
+&lt;br /&gt;
+A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community.&lt;br /&gt;
+The ones I think of include:&lt;br /&gt;
+&lt;br /&gt;
+•&amp;quot;microtonal solutions&amp;quot; as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, and&lt;br /&gt;
+perhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them want this)&lt;br /&gt;
+&lt;br /&gt;
+•lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
-&lt;em&gt;I think that having one is a good idea, for many reasons. Dredging through archives of Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of specific information. Doubtless we can make things easier for first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
+•a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and discussion, sound examples of them.&lt;br /&gt;
-&lt;em&gt;knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
-&lt;em&gt;Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
+•one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.&lt;br /&gt;
-&lt;em&gt;that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it. A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community. The ones I think of include:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
-&lt;ul&gt;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;microtonal solutions&amp;quot; as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, andperhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them want this)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and discussion, sound examples of them.&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
-&lt;em&gt;But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
-&lt;em&gt;no need for a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
-There's one at &lt;a class="wiki_link_ext" href="http://riters.com/microtonal/" rel="nofollow"&gt;riters&lt;/a&gt;, but I think it's ugly. So let's try this one, shall we?&lt;/body&gt;&lt;/html&gt;</pre></div>
+But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's&lt;br /&gt;
+no need for a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.&lt;br /&gt;
+&lt;/em&gt;----&lt;br /&gt;
+So there you have it. A year later, there's one at &lt;a class="wiki_link_ext" href="http://riters.com/microtonal/" rel="nofollow"&gt;riters&lt;/a&gt;, but no one uses it, it gets spammed, and it's ugly besides. So let's try this one, shall we?&lt;/body&gt;&lt;/html&gt;</pre></div>