Re: GG: A question for the musicologists

[Edsma4933@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/6/98 9:17:28 AM EST, loco.nordin@mbox200.swipnet.se
writes:

<< >Somewhere along the path I picked up the term "microtonal".
 >Could someone please explain to me what exactly this term means ?
 
 There are a number of composers who work with microtonality, like Giacinto
 Scelsi and Alois Haba, to mention but a few. The term indicates that the
 muisc shifts not from just one note to another note in the octave, or from
 one halfnote  to another halfnote, but that the notes are divided up in
 mych smaller portions, so that the melody line, for example, can slip in
 very small stages.
  >>

This is actually a pretty good description of what the listener _hears_.  A
description of what _happens_  might be this: our scale system is built upon
equal half steps between each consecutive pitch.  Microtonal music can use
quarter-steps, or eighth-steps, etc., and does not necessarily use equal
divisions of the octave, or equal distances between consecutive pitches.  The
scale a piece is based on may be invented by the composer, or can be based on
some equal division of the octave.  There has been much discussion in recent
years in the music-theoretical community  about how and why some such scales
seem to be more resonant (and just sound better) than others.  My friend David
Clampett, of Yale University, has coined the term "well-formed scales" for
those exhibiting certain qualities that seem to make for better sound (that is
a very non-technical description of some very complicated and ground-breaking
work, so if anyone wants read David's real stuff, I'll dig up the citation for
you).

Anyway, microtonality deals with scales built upon small distances between
consecutive tones of the scale (micro-tones), as opposed to our diatonic
system, which is based upon two types of division between consecutive tones
(half-steps and whole-steps).

Hoping this didn't muddy things still further...

Melissa Stewart
SUNY at Buffalo