[HN Gopher] What I Learned Writing an Album in Just Intonation
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What I Learned Writing an Album in Just Intonation
        
       Author : pierrec
       Score  : 145 points
       Date   : 2024-08-13 18:55 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.osar.fr)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.osar.fr)
        
       | vunderba wrote:
       | When I compose, I usually begin by sitting quietly and humming or
       | singing out loud until I have a melody that I like. Because I was
       | born and raised in the west, acoustically I'm naturally
       | accustomed to a 12 tone equal temperament.
       | 
       | Atonal music is more difficult for me to grok, and I kind of
       | imagine that for you to be fluent and compose in these sort of
       | microtonal scales you would need to be introduced to it at a
       | young age - in much the same way that it's significantly easier
       | to learn a second language if you grow up in a bilingual
       | environment.
        
         | eternauta3k wrote:
         | I have no clue about this topic, but isn't Just Intonation what
         | e.g. people sing when left to their own devices?
        
           | handity wrote:
           | Yes
        
         | andybak wrote:
         | I'm no expert but your use of "atonal" and "microtonal"
         | interchangeably here seems way off the mark.
         | 
         | "Atonal" usually refers to music composed without a fixed sense
         | of key - and was originally used to describe music written
         | using standard western 12TET.
         | 
         | It's a property of the music's relationship to key signatures -
         | not it's tuning system.
        
       | pierrec wrote:
       | I'd love to get some feedback on this, because I'm not sure I've
       | hit the original goal of this article.
       | 
       | For a long time, the topics of just intonation, harmonic
       | lattices, and of their relationship with temperaments were
       | difficult for me to understand, despite reading the theory on
       | them. It's not until I applied the concepts that could say I
       | understood them.
       | 
       | I tried writing the "missing article" that would have given me
       | this understanding right away, banking on the added value of
       | interactive figures. Right now I suspect that I failed in the
       | same way as my early readings did: this article might be hard to
       | understand unless you're already familiar with the topic, which
       | is a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem. I think I glossed over
       | some concepts, and it sometimes looks like I'm pulling numbers
       | out of thin air in some examples. Nonetheless I hope it will help
       | some people understand these topics. Maybe what's needed is a
       | slower-paced version of this as a longer series.
        
         | thrtythreeforty wrote:
         | The interactive harmonic lattice, with the commas clickable and
         | audible, is first rate and is the best interactive illustration
         | of JI problems I have yet seen.
         | 
         | It is not quite clear from the explanation, that since the "3"
         | direction is also dividing by 2 implicitly, the note
         | confusingly labeled "3" is really just 3/2 - the perfect fifth.
         | Similarly, the note labeled "5" is actually what we hear as the
         | 12TET major third - clarifying a couple of examples on this
         | lattice (or playing a chord) would be good.
         | 
         | Then, the thing I think that might help is driving the point
         | home a little more by creating a comma by hand - a "knight's
         | move" to another tile 5 horizontal and 3 vertical, creates a
         | ratio that _almost but not quite_ undoes itself. The (unwieldy)
         | math is 1*3*3*3*3*5*5 /2/2/2/2/2/2/2/2/2/2/2 = 0.9887, _and
         | this is what creates the commas in JI._ Hiding the octave
         | transpositions, while making for a neat visualization of the
         | lattice, confuses the underlying issue.
        
           | pierrec wrote:
           | I'm now realizing this and I totally agree that hiding the
           | octave transpositions might make things confusing.
           | 
           | Maybe this could be clarified by having a first lattice where
           | this adjustment is not made, and everyone can observe how
           | frequencies rapidly become extremely low or high, maybe to
           | the point of being inaudible. Then we can ask "how can this
           | problem be solved?" and introduce the concept of pitch class
           | lattices where everything is transposed into one octave.
           | 
           | Regarding intervals, I've always seen the irony and should
           | probably mention it. Yes, the classical concept of fifth is
           | related to the 3-ratio, while thirds are related to the
           | 5-ratio. I'd argue this falls under the "empty your cup"
           | category, but yes, leaving it untold probably doesn't help
           | with understanding.
        
             | thrtythreeforty wrote:
             | To continue with an empty cup philosophy while still
             | mentioning intervals, you can just posit "humans like how
             | these 5- and 3-ratio intervals sound" and play chords using
             | them to demonstrate. Then you don't need to handwave why
             | this particular lattice was picked, and you can draw a
             | comparison to 12TET's third and fifth.
        
           | pyinstallwoes wrote:
           | What are your thoughts on the fringe 432 theory, but the
           | actual roots of it in relation to the geometric significance
           | towards whole number ratios and then what is never discussed:
           | the tuning associated with it?
        
             | bongodongobob wrote:
             | If you're talking about using 432 Hz vs 440 Hz it's
             | nonsense. You could pick any frequency you want. The
             | frequency you pick to tune an A to is arbitrary.
        
               | pyinstallwoes wrote:
               | Yeah but you don't have the same knowledge apparently.
        
           | munchler wrote:
           | In other words, 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 5 * 5 is 2025, which falls
           | well short of 11 octaves (2^11 = 2048). No series of 3's and
           | 5's can ever multiply to a power of 2.
        
         | thrtythreeforty wrote:
         | Oh, and one last point of feedback - it wasn't apparent to me
         | that the "Aniron" progression was walking across the lattice.
         | You should make the projected versions semitransparent to show
         | the main chord progression walking as it does in the JI
         | lattice.
         | 
         | Still, awesome diagrams.
        
         | wonger_ wrote:
         | I am very unfamiliar with the topic. Here's my takeaways from
         | the article:                 - almost all music I've heard uses
         | 12TET       - JI is microtonal / an alternative tuning to 12TET
         | - you're the author of the lovely ambient.garden, which uses JI
         | - the audio widgets and visualizations were very helpful
         | - JI has perfect harmonies, and 12TET approximates those enough
         | to still sound good       - JI opens up cool chord options
         | - but there's extra pitfalls when making JI chords compared to
         | 12TET        - still not sure what consonant, continuous, or
         | misleading chords are. I only know what dissonance sounds like
         | - still haven't looked at numbers; all I know is that there's
         | ratios in there somewhere
        
           | lewispollard wrote:
           | > still not sure what consonant, continuous, or misleading
           | chords are. I only know what dissonance sounds like
           | 
           | Consonance is the opposite of dissonance; so while a
           | dissonant chord sounds jarring and unpleasant with beating, a
           | consonant chord sounds harmonious, pleasant, smooth.
           | 
           | I'm not sure about the other two either, I don't think
           | they're commonly used terms.
           | 
           | Maybe continuous refers to "continuo" in Baroque music, where
           | the bassline and chords are separate but work together
           | harmonically - in some tunings, perhaps this is harder.
           | 
           | I think misleading refers to chords where their function
           | harmonically is ambiguous until they resolve "home" at a
           | later time - for example, not using the root note of a chord,
           | instead using an inversion or modulation that feels like the
           | chords could lead in several directions, creating a kind of
           | uncertainty and tension in the piece that feels satisfying to
           | resolve when the later chord indicates which of the paths
           | through the harmony were the "correct" one.
        
           | colanderman wrote:
           | One definition of consonant intervals are those that share
           | many overtones/partials in common [1]. This reduces the
           | phenomenon of "beating" which is readily perceived as
           | unpleasant dissonance. (Though small degrees of "beating" can
           | be pleasant.)
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consonance_and_dissonance#A
           | cou...
        
           | jfengel wrote:
           | The key to the article, and to all of Western music, is about
           | a set of weird mathematical coincidences involving the
           | twelfth root of two. In particular, that twelfth-root-of-two
           | to the fourth power is almost exactly 4/3, and twelfth-root-
           | of-two to the fifth power is is almost exactly 3/2. And, of
           | course, twelfth-root-of-two to the 12th power is exactly 1.
           | 
           | For some reason, not entirely well understood, when you play
           | frequencies that are nice multiples together, they make
           | pleasant patterns ("consonance"). They interfere and
           | reinforce at regular intervals, and it sounds nice. When you
           | don't get nice ratios, they make irregular interference
           | patterns, and that sounds unpleasant ("dissonance").
           | 
           | So... take a scale (one frequency to twice-that-frequency),
           | divide it into 12 equal parts (geometrically), and you get of
           | those nice patterns. Each successive note is the frequency of
           | the previous note times the-twelfth-root-of-two. That's the
           | "twelve tone equal temperament". It makes it easy to write
           | pretty music just by following some mathematical rules.
           | 
           | There's a Wikipedia article on the-twelfth-root-of-two:
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_root_of_two
           | 
           | EXCEPT... that those coincidences aren't perfect. They're
           | very close, but tiny differences matter. Some intervals that
           | should work, don't. Different scales take on different
           | feelings, even though in theory they're just the same thing
           | nudged up a few hertz.
           | 
           | Anyway... that set of coincidences is the basis of all of the
           | music you're familiar with. Other musical cultures also take
           | advantage of it. But there's no fundamental reason why those
           | particular coincidences should be the only interesting music,
           | and so people look around (often, to yet more world musical
           | cultures) for alternatives.
        
             | cjbprime wrote:
             | I think you're maybe missing the main motivation, which is
             | that "correctly tuned" overtones are in nature, in physics,
             | in all sounds -- they aren't a social construct, unlike
             | everything else about music. I think the argument from JI
             | advocates is that our body's perception knows very well
             | what a justly-tuned chord sounds like, etc.
        
         | bigstrat2003 wrote:
         | I would say that this is way too technical for me, however, I
         | also only have the slightest hint of music theory knowledge to
         | begin with. It seems to me like that isn't a problem though,
         | because this is a very technical topic by nature.
         | 
         | Unrelated to the writing, but I was kind of disappointed that
         | when listening to the examples, I cannot for the life of me
         | hear a difference between just intonation and equal
         | temperament. I know it's there, but I can't hear it _at all_.
        
           | JohnKemeny wrote:
           | Do you hear the differences when clicking the 275 vs the 277
           | in the third player? If so, you can try to focus on those
           | frequencies and see if they stand out to you.
        
           | lewispollard wrote:
           | I'm familiar with music theory and microtonal music and the
           | first examples are just too close to really discern easily.
           | The examples of "chord 1/2" in the section "The Far-Out
           | Solution: Freestyle JI" are probably the first example that
           | makes the difference clear, if you play the 12TET and the JI
           | overlapping slightly. That's because subtle differences in
           | tuning are much more perceptible in harmony (chords) than in
           | melody (single notes), since notes playing together are
           | perceived with noticeable effects introduced by our brains
           | such as harmonic beating and feeling tone.
        
           | javier123454321 wrote:
           | I thought this video was good at explaining and showing the
           | difference audibly
           | https://youtu.be/zJTBT5u9AwQ?si=M3csNlck4El_eluH
        
           | black_knight wrote:
           | I have limited pitch perception, but I could hear the 12TET
           | chords "beating" while the just ones fade out much more
           | smoothly.
           | 
           | This beating occurs when two waves just a bit out of tune
           | interfere, alternating between constructive and destructive
           | interference.
        
           | Levitz wrote:
           | It's worth noting that part of the point is showing that the
           | difference can be very small.
           | 
           | The one at https://www.osar.fr/notes/justintonation/#compare
           | is really tiny, the largest difference being 3hz, you can
           | kind of compare side to side using
           | https://www.szynalski.com/tone-generator/ and see for
           | yourself.
           | 
           | The difference is more perceptible below that, in the chord
           | comparisons.
        
         | sonorous_sub wrote:
         | I think you could make the piece more interesting to the casual
         | reader by grounding the subject in its history. It's been
         | suggested by the book below that the dominance of equal
         | temperament in western music is a relatively recent innovation,
         | something like 120 years old, and is perhaps a consequence of
         | the industrial revolution and the demand for mass manufacture
         | of musical instruments having uniform qualities it produced.
         | 
         | Further reading: How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony (and Why
         | You Should Care), by Ross W. Duffin (2008).
         | 
         | My layman's takeaway from the book: Equal Temperament is a
         | compromise tuning that allows a piano to access all major and
         | minor modes, at the cost of the keys on the outer ring of the
         | circle of fifths to be somewhat out of tune. An ET "C Major"
         | "sounds best", and the further you move away from it in either
         | direction, the worse the key sounds. Also, the fact that
         | Beethoven and Mozart were aiming for just intonation and/or
         | meantone in productions of their works seems to be sort of an
         | inside secret among music maestros, with rigid adherence to
         | equal temperament slyly pushed on competing rookies to keep
         | them trapped in the lower ranks by virtue of their resulting
         | weaker performances. But the subject is highly contentious in
         | western music for sure.
        
           | black_knight wrote:
           | I disagree. I really liked that this post focused on the
           | subject matter, rather than the history. History can be
           | interesting in itself, but I find that when trying to
           | actually learn something it is just a layer of distraction.
           | Maybe "casual" reader would find it interesting to read about
           | the history. But more technically inclined readers might then
           | just bounce off the piece because they would have to weigh
           | through history in order to get to the part which they
           | actually found interesting.
        
           | smrq wrote:
           | I haven't read this book, but that takeaway doesn't sound
           | right. In ET, all keys are equally out of tune--that's a
           | natural consequence of it being equal. In contrast, it's just
           | intonation in which chords become progressively further out
           | of tune the further they get from the center.
           | 
           | It's true that ET is a compromise in some ways, but it
           | actually opens up the possibility for radical modulations
           | into more distant keys without having to adjust intonation on
           | the fly. In that sense, just intonation is also a compromise.
        
           | olau wrote:
           | If you have not read it, you might find the last part of the
           | blog post most interesting. It covers shortcomings of just
           | intonation.
        
         | iainmerrick wrote:
         | _Right now I suspect that I failed in the same way as my early
         | readings did: this article might be hard to understand unless
         | you 're already familiar with the topic_
         | 
         | I really enjoyed this article (although I already knew the core
         | concepts, so I may be confirming your suspicion, sorry!)
         | 
         | The visualizations are terrific, especially the ones with the
         | The Lord of the Rings chord progression. Despite knowing the
         | concepts, I hadn't fully appreciated how TET forms a tiling;
         | visualized that way, the "wrap around" the circle of fifths
         | really hits home.
         | 
         | Excellent work, thank you.
        
         | eltoxo wrote:
         | I think it is a really great article but I am a chef too
         | already familiar with the ingredients and style of cooking.
         | 
         | I think the main issue is getting people to try new dishes.
         | 
         | Of course, the dishes have to be good and not just the chef
         | fooling around. Sometimes this style seems like "hey try this
         | new exotic dish! It is made from mixing organic ice cream,
         | grass fed beef, fair trade coffee and sriracha. Oh you think it
         | sucks? Well that is because your taste buds are use to standard
         | western food!"
         | 
         | I think of how no one needs an intellectual explanation as to
         | why pad thai is good even if they only ever had pizza and
         | burgers.
        
         | klik99 wrote:
         | I think you need some info in the start of the article about
         | why 12tet was invented, what problems it was solving and how it
         | fails. Like - In Bachs day you'd have to retune the instrument
         | if you changed key signatures and you could only modulate a few
         | steps away before the ratios sounded really bad. So 12TET opens
         | up the possibilities to modulate far away from your original
         | and requires less retuning, at the cost of adding various
         | amounts of dissonance to intervals. I always find it
         | interesting that each key signature in 12TET has a unique sound
         | (Like CMaj vs EMaj) due to inconsistent ratios in perfect
         | fifths, etc, and that "offness" is not necessarily a bad thing.
         | You could also mention what most people think "microtonal" is
         | (adding extra notes in between half steps) and why just
         | intonation is different.
         | 
         | IMO music is all about the balance of the harmonic/expected and
         | dissonant/unexpected at various timescales. The experience of
         | Just Intonation is interesting because at first it sounds wrong
         | due to us expecting 12TET but once you recalibrate your
         | expectations it sounds more pure and harmonic, like how choirs
         | or string quartets slip into simpler ratios instead of sticking
         | exactly to 12TET.
         | 
         | I think with some more context/succinct summary at the
         | beginning (which is REALLY HARD to write about for a general
         | audience) the rest of the article would be more clear for
         | people not steeped in music theory. A way I simplify it for
         | others is by framing it all as simple ratios vs more
         | complicated ratios, and how harmony is a kind of alchemy in
         | mixing those ratios together in the right amounts.
        
           | banana-lambda wrote:
           | > each key signature in 12TET has a unique sound (Like CMaj
           | vs EMaj) due to inconsistent ratios in perfect fifths
           | 
           | I thought this wasn't true in 12TET, because in that case a
           | perfect fifth interval is always a ratio of the twelfth root
           | of two to power seven, or almost 3/2, no matter the starting
           | point, C or E.
        
             | klik99 wrote:
             | Sorry, that was an incorrect thing I was taught and I never
             | checked it... The ratio of a perfect fifth in 12TET is
             | always 1.498307, not exactly 1.5, but it's close enough to
             | 3/2. The deviation from "simple ratios" is more or less
             | depending on the interval (P5(3/2): -0.001692923, M3(5/4):
             | 0.00992105, m3(6/5): -0.010792885).
        
         | jerf wrote:
         | I really appreciate at the end how you explained some of _why_
         | 12TET is so popular. There was a time when it was the new kid
         | on the block, and there 's a reason it took over. Most articles
         | of this type are so busy taking a dump on it that you can't get
         | a clear answer to that question.
         | 
         | I am a firm believer in the idea that if you want to know how
         | to improve on something, you must clearly understand where you
         | are coming from with current practice... and if your
         | understanding of "current practice" is that it is entirely bad
         | with no redeeming qualities, you don't understand current
         | practice. We see that a lot in the programming space; there's a
         | recurring set of ideas like "everything should be visually
         | programmed everywhere!" that always come from people who spend
         | a lot of time complaining about text without demonstrating any
         | understand that it is there for a _reason_ , indeed, many
         | reasons, and if you casually throw all those good reasons away
         | in your attempt to be new and fresh, you are starting so far to
         | the negative that you stand no hope of producing anything new
         | and useful.
         | 
         | Personally I really appreciate 12TET's ability to wrap the
         | harmonies around as you show, and I've never thought about it
         | that exact way, so I also appreciate the visualization. That
         | doesn't mean it needs to be the only tuning used by anyone,
         | though.
         | 
         | On to the music itself. One thing that I have found when I
         | listen to a lot of "microtonal" music is that for music that is
         | nominally more "consonant", it ends up with things I would not
         | call "dissonant" per se (at least, in the traditional ways that
         | 12TET has dissonant intervals), but a whole bunch of intervals
         | I'd just call _sour_. Now, I won 't deny that despite my
         | general openness to alternate tuning pretty much everything I
         | listen to is 12TET and I'm adjusted to that just like everyone
         | else, but when I listen to Baroque-period music in pre-12TET
         | tunings (as they were likely performed then), I hear the
         | differences versus 12TET, but I don't hear that sourness in
         | those pieces. It seems to me that if the goal is to seek
         | greater consonance in tunings (and I acknowledge those who do
         | not have that goal, this post is specifically about those who
         | are seeking that) I would be hearing music that actually _is_
         | generally more consonant. I would be more interested in
         | alternate tunings if the resulting music was not so sour.
         | 
         | I really appreciate that your "ambient garden" is both
         | different from what I'm used to hearing, but also I find it
         | quite approachable. Sure, a bit of adjustment is necessary, or
         | at least helpful, but it seems like one could actually argue
         | that there is indeed greater _consonances_ , and interesting
         | contrast to conventional intervals, in that music, rather than
         | just... sour intervals everywhere.
        
         | Sesse__ wrote:
         | My basic problem is that I'm really struggling to hear the
         | difference between many of your samples :-) And I've already
         | got a bit of experience with microtonality (DSP background,
         | playing and have tuned multiple instruments, reasonable pitch
         | perception). One of the big problems for me is that it's not so
         | easy to hear them side-by-side; you have to stop one of them,
         | then start the other (unless you want them both at the same
         | time, which you probably don't), and both the start and stop
         | buttons are pretty laggy. FWIW, most audio comparison tools
         | I've seen (typically centered around compression or
         | restoration) include some way of switching seamlessly between
         | the two, without restarts.
        
         | pclmulqdq wrote:
         | If I may provide some constructive criticism as someone who
         | also has a background in tuning and tuning theory: I believe
         | the article is pretty cool and you clearly have a good
         | background on modern microtonal music. However, it is also
         | clear that you do not have a good background on historical
         | tunings (there are some factual errors in this regard).
         | 
         | Modern sources often implicitly assume that you understand
         | tuning theory before teaching it, I agree. The understanding
         | they often expect is this historical theory, though. I find
         | that understanding historical tuning based on the idea of
         | scales to be sort of tough to understand, while the circle of
         | fifths is a lot more useful, and before 1900, pretty much
         | nobody wrote about tuning in terms of scales since for all
         | practical purposes it is very easy to hear frequency
         | relationships in fifths and fourths rather than hearing them
         | from steps.
         | 
         | Just Intonation is built on top of the harmonic series (not the
         | circle of fifths), and I would suggest that you introduce the
         | concept of the harmonic series before thinking about scales and
         | fixed temperaments (your "boring" solution). As someone who
         | does understand Just Intonation pretty well, I found the idea
         | of going straight to a concept of scales very confusing,
         | personally. The scale for true just intoned tunings is built on
         | top of the harmonic series relationships you showed later, and
         | those don't all have nice intervalic ratios.
         | 
         | Factually, the intervals were wrong for a typical Pythagorean
         | scale: your fifth is 2^18/3^11 when the correct relationship
         | for the typical notion of Pythagorean tuning is 3/2. Your scale
         | stacks fourths based on 4/3 relationships, leaving the most
         | important interval in the scale as the so-called "wolf" fifth.
         | Most practical notions of Pythagorean tunings used fourths
         | going one way and fifths going the other from the tonic,
         | leaving the F#-C# relationship as the "wolf" (if the tonic is
         | C), while all other fifths are pure. If you illustrate this
         | with a circle of fifths rather than a graph showing scale
         | degrees, it's a lot easier to understand. Pythagorean tuning
         | also isn't really a type of just intonation since it doesn't
         | use a harmonic series on a single note, but the exact
         | definition of "just intonation" varies by source (some would
         | say that even a temperament like Werckmeister is "just
         | intonation").
         | 
         | All that said:
         | 
         | I would suggest you start with some ideas about tuning,
         | introduce the harmonic series, introduce that "just intonation"
         | is about preserving harmonic series relationships, and then go
         | straight to your "freestyle" section. Eschew the notion that
         | you need to understand the history of unequal temperaments to
         | understand the present concept of the tension between the
         | equal-tempered compromise scale and the just-intoned harmonic
         | series.
         | 
         | Since you're more interested in modern theory, and your
         | innovation and interests are there, I think you can skip the
         | history and just get straight to the math and the lattices.
         | Whether you use circles of fifths if you do this is up to you
         | (I'm guessing you shouldn't - they are not so useful for modern
         | tuning ideas).
        
           | pierrec wrote:
           | Thanks for bringing in your understanding of historical
           | tunings. Maybe a simpler correction would be to describe the
           | example as "a Pythagorean tuning" rather than "THE
           | Pythagorean tuning", which would be (according to some)
           | technically correct despite not being historically
           | representative. The goal of that example isn't to provide
           | historical background, it's to provide one of the simplest
           | possible derivations of 12 usable tones from just intervals.
           | I believe that that the 3 being a multiplier or a divisor is
           | a matter of perspective: if you start from the last tone in
           | my example, the same scale is derived from reversed
           | fractions. Starting from the middle might be closer to what
           | you're describing, hopefully I'm getting that right.
           | 
           | Grounding the whole thing in the harmonic series on would
           | certainly make sense.
        
             | pclmulqdq wrote:
             | You are correct about the ratios not mattering that way,
             | but it is jarring for someone who knows about this stuff to
             | see 4/3 (the fourth) instead of 3/2 and to see the
             | positioning of the wolf being the I-V relationship in the
             | scale. I would suggest that if you want to keep it, you
             | should be explicit that the frequency relationship on this
             | fifth is far off, and I would suggest drawing a circle of
             | fifths (which will be a lot more clear after seeing a fifth
             | in the harmonic series). Instinctively, that section feels
             | very wrong despite being (mostly) right. I would personally
             | suggest dropping it entirely - you don't need the history.
             | 
             | Edit: I was thinking about your existing diagram a bit
             | more, and here is the rework I might suggest without doing
             | anything too major:
             | 
             | Do an up-a-fifth-down-a-fourth path through the chart, and
             | that is easier to rationalize and understand than "mostly
             | 4/3 with 2/3 ratios interspersed when we need to drop an
             | octave":
             | 
             | C * 3/2 -> G
             | 
             | G * 2/3 -> D
             | 
             | D * 3/2 -> A
             | 
             | A * 2/3 -> E
             | 
             | E * 3/2 -> B
             | 
             | B * 2/3 -> F#
             | 
             | There is only one break from the pattern right here with
             | two descending perfect fourths in a row:
             | 
             | F# * 2/3 -> C#
             | 
             | C# * 3/2 -> G#
             | 
             | ...
             | 
             | You can also restart from C going down to F and Bb once you
             | reach F# and that gives you the typical Pythagorean tuning,
             | but then you will have to explain why that happens to
             | readers who are unfamiliar with tuning.
        
         | riemannzeta wrote:
         | I will admit that I already had some familiarity with the
         | topic, but I feel you did an amazing job at explaining
         | specifically the constraints you're under as a composer, and in
         | elucidating how having digital tools doesn't magically solve
         | the problems you face in harmonizing in just intonation over
         | the course of a piece. I had not really understood that before
         | reading your article, and at least suspected that we might
         | transition to hearing mostly Just Intonation eventually as
         | digital tools became more widely used.
         | 
         | Of course you could make it more accessible by starting from
         | some even more basic principles and elaborating further on
         | those foundations, but then you risk losing some of our
         | audience that's already familiar with those. For me at least
         | you struck a good balance. (No pun intended!)
        
       | benwen wrote:
       | " This also has the reputation of being terribly impractical,
       | which is always a selling point for me."
       | 
       | That was truly LOL. Thank you.
        
         | an_aparallel wrote:
         | posting related vinyl record collection comic:
         | https://www.ratherrarerecords.com/wp-content/uploads/AlexGre...
        
       | rob7cc wrote:
       | What a marvelous article about intonation and temperament. It is
       | one of those expositions that approach perfection in conveying
       | the subject matter. I am no music theorist but rather an engineer
       | with an appreciation for all things wave- or signal-oriented. I
       | will want to read it multiple times to savor the explanations.
       | The author's album based on just intonation is linked in the
       | article ("A Walk Through The Ambient Garden") and I highly
       | recommend it: it is a mesmerizing composition.
        
         | keybits wrote:
         | To save people a few clicks, there's a wonderful visualisation
         | of the generated music at https://ambient.garden/
        
       | thomasahle wrote:
       | This reminds me of when I stumpled into a music theory flame war
       | by proposing the "scale": 1, 15/14, 15/13, ..., 15/8, 2.
       | https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/66620/what-is-a-te...
       | 
       | This set of 8 nodes (can be transposed to whichever base
       | frequency) has _the lowest common denominator between any pair of
       | nodes_ among all 8-node scales.
       | 
       | I thought that might make it a good choice for a just intonation
       | scale (which can really be any subset of frequencies you build
       | you music from), but it turned out a sensitive subject.
        
         | the_other wrote:
         | Why is it a sensitive subject?
        
           | pyinstallwoes wrote:
           | Wait until you hear about A=432Hz
        
             | the_other wrote:
             | I've heard a little about this one. It's not that
             | interesting, IMO. Some people think tuning even temperament
             | down such that middle A becomes 432Hz (rather than 440Hz)
             | is better for your health as well as the tone. I can get a
             | little "woo" from time to time, but this one left me cold.
        
         | colanderman wrote:
         | Oh hey, I've experimented a bit recently with the similar scale
         | 1, 24:23, 12:11, ... 24:13, 2. Essentially a 12-tone version of
         | yours. I've been calling it the "utonal" scale as it is a
         | utonal [1] series. Complements what I call the "otonal" scale
         | of 1, 13:12, 7:6, etc.
         | 
         | The trouble is, while intervals with the root are very
         | consonant, arbitrary intervals don't sound great.
         | 
         | I've noticed though, that a utonal scale is very similar to the
         | scale of harmonics [2], which is traditionally used relative to
         | a moveable root note. So I intend to experiment in that
         | direction.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otonality_and_utonality
         | 
         | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_of_harmonics
        
       | muhrizqiardi wrote:
       | Haven't read it fully (to be honest this topic is new to me), but
       | it's funny that as I read this article, I also happen to listen
       | to a microtonal music: Flying Microtonal Banana by King Gizzard &
       | The Lizard Wizard.
       | 
       | Both the name of the album and the name of the band sounds funny,
       | trust me when I say this: It's one of the best microtonal album
       | out there. They really mixed the sound element of turkish(?)
       | music into the album. Highly recommended!
        
       | lovegrenoble wrote:
       | Avez-vous la version francaise, monsieur ?
        
       | Sharlin wrote:
       | Should be noted that any ensemble that consists only of
       | continuous-pitch instruments (eg. strings, trombone, human voice,
       | fretless guitar) is free from the shackles of 12TET and its
       | harmonies naturally tune to as close to "pure" intervals as the
       | performers' skills allow.
        
         | kaapipo wrote:
         | The guitar doesn't event need to be fretless; there is a lot of
         | leeway (even towards flat) even with frets if you know the
         | technique!
        
         | cchi_co wrote:
         | A richer and more authentic harmonic experience
        
         | naltroc wrote:
         | Yes, this should be noted.
         | 
         | Naturally JI instruments include any instrument which has a
         | continuous frequency domain, like trombone, fretless stringed
         | instruments, and human voice.
         | 
         | Instruments with keys or frets may be "bendable". However, the
         | direction and quantity of bend varies with with each tone it is
         | paired with, making this incredibly impractical.
        
         | Levitz wrote:
         | I never thought about this, does a choir left to its own
         | devices naturally gravitate to JI rather than ET?
        
           | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
           | It seems to depend a lot on their age and experience. Years
           | of only single 12TET will tend to pull them away from the JI
           | "sound". However, I know a few choral singers who've tried
           | (in midlife) to single JI and once they got over the initial
           | "hump" they found it quite natural.
           | 
           | The "beating" that occurs in 12TET is inaudible to most
           | western listeners because we've become so acculturated to it.
           | You have to get some exposure to music where it doesn't
           | happen before you even notice it (and thus seek out more
           | consonant harmony).
        
       | nonrandomstring wrote:
       | Sometimes I like writing stuff in odd scales and intonations. The
       | "Lucy" tuning is also very pleasant [0]. I once met a producer
       | who had guitars fretted to this tuning. It doesn't lend itself
       | well to DAWs that have an underlying MIDI note logic. Practically
       | it's better to work in Pd/Max with raw oscillators and arithmetic
       | than to try shifting MIDI note values around with bend. The
       | ZynAddSub engine (also used in Yoshimi synth) has a nice scales
       | filter.
       | 
       | Probably worth mentioning Jacob Joaquin [1] who did this stuff in
       | Csound back in the 90s. On one of his patches I based a
       | generative music system for a game, it was the "Harmonic tree" -
       | very similar to the system in the article - repeated
       | multiplication by integer fractions at each branch.
       | 
       | Using simple timbres (like flute/organ/sine) you can make big but
       | crystal clear sounding chords, and then slowly changing one
       | "note" at a time you get an ever evolving soundscape that blows
       | anything "Eno" off the map. Its in a sweet creative area between
       | composition and additive synthesis.
       | 
       | [0] http://www.harmonics.com/lucy/lsd/colors.html
       | 
       | [1] https://github.com/jacobjoaquin
        
         | colanderman wrote:
         | You can use the same construction as the Lucy scale with the
         | periods of planets to produce true "music of the spheres"!
         | Though the pitches tend to be clumpy, it does sound quite
         | otherworldly.
        
       | carterschonwald wrote:
       | This is interesting, but the harpsichord based samples really
       | made me not wanna listen. But that's probably just me disliking
       | harpsichord
        
         | cchi_co wrote:
         | They have a unique sound that not everyone enjoys.
        
         | naltroc wrote:
         | Would it be more appealing if we relabeled "harpsichord" as
         | "pluck triangle synth"? :P
        
         | pierrec wrote:
         | The choice of instrument is not entirely innocent. Harpsichords
         | are rich in harmonics, and those harmonics are almost exactly
         | multiples of the fundamental. This is perfect for revealing
         | natural ratios in chords. Pianos have "bent" harmonics which
         | would slightly obscure this. This is inharmonicity:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inharmonicity
        
       | cchi_co wrote:
       | It's interesting to see how just intonation can offer a richer
       | harmonic
        
       | naltroc wrote:
       | Here are three additional references on applied Just Intonation.
       | 
       | The first book is abstracted away from composition and provides a
       | more general description of tuning systems.
       | 
       | The next two are composition focused, explaining how tuning
       | system is an option for musical works.
       | 
       | 1) The book "How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony" provides
       | excellent historical context on why ET was a great solution and
       | how we kind of got stuck with it.
       | 
       | While it could be read by anybody, having a bit of musical
       | knowledge OR physics of acoustics knowledge may benefit you.
       | 
       | https://www.amazon.com/Equal-Temperament-Ruined-Harmony-Shou...
       | 
       | There are also two composers who recognize ET as a constraint (as
       | opposed to the "the only option").
       | 
       | 2) Harry Partch built many of his own instruments to circumvent
       | issues from 12ET and composed music just for them. He describes
       | his conceptualizations of JI in "Genesis Of A Music":
       | 
       | https://www.amazon.com/Genesis-Music-Account-Creative-Fulfil...
       | 
       | 3) Paul Hindemtith also has some opinions on the matter, though
       | both Partch and I disagree with his points of view. Nonetheless
       | he has some at-the-time innovating ideas, some of which are valid
       | and others of which may not have aged well. You can read about
       | them in "The Craft of Musical Composition"
       | 
       | https://www.amazon.com/Craft-Musical-Composition-Theoretical...
        
       | elevation wrote:
       | For practical performance of alternate intonations, you can tune
       | a guitar so that a particular chord shape presents perfect roots
       | and 5ths, while arranging for a single string to be a perfect
       | third (e.g, a few cents "flat" compared to equal temperament.)
       | 
       | When playing this same chord shape (or an appropriate derivative)
       | up the neck, the relative intervals is maintained for other
       | chords, allowing perfect intonation not just of the root chord
       | but of other chords in the key family.
       | 
       | For chord shapes where a flatted string cannot be used as a 2nd
       | or 3rd, it will sound objectionably flat, but for many chord
       | shapes it's possible to fret the flat string with additional
       | pressure to bring it back into tolerance.
       | 
       | Mastering this technique makes the guitar sound much more in tune
       | with itself which is a wonderful sensation as a player.
        
         | cscheid wrote:
         | (In case you didn't know, it's fun that) Jacob Collier plays a
         | 5-string guitar in a tuning that takes advantage of this trick
         | exactly. IIRC, from lowest to highest he tunes them a fifth, a
         | fifth, a fourth and a fourth apart. By flatting the middle
         | string a dozen cents or so, you can get a root-fifth-perfect
         | tenth voicing of a major chord. Neat trick.
        
           | wrs wrote:
           | Speaking of Jacob Collier, this is a good time to mention the
           | song where he "hacks" equal temperament to modulate to
           | G-half-sharp without anyone noticing.
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xd54l8gfi7M&t=3m17s
        
             | cjbprime wrote:
             | One more Jacob Collier mention: also generally releases
             | albums using just intonation, I think, and especially does
             | hand-tuning of thirds etc. I like his description of having
             | to "monkey swing" when an e.g. flattened third needs to
             | become a new root note.
        
         | bwanab wrote:
         | Aren't you still fighting the fact that the frets themselves
         | are tuned as 12TET?
        
           | elevation wrote:
           | The fight increases the faster/further you jump around the
           | circle of 5ths. The 12TET fret spacing aligns octaves and
           | 5ths with JI, so if you tune for a JI `I` chord, your other
           | chords will be internally JI but only your `V` chord will be
           | spaced perfectly from the `I` chord. The other chords will be
           | closer to perfect JI the closer they are to `I` on the circle
           | of fifths.
           | 
           | This microtuning isn't perfect in theory, but it's a
           | favorable compromise for a lot of western music, especially
           | for legato strumming where the inter-string intervals are
           | heard more often than the inter-fret intervals.
        
         | kazinator wrote:
         | Most guitars are not properly in equal temperament intonation,
         | because that requires compensation at the nut.
         | 
         | In particular, an unwound G string can be off. I got sick of
         | three decades of listening to that out of my main guitar, and
         | earlier this year finally did something out of it with
         | satisfactory results:
         | 
         | https://mstdn.ca/@Kazinator/112332540341043265
         | 
         | Without this string, I cannot get these G and D power chords to
         | be in tune simultaneously:
         | 
         | G:                 E   |---|---|-*-|       B   |---|---|-*-|
         | G  o|---|---|---|       D  o|---|---|---|
         | 
         | D:                 E  x|---|---|---|       B   |---|---|-*-|
         | G   |---|-*-|---|       D  o|---|---|---|
         | 
         | If you tune the latter D, then the open G is too flat in the
         | former G. If you sharpen the open G, the latter D is out of
         | tune.
         | 
         | The problem is that when we fret the A note on the G string
         | near the nut, it stretches; the string goes sharp. So the
         | interval between the nut and that fret is wider than a tone,
         | without the compensation that shrinks it.
         | 
         | The other strings have the problem, but the unwound G has it
         | worse due to lower tension relative to mass. I'm so happy with
         | the G compensation on that guitar, that it needs nothing else.
         | 
         | Anyways, there are videos out there which do A/B comparisons
         | between ordinary guitars and just intonation. They feature
         | uncompensated guitars, so they perpetrate a fallacy.
         | 
         | The guitarist must experience a properly intonated guitar with
         | nut compensation first, then decide whether going to exotic
         | intonations is worth it.
        
       | sporkl wrote:
       | Overall a good intro on the subject. I feel like at the start it
       | might benefit from being a bit more explicit about pitches being
       | frequencies and ratios being intervals; probably just worth a
       | reminder for people who aren't as familiar
       | 
       | Might be interesting to talk about how the usual ratios come from
       | the harmonic series. For sounds that don't produce a harmonic
       | series, other potentially non-integer ratios can actually sound
       | more consonant. The youtube channel New Tonality[0] has a bunch
       | of great videos about this
       | 
       | Also wanted to mention that I've been working on a piece of
       | commercial software[1] for working with freestyle/adaptive just
       | intonation, if anyone's interested
       | 
       | [0]: https://www.youtube.com/@new_tonality [1]:
       | https://www.dmitrivolkov.com/projects/pivotuner/
        
         | pierrec wrote:
         | Thanks for posting this. The approach of keeping the
         | traditional 12 notes while changing the tuning on-the-fly is
         | really interesting and maybe the right tradeoff. This is so
         | spot-on because adaptive JI is mentioned as a possible solution
         | at the end of the article. It's the classic HN move where a
         | weird topic is being discussed and someone says "why yes, I've
         | made tools that happen to exactly match the niche topic being
         | discussed!"
         | 
         | In fact, it's probably not my business, but this topic is so
         | profoundly niche (and likely to remain so for a while) that I
         | personally wouldn't make this commercial. My reasoning (and the
         | reason I open-sourced some projects) is that it will limit
         | adoption while changing almost nothing about my income.
         | Obviously I hope I'm wrong, maybe these techniques will pick up
         | in popularity. It's also possible that I think this way simply
         | because I'm bad at marketing.
        
           | sporkl wrote:
           | yeah, in general I do want to open source it, but for the
           | time being I'm a student and every little bit counts
        
       | flobosg wrote:
       | For more pieces in just intonation, check out
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_in_just_i...
        
       | hypertexthero wrote:
       | One of the linked music examples, "occultation" by Pure Code, is
       | beautiful ambient music.
        
       | crtasm wrote:
       | If the author is here, the audio clips don't play for me. Firefox
       | console has: Uncaught (in promise) TypeError:
       | document.querySelector(...).contentDocument is null
        
         | pierrec wrote:
         | Sure, I also use Firefox but I don't have this error, so that's
         | not really enough detail for me to look into it.
        
       | riemannzeta wrote:
       | I feel like I can hear beat frequencies in the 12TET chords that
       | I don't hear in the JI chord examples.
       | 
       | Anybody else hearing that? Or is that my imagination?
        
         | naltroc wrote:
         | Yes!
         | 
         | We don't even have to listen to the audio examples to know that
         | yes, ET chords produce beat frequencies. This is an artifact of
         | the non-integer relationships created in ET chords that don't
         | exist in the JI examples.
         | 
         | A piano will produce similar beat frequencies when playing a
         | perfect fifth. Some ears are more sensitive to hearing it than
         | others.
        
           | riemannzeta wrote:
           | Thank you! I'm so glad to have that confirmed. I feel like I
           | do hear them, and actually have come around to liking them.
           | They feel quite different from what you get with a pure
           | harmony in Just Intonation -- maybe the ephemerality of the
           | flow of energy back and forth between different subharmonics
           | adds to the excitement somehow.
           | 
           | It's hard for me not to think of the electric guitar in this
           | context. I love the purity of an acoustic played in a
           | plangent tone like Django. But the incredibly rich spectrum
           | introduced when an amplifier saturates and tons of additional
           | harmonics and subharmonics that aren't supposed to be there
           | gets introduced -- that's it own kind of excitement. Like
           | falling into an abyss aurally.
        
       | riemannzeta wrote:
       | Readers who enjoyed this essay might also enjoy this one, which
       | goes into further depth on the mathematics of musical intervals,
       | the connection between the "blue note" in Equal Tempered jazz
       | music, and more:
       | 
       | https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0034-4885/72/7/07...
       | 
       | As an added bonus, the author draws an extended analogy between
       | musical intervals and energy levels in quantum mechanics toward
       | the end of the article, and indeed the study of the patterns in
       | intervals between and among energy levels in the simple harmonic
       | osciallator remains an active area of reasearch!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-16 23:01 UTC)