User talk:Rperlner: Difference between revisions

Line 393:

--[[User:Rperlner|Rperlner]] ([[User talk:Rperlner|talk]]) 01:04, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Posting a couple more followup emails:

--------

Dear Dr Oz.

Thanks. That makes much more sense. My only quibble then would be that it seems like it would make more sense to use 5/4 and 5/3 respectively for the tuning of Perde Segah and Dik Hisar wrt Perde Rast in the context of Turkish music, as these ratios are simpler than 99/80 and 33/20, and just as close to the measurements given in table 4 of your paper on Yarman-36, for example. This would then tend to suggest the size of the bounding interval of the Turkish Huzzam tetrachord should be 13/10. With these values in place, it seems clear that the tempering you suggest on Hisar is still possible, although I'm not sure exactly what musical context would motivate one to do so. One gets a simpler relation with Chargah, for example, if Hisar is tempered to 64/39, but the same could be said if Hisar is instead tempered to, say 44/27, which is closer to 13/8.

Thanks for your comments on my and Aura's music, and I'm glad to see some study of 34 EDO in the context of Makam music.

Best,

Ray

--------

Dear Ray, the "untempered low hisar" is, for my tastes at the very least, much too below in general for Turkish Hüzzam (better suited for Karjighar?) -- while 5/4 as the tonic (viz., perde segah) in comparision to a 1/1 perde rast pivot is too high as a finalis (Rauf Yekta argued a century ago for the schismatic Pythagorean equivalent as the true segah while 5/4 was for him an "approximate ratio"). The idea is to create as close a semblance to a perfect fourth as can be between segah and hisar while not deviating from the Hüzzam gestalt where perde hisar is "quartertonal" (not "commatic"). In fact the presence of just such a perfect fourth thereat is a requisite per se for the Turkish Hüzzam as far as I understand it.

In the paper I shared with you, Yarman-36 did not perform so well compared to 34-tET and 29-tET. Still it was a good try and even so, my 5/4 is lower and "beats proportionally" in major chords at home keys.

Cordially,

Dr. Oz.

p.s. I follow the practice of using entire lowercase for perde names and single uppercase for maqam names. It helps communication better in my opinion. --[[User:Rperlner|Rperlner]] ([[User talk:Rperlner|talk]]) 04:25, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

: Truth be told, I don't know a lot about Arabic/Turkish/Persian music, but from the sounds of things, 512/507 should be named after "hisar". Since the "rastma" has the "-ma" suffix, perhaps we should call 512/507 the "hisarma". --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 00:46, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@@ Line 393: / Line 393: @@
 --[[User:Rperlner|Rperlner]] ([[User talk:Rperlner|talk]]) 01:04, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
+Posting a couple more followup emails:
+--------
+Dear Dr Oz.
+Thanks. That makes much more sense. My only quibble then would be that it seems like it would make more sense to use 5/4 and 5/3 respectively for the tuning of Perde Segah and Dik Hisar wrt Perde Rast in the context of Turkish music, as these ratios are simpler than 99/80 and 33/20, and just as close to the measurements given in table 4 of your paper on Yarman-36, for example.  This would then tend to suggest the size of the bounding interval of the Turkish Huzzam tetrachord should be 13/10. With these values in place, it seems clear that the tempering you suggest on Hisar is still possible, although I'm not sure exactly what musical context would motivate one to do so. One gets a simpler relation with Chargah, for example, if Hisar is tempered to 64/39, but the same could be said if Hisar is instead tempered to, say 44/27, which is closer to 13/8.
+Thanks for your comments on my and Aura's music, and I'm glad to see some study of 34 EDO in the context of Makam music.
+Best,
+Ray
+--------
+Dear Ray, the "untempered low hisar" is, for my tastes at the very least, much too below in general for Turkish Hüzzam (better suited for Karjighar?) -- while 5/4 as the tonic (viz., perde segah) in comparision to a 1/1 perde rast pivot is too high as a finalis (Rauf Yekta argued a century ago for the schismatic Pythagorean equivalent as the true segah while 5/4 was for him an "approximate ratio"). The idea is to create as close a semblance to a perfect fourth as can be between segah and hisar while not deviating from the Hüzzam gestalt where perde hisar is "quartertonal" (not "commatic"). In fact the presence of just such a perfect fourth thereat is a requisite per se for the Turkish Hüzzam as far as I understand it.
+In the paper I shared with you, Yarman-36 did not perform so well compared to 34-tET and 29-tET. Still it was a good try and even so, my 5/4 is lower and "beats proportionally" in major chords at home keys.
+Cordially,
+Dr. Oz.
+p.s. I follow the practice of using entire lowercase for perde names and single uppercase for maqam names. It helps communication better in my opinion. --[[User:Rperlner|Rperlner]] ([[User talk:Rperlner|talk]]) 04:25, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 : Truth be told, I don't know a lot about Arabic/Turkish/Persian music, but from the sounds of things, 512/507 should be named after "hisar".  Since the "rastma" has the "-ma" suffix, perhaps we should call 512/507 the "hisarma". --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 00:46, 9 December 2020 (UTC)