Is "Equal Temperament" necessary in electronic music?

[ryan7585]

It causes a lot of unintentional harmonics. Some people like them, but I don't.

I get why it came about, it was so you could transpose easily, so different keys would sound more the same, and so you could tune the instrument once and be capable in multiple keys. Very mathematically and practically clever, very useful for its time.

But we can do better now... It seems like at this point it would be silly not to just combine the best aspects of both systems. Do you think there is a way we could make this work to our benefit?

I was thinking it could be something like this-

Have the default frequency of each keyboard key line up with what it should be in equal temperament. As chords are formed, keep the root note's frequency the same, but shift the rest of the chord into just temperament, eliminating the unwanted harmonics

Imagining this I can already see some benefits and problems this might cause when it comes to composition and performance. But I think I'm onto something here and I think the problems can be ironed out.

*What do you think?
*Would you be interested in a synth like that? Purer, less digital shimmer, more character, etc?
*Do you have any suggestions for improvements on the mechanism of how something like this could be done?

[Anderton]

This is a topic very close to my own heart, I've been into JI since the mid-70s. I LOVE the sound of just intonation. A lot of people don't realize that string quartets naturally adjust to playing in just intonation. The best analogy I can give is that it's like a laser compared to a flashlight - the laser is coherent light.

And, your question is well-founded. There's no reason why electronic instruments can't adjust to play in perfect intonation. Several synthesizers have offered alternate tunings (e.g., Yamaha) but they never took the next step and made it easy to shift chords within a key structure.

Seems to me the way to do this right would be with a computer to provide commands. In programs like Acid that allow for key changes for loops, you can put in markers to indicate key changes. Why not have chord change markers that would send per-note pitch bend messages using polyphonic aftertouch to resolve each chord to just intonation? Yeah, that's the ticket...most synths seem to respond to poly aftertouch, the problem is finding controllers that generate it. But in this case, the computer would take care of that for you.

[scarecrowbob]

My wife is sitting next tome and points out that there is a commercial keyboard you can get which allows for just intonation:

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/keybo...ional-keyboard

You might be able to take some cues from their implementation.

[nat whilk II]

There are synths that have intonation options, including just intonation. My old Kurzweil K2000 had I think 17 different tunings you could use

One ambient electronic artist that uses just intonation is Robert Rich - if my memory is correct, I even think he was involved in providing help with the first MIDI spec regarding intonation options, microtuning, and other arcana of tuning.

Personally - I'm not sure I want to adapt my ear into some mode where tuning or singing or playing always has to be tonally "perfect". Unless I could still remain content with the inherent imperfections of tempered scales, not to mention imperfect artists, and the wonderful wide world of playing or singing a bit sharp or flat as another expressive method. I'd hate to see that sort of thing become "wrong" or "sounds bad" due to some idea that things have to be mathematically "perfect" to be good or right.

As just another way of doing things, just intonation is great, sure. But it's a very small sort of genre (if that's the right word) and I kind of hope it stays that way

nat whilk ii

[ryan7585]

My idea was to put it together as a max4live plugin so I can just make it do what I want without trying to combine stuff other people made together into a component collage

I was gonna try doing it like this--

Here would be the main function of the actual instrument:

Midi in ---> MTOF ----> analyser---> reactor ------> synth (oscillators, etc)

MTOF being midi to other frequency, analyzer being a block of code that will take frequency data as input and organize it into realtime chord and key information, reactor being a block of code that takes the key/chord information and root note from the analyzer and outputs adjusted frequency data to the oscillators and to a head unit on the master track

Then on the master track you could have a kind of virtual head unit that takes in the data from all the slave instruments' analyzers and forces them to work together. Doing it inside Max would alleviate the need for a certain type of controller

Do you think that's feasible?

[ryan7585]

Originally Posted by nat whilk II

There are synths that have intonation options, including just intonation. My old Kurzweil K2000 had I think 17 different tunings you could use

One ambient electronic artist that uses just intonation is Robert Rich - if my memory is correct, I even think he was involved in providing help with the first MIDI spec regarding intonation options, microtuning, and other arcana of tuning.

Personally - I'm not sure I want to adapt my ear into some mode where tuning or singing or playing always has to be tonally "perfect". Unless I could still remain content with the inherent imperfections of tempered scales, not to mention imperfect artists, and the wonderful wide world of playing or singing a bit sharp or flat as another expressive method. I'd hate to see that sort of thing become "wrong" or "sounds bad" due to some idea that things have to be mathematically "perfect" to be good or right.

As just another way of doing things, just intonation is great, sure. But it's a very small sort of genre (if that's the right word) and I kind of hope it stays that way

nat whilk ii

Dude that's not gonna happen. I'm a huge music math nerd and I listen to some of the most abrasive music you've never heard. When you get a better ear you appreciate the value of imperfection a lot more, learn how to get to the imperfections you like, and how to avoid the ones you don't

[Anderton]

Hey Nat - Amazingly enough, I found this post from Harmony Central in the archives - it's from 1584! Seems like maybe it was a distant relative of yours...

Personally, regarding equal temperament - I'm not sure I want to adapt my ear to some mode where tuning or singing or playing is always "out of tune," except for the tonic and octave. Unless I could still remain content with the consonance of Pythagorean scales, not to mention artists using those scales, and the wonderful wide world of playing or singing completely in tune to create a beautiful consonance. I'd hate to see that sort of thing become "wrong" or "sounds bad" due to some idea that things have to be mathematically "imperfect" just to allow for convenient transpositions.

As just another way of doing things, even temperament is convenient, sure. I find it much easier to construct lutes when the frets can be straight bars of metal. But it's hard to imagine more than a limited group of people trading tonal purity for transpositional convenience, and I kind of hope it stays that way

Nathaniel Whilke

Out of courtesy to your distant relatives, I omitted the snarky response from Vincenzo Galilei where he called you an "ignorant moron" and said your place was more properly in the Court Jester's forum (which over the centuries evolved, or some would say de-evolved, into the Political forum).

[ryan7585]

Just started looking at Pythagorean Temperament... Apparently there's a big new thing people are talking about saying that 432hz is the frequency of the "cosmic hum" of the rotating planets... and that this is the natural temperament for music and that it was always understood to be so until equal temperament was brought into use.

Sounds pretty interesting. There are a lot of conspiracy theories about it, saying Goebbels and the NWO tuned up the standard temperament to weaken the world population and gain power. I don't know about all that, but its definitely an interesting concept.

[ryan7585]

Well anyway I think I'm gonna do it. It won't be the next thing I work on, but if anyone on here is interested they can PM me and I'll send them a copy when I get it done

[techristian]

Good article at Wiki with some audio comparisons as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_intonation

From my standpoint, this type of synth would require multiple pitch tables where each and every frequency for every scale and key would be stored. The end user could manually select the table to use or the computer could try and pick the right table based on the first chord that the player hits.

Dan

[MargeHowel]

dynamic intonation is actually very old -- strings (violins, etc) for example do this dynamically
Ever hear the old term "the tyranny of the klavier (keyboard)"? that's what they are talking about, static intonation.

[MargeHowel]

Originally Posted by techristian

Good article at Wiki with some audio comparisons as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_intonation

From my standpoint, this type of synth would require multiple pitch tables where each and every frequency for every scale and key would be stored. The end user could manually select the table to use or the computer could try and pick the right table based on the first chord that the play hits.

Dan

actually you can go further. I know the Uof Mich has done some work on actual dynamic intonation (the intonation gets adjusted on-the-fly, not per-piece/movement)

[UstadKhanAli]

Originally Posted by nat whilk II

There are synths that have intonation options, including just intonation. My old Kurzweil K2000 had I think 17 different tunings you could use

One ambient electronic artist that uses just intonation is Robert Rich - if my memory is correct, I even think he was involved in providing help with the first MIDI spec regarding intonation options, microtuning, and other arcana of tuning.

Personally - I'm not sure I want to adapt my ear into some mode where tuning or singing or playing always has to be tonally "perfect". Unless I could still remain content with the inherent imperfections of tempered scales, not to mention imperfect artists, and the wonderful wide world of playing or singing a bit sharp or flat as another expressive method. I'd hate to see that sort of thing become "wrong" or "sounds bad" due to some idea that things have to be mathematically "perfect" to be good or right.

As just another way of doing things, just intonation is great, sure. But it's a very small sort of genre (if that's the right word) and I kind of hope it stays that way

nat whilk ii

Have you heard Robert Rich's stuff? There's no adapting necessary. It sounds very pretty, and is not "difficult listening" at all. It's very pretty.

And like Ryan, I listen to some stuff in alternate tunings, international music, etc. that will clear a room. Ask me how I know.

Robert Rich's stuff is very pretty. There's no adaptation necessary. And as Craig pointed out, many string quartets play just intonation.

I wouldn't get hung up and what songs "wrong" or "right" or this or that. I would just listen and not try and define parameters. Just listen and enjoy.

[UstadKhanAli]

By the way, the Emu Proteus III supports some alternate tunings, including user-definable alternate tunings, slendro, pelog (the latter two being pentatonic scales from gamelan, which have notes that don't correspond to Western scales), and so forth. I use the slendro and pelog scales occasionally for playing stuff that sounds like Javanese gamelan. Or I use my Javanese gamelan instruments. I have brass metallophones with bamboo resonators called a gender (pronounced with a hard "g"). But anyway, looking into this sort of thing can be a lot of fun, and you can create cool sounding music that doesn't have to sound harsh or weird (unless you want it to, of course, which is okay too).

I would encourage people to try out these things, and not pigeonhole things as something that someone else does, or something that is weird or whatever. Think of it like someone who always plays a Jazzmaster trying out a 12-string or a Telecaster instead. Just simply a different sound. And yes, I know this isn't an apples-for-apples analogy, and is not meant to be. It's just meant to try and encourage people to explore.

[blue2blue]

Originally Posted by ryan7585

It causes a lot of unintentional harmonics. Some people like them, but I don't.

I get why it came about, it was so you could transpose easily, so different keys would sound more the same, and so you could tune the instrument once and be capable in multiple keys. Very mathematically and practically clever, very useful for its time.

But we can do better now... It seems like at this point it would be silly not to just combine the best aspects of both systems. Do you think there is a way we could make this work to our benefit?

I was thinking it could be something like this-

Have the default frequency of each keyboard key line up with what it should be in equal temperament. As chords are formed, keep the root note's frequency the same, but shift the rest of the chord into just temperament, eliminating the unwanted harmonics

Imagining this I can already see some benefits and problems this might cause when it comes to composition and performance. But I think I'm onto something here and I think the problems can be ironed out.

*What do you think?
*Would you be interested in a synth like that? Purer, less digital shimmer, more character, etc?
*Do you have any suggestions for improvements on the mechanism of how something like this could be done?

That actually is one of the ways in which the Justonics dynamic intonation system works. It's pretty nifty... and it was/has been available on a few different synths and v-synths.

But the demand was apparently wildly underwhelming, rather sadly.

I remember posting about the system when it was new in a keyboard forum and about 3 people knew what I was talking about with regard to 12TET vs Just intonatin and the rest were, like, What do you mean standard keyboards produce out of tune intervals?!?

Here's the Justonics site -- but it's looking a bit abandoned. If you go to the domain name, you just get an html directory listing -- there's a missing redirect to the actual site pages...

But here's the home page: http://justonic.com/html/

It's accumulated a little v-ink over the years; you can find some write-ups and demo and explainer vids with a google search: https://www.google.com/search?q=justonics

This vid has some nice examples and scopings...

[blue2blue]

Originally Posted by nat whilk II

There are synths that have intonation options, including just intonation. My old Kurzweil K2000 had I think 17 different tunings you could use

One ambient electronic artist that uses just intonation is Robert Rich - if my memory is correct, I even think he was involved in providing help with the first MIDI spec regarding intonation options, microtuning, and other arcana of tuning.

Personally - I'm not sure I want to adapt my ear into some mode where tuning or singing or playing always has to be tonally "perfect". Unless I could still remain content with the inherent imperfections of tempered scales, not to mention imperfect artists, and the wonderful wide world of playing or singing a bit sharp or flat as another expressive method. I'd hate to see that sort of thing become "wrong" or "sounds bad" due to some idea that things have to be mathematically "perfect" to be good or right.

As just another way of doing things, just intonation is great, sure. But it's a very small sort of genre (if that's the right word) and I kind of hope it stays that way

nat whilk ii

Among highly skilled singers, a lot of what is sometimes chalked up to 'characterful' or 'idiosyncratic' pitch choices, including blue and other shaved pitch notes can often be analyzed and made sense of when viewed in the proper harmonic/intervallic context.

[blue2blue]

Originally Posted by ryan7585

Just started looking at Pythagorean Temperament... Apparently there's a big new thing people are talking about saying that 432hz is the frequency of the "cosmic hum" of the rotating planets... and that this is the natural temperament for music and that it was always understood to be so until equal temperament was brought into use.

Sounds pretty interesting. There are a lot of conspiracy theories about it, saying Goebbels and the NWO tuned up the standard temperament to weaken the world population and gain power. I don't know about all that, but its definitely an interesting concept.

There was one of those discussions on Gearslutz not that long ago where some magical thinking types (they love the sound of pseudo-science since you can find pseudo-science that will back up just about any contention, no matter how outlandish) brought up the whole 'A440 Conspiracy Theory' [it was a Nazi plot, don't you know?] and that actually got some of the GS regulars who have a science background (including a couple of guys with docs in physics) and it was a hoot. Of course, most of the magical thinkers/conspiracy devotees will never be convinced by any sort of logical/rational discourse -- because they cannot follow it.

BTW, it's amusing to note that some of the main voices behind the A440 Conspiracy Theory are true believers (there is no other kind) in the Lyndon Larouche movement.

[scarecrowbob]

Over the last two year, I've started playing cello and upright bass with an orchestra and a couple of small ensembles. I'm not super serious, though I do work through etude books. I have been concentrating a lot on intonation on both of these instruments, as they are far different than, say, the guitar where (in the past) I might have just pushed down the string and called it "in tune" (assuming the open string is in tune).

It has changed my playing and harmony singing quite a bit.

I don't think that it's especially much changed the way I listen to other folks playing music-- I don't think the concerns of the intonation system affecting our general aesthetic judgement are very serious, even if I'm getting a lot better at understanding why some arrangements of instruments (especially groups of not very carefully tuned guitars) sound as... crowded?... as they do. I still like those kinds of sounds.

However, playing in string quartets has changed how I hear my own playing. I am a lot more likely to bend strings just a little bit when playing electric bass because I can hear the note is out of tune with the chord, even if the pitch is essentially in tune.

In general, though, I think that intonation is a very complex problem for chordal instruments that can play in more than one key... I wonder if the satisfactory solution isn't to develop chording instruments that guess the tonal center of music and adjust, but rather to develop arrangements that use monophonic voices controlled by players (or programmers, in the case of electronic music) who already know what the pitch should be.

[blue2blue]

Originally Posted by MargeHowel

dynamic intonation is actually very old -- strings (violins, etc) for example do this dynamically
Ever hear the old term "the tyranny of the klavier (keyboard)"? that's what they are talking about, static intonation.

Excellent point. And many singers, too, particularly those who came up singing in ensemble. Also, horns involve harmonically true intervals as well, although I assume the valves are rooted in 12TET. (But horns are total voodoo to me, so don't take it from me. )


BTW... I had an interesting experience a week ago when I went on a chartered, vintage 'excursion car' on a 4 hour train trip celebrating Veteran's Day (a little late). Part of the fun was a trio of women singers who worked the Lennon Sisters oeuvre. There was a hangup with the 'real' PA for the first leg of the trip and so the gals sang without amplification, accompanied by an iPad and small battery powered speaker. I'd seen them the year before and thought, dang, they've a fair bit tighter this year.

But on the second leg, the porter/waiter/sound tech got the main PA up and the singers grabbed mics and plugged the iPod into the PA. While we could hear the performance better -- and it was carried through the whole car -- their performance, in particular pitch/harmony was noticeably impacted -- but not for the better. It wasn't surprising, really, but it as definitely interesting.

[blue2blue]

Hey, after this, let's talk about the natural inharmonicity of wire strings!

[blue2blue]

And, after that, maybe someone can come up with a rationale for why the Buzz Feiten system works (assuming it does, as so many people maintain), since the explanations on the Buzz Feiten website (last time I saw) were fanciful at best.

[UstadKhanAli]

I felt like, at one point, I could superficially explain why the Buzz Feiten system worked, only to forget it. I looked it up again, only to immediately forget it again.

 

I feel like maybe the concept was taxing my poor little pea brain too much. Or maybe, as with many things, it's simply because I have a poor memory.

 

It does work. It performed miracles with my '67 SG, which had some pretty bad intonation problems before I had someone install the BF system.

 

I have only done it on that guitar. My other guitars seem to have good intonation.

[chevybusa]

This is always an interesting topic for me....

 

I think it all boils down to personal choice and how it sounds to people....TBH, when I had a KORG Triton LE it had all the following tunings availavle at the flick of a button/turno f a knob:

 

2.1

[blue2blue]

Oh, I don't doubt that it works to some extent to address the inherent inharmonicity of steel strings when properly set up. It's just that I've checked in there a few times over the years and don't recall ever seeing an explanation of it that made sense to me. That said, it seems like they're currently (for the last six years anyhow) just sort of avoiding any sort of tricky explanation... Basically just saying it works -- balancing your intonation. (And that last avoids absurd claims like 'perfect' intonation. So, maybe a happy medium after all.)

[UstadKhanAli]

I found this also, and have quoted part of it:

 

http://www.guyguitars.com/eng/guyguitars/feitentest.html

 

 

Buzz Feiten, guitarist and innovator But who the devil is Buzz Feiten, and what does the man do to the guitars? Buzz has been around for a while. Some readers maybe remember him from his time with the Paul Butterfield Bluesband or the Rascals. If not, he has also played with Chicago, Mr Mister, James Taylor, Kenny Loggins, Feiten Larsen Band, Bob Dylan, Jeff "Skunk" Baxter, David Sanborn, Al Jarreau, Gregg Allman, Stevie Wonder, Bette Midler and many others. Buz started serious research to examine whether anything could be done to improve the weaknesses of guitar tuning at the beginning of the '90's. He discovered among other things that most guitars - despite correct tuning - always sound slightly sharp on the first couple of frets. Buzz tried moving the nut a little closer to the first fret. After measuring and testing a number of different positions he worked out a placing for the nut where several of the known problems were dramatically reduced. But the problem of dissonances between the strings and further up the neck remained. Together with guitar technician Greg Back, Buzz began investigating the conventional way to intonate. Normally the guitar is intonated according to the mathematical model which assumes that the intervals are all the same size, and you find yourself in conflict with the natural note row - what the ear "wants" to hear to experience intervals as harmonious. Buzz began to suspect that, in effect, he was trying to perfect a bad model, and started working on other ways to intonate instead. - We started studying the system that is used on the piano carefully, and then we calculated a series of formulas for optimising the guitar's intonation, to eliminate or minimise the dissonances. You can't follow the piano's model exactly, but you can use the same principles of tuning the octaves successively sharper the further you get from Middle C and tuning them slightly flatter the further down you go. Strangely enough, no-one has done this from a scientific approach earlier - not for the guitar. Since you are working with very small differences you have to intonate with a strobe tuner, but once the intonation has been set you can tune normally with a tuning fork or a tuner. How does one get one's guitar intonated according to your system? - It is done by authorised retrofitters who I train and approve. The system is patented, and even if the alterations made are small, a whole lot of theoretical and practical knowledge is needed to do it correctly. An initiated intonator's impressions Paul Guy, a guitar repairer for the last 20 years and a contributor to FUZZ from the beginning, has long been engaged in the problems involved in the tuning and intonation of the guitar. Among other things, he has written a pamphlet on the subject. ("Tuning The Guitar". Can be found on this website. /Webmaster.) Paul contacted Buzz Feiten and obtained permission to reftrofit two guitars for some well-known Swedish guitarists to test. He signed a contract in which he promised not to reveal the figures for the position of the nut and for intonation. At first Paul was very sceptical, but says now: - I will never go back to the old intonation method on my own guitars. When Ulf Zackrisson (editor of FUZZ) asked me to check out Feiten's system I was sceptical, to say the least. There have been others who have claimed to have developed systems to improve the guitar's intonation, but they have mostly been pure hocus-pocus, or far too complex - interchangeable fingerboards for each key, zig-zag frets and other weirdnesses, for example. Buzz Feiten's system works far more convincingly, it is based on exact calculations, and is relatively simple to reproduce. It's probably the biggest thing to happen to the guitar in 2 or 300 years. The results are astounding when you consider the small adjustments made to the instrument.