Your Conculture's Music

Discussions about constructed worlds, cultures and any topics related to constructed societies.
User avatar
Pirka
roman
roman
Posts: 907
Joined: 09 Oct 2010 10:18
Location: Seattle

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Pirka »

I guess I should contribute as well.

The Kaynur and Hezek are rather different in most forms of music. Neither group uses instruments as of the now; voice and subsequently acapella groups are the only way they made music. Tapping, pronouncing [|], stomping, scratching stone, and clapping are used to keep the beat.

The differences between Hezek and Kaynur music genres is that Hezek songs are usually about depressing subjects and are heterophonic, resembling Arabian prayer calls, Hungarian folk music, and generic lamenting, as well as being reminiscient of a joik. Joiks are sometimes sung. On the other hand, Kaynur music is all about joiks; these joiks may be composed of improvised sounds, lyrics, or improvised rhyming lyrics and are pentatonic. Love, summer, rivers, reindeer, and suicide are common subjects.

A traditional Kaynur song is the cakkuru, or the throwing-song. It has a lively, up-beat, generic tune. It is a song often sung in groups at joyous celebrations. Each participant gets their turn to put in some improvised rhyming lyrics for a couplet of eight beats per line. Usually, the lyrics are praising newlyweds and wishing them a wonderful life when sung at marriage ceremonies, or something else that is joyful. It's a very flexible song.
After each couplet, if the couplet is a successful improvisation that sounds nice, the other participants cheer and joik their appreciation. Usually there is no order to the singers. If there is a failed couplet, the singer is jokingly booed.

Recently, a Kaynur individual, when carving out a shrine and engraving a picture of Tuntarimur, the Tundra God, found out that if she pluck a firm strip of wood a wooden bell-like sound will be produced, making this new proto-instrument work similar to a kalimba.
User avatar
Ashroot
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 128
Joined: 19 Jan 2011 07:44

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Ashroot »

@MrKrov: I never thought it would be possible to have all logic fly out the window. I can't say a word without you changing it completely. The worst of it is that I am giving you the satasfaction of almost loosing sight of what humanity is. All I feel towards you is tolerance. A numb non emotional acceptance that you are.

If you understand what I have said that should stike but I doubt you will. Your sarcasm is a shield. What are you hiding? What is it you fear? Why are you? And tell me, who are you and what are you doing.

This is a place of sancuary and though yes we can just leave who wins? You don't. What happens when you are here talking to yourself? I am considered an outsider and I too agree that I am.


Now on con music my people have bagpipes. Barf all you want they are simply magical. Flutes are also common.
Got tired of my old one.
Systemzwang
greek
greek
Posts: 541
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 15:48
Contact:

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Systemzwang »

so, those bagpipes -
what kind of scales do they use?
do they have multiple drones or just one?
is the drone out of tune wrt the scale?
is there even drone, or are they more like uilleann pipes?
xijlwya
sinic
sinic
Posts: 263
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 15:55
Contact:

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by xijlwya »

Hey! Because I'm a passionate drummer, I'm really into this topic. Of course, my conmusic is focused on rhythm.

The music I will describe now it the traditional folk music of the people of Saza, my conworld. The music is strongly intervowen with magic. Making this music may summon spirits or deamons who may provide supernatural wonders (or destruction).
The basic instruments used to make this music are the heart, dôdhuke /ˈdɔ.ðɐ̝kə/, and the time drum, bipêtun edzôsa ha /bə̝.ˈpɛ.tɐ̝n əd.ˈzɔ.sɜ hɜ/. Basically the huge dôdhuke gives a steady bass beat as a foundation for the bipêtun edzôsa ha to play upon. In this way, the basic instrumental structure is similar to the Taiko drumming tradition in Japan. The dôdhuke is quite similar to huge Taiko drums, but the bipêtun edzôsa ha is not. It is in fact not even a proper drum, because it consists of a wood body and has no drum head attached to it. It is more like a wood block. It provides a high pitched and cutting tone. Both drums are beaten with wood sticks of different diameters but equal lengths. Thick ones are used for the large dôdhuke and thinner ones are used to beat the bipêtun edzôsa ha.
Rhythmically, the music is oriented vaguely towards traditional African music, as it does not follow a fixed bar rhythm (like 4/4 or 7/8). Instead it follows patterns of varying length.
Dependent on the region, the location and the purpose other instruments can be added to these two core instruments. Voices, flutes and other drums of differing diameters are common.

I will try to provide a sample of some ideas I have in my head using my bassdrum as the dôdhuke and the rim of my snare drum (actually I have a wood block somewhere...) as the bipêtun edzôsa ha when I find the time :(
User avatar
Pirka
roman
roman
Posts: 907
Joined: 09 Oct 2010 10:18
Location: Seattle

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Pirka »

Ashroot wrote:Now on con music my people have bagpipes. Barf all you want they are simply magical. Flutes are also common.
I love bagpipes! I can see why people don't like them, but personally the drone makes me think of Celtic things.
Systemzwang wrote:so, those bagpipes -
what kind of scales do they use?
do they have multiple drones or just one?
is the drone out of tune wrt the scale?
is there even drone, or are they more like uilleann pipes?
Yes, this would be nice to know.
Systemzwang
greek
greek
Posts: 541
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 15:48
Contact:

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Systemzwang »

Pirka wrote:
Ashroot wrote:Now on con music my people have bagpipes. Barf all you want they are simply magical. Flutes are also common.
I love bagpipes! I can see why people don't like them, but personally the drone makes me think of Celtic things.
the main reason people dislike them is probably that the drone (as well as the scale, to some extent?) are out of tune compared both to just-intonation and 12-tet temperament; if you have some kind of loop-effect for a guitar, try looping a slightly detuned open E-string, while playing an in-tune pentatonic or minor harmonic E scale, and you get something that sounds very bagpipeoid.

The timbre of the bagpipes might not help much either, but I figure that timbre wouldn't be half as bad if it were in tune. It's rather shrill, which in and of itself is somewhat off-putting (but not all bagpipes are that shrill, e.g. uilleann bagpipes seem somewhat less shrill, as do mainland European ones, like Polish and Balkans bagpipes, as well as Scandinavian ones, altho' I've heard some even worse out of tune and shriller Yugoslavian ones as well - but shrillness isn't a universal for bagpipes, continentwide.)
(do notice that bagpipes aren't something of exclusively scottish origins.)
peterofthecorn
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 91
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 02:32

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by peterofthecorn »

My conpeople sing like this:

http://overtone.ru/old/sound/gvinea.mp3
Lhûd
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 12
Joined: 30 Mar 2011 02:29

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Lhûd »

Since I'm going to a music school next year, I can't say I haven't thought about this.

I've had an idea inspired by the early Greek notation of music, i.e. using the alphabet.

The alphabet would of course be my conscript, and each character would represent a note or phrase relative to the scale ('such-and-such means subdominant-dominant-tonic')
There would have to be some way of embellishing the characters to give more variety, and I'm not sure how I would denote rhythms. Maybe just by the proximity of the 'notes' to each other like I think Gregorian chant does.

Then there could be in addition 'lower class' music for uneducated musicians, much freer but not able to be written down with any sophistication.

I'm not sure what scales they would use, but I like me my dorian and mixolydian.
Their instruments would probably be medievaly-type, viols and woodwinds, maybe some long-lost cousin of the lute :-)

I would love to develop this.
Systemzwang
greek
greek
Posts: 541
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 15:48
Contact:

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Systemzwang »

Lhûd wrote:Since I'm going to a music school next year, I can't say I haven't thought about this.

I've had an idea inspired by the early Greek notation of music, i.e. using the alphabet.

The alphabet would of course be my conscript, and each character would represent a note or phrase relative to the scale ('such-and-such means subdominant-dominant-tonic')
There would have to be some way of embellishing the characters to give more variety, and I'm not sure how I would denote rhythms. Maybe just by the proximity of the 'notes' to each other like I think Gregorian chant does.

Then there could be in addition 'lower class' music for uneducated musicians, much freer but not able to be written down with any sophistication.

I'm not sure what scales they would use, but I like me my dorian and mixolydian.
Their instruments would probably be medievaly-type, viols and woodwinds, maybe some long-lost cousin of the lute :-)

I would love to develop this.
Have you considered not having the idea of dominants and subdominants at all? Those are quite unusual in most musical traditions of the world!
Lhûd
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 12
Joined: 30 Mar 2011 02:29

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Lhûd »

Systemzwang wrote:Have you considered not having the idea of dominants and subdominants at all? Those are quite unusual in most musical traditions of the world!


By those terms I didn't mean to imply that my elves would see them the same way as westerners, simply that a certain character could mean 'fourth scale tone-fifth scale tone-first scale tone'

But since the notes themselves would be named with numbers according to the instrument (If a viol goes down to a G, then that note would be called '1', maybe the G an octave above would be 'second 1') I thought I'd have a different, non-numerical system for scale tones once a key is established.

But then again, I haven't given more than a few minutes' thought to any of this :roll:
User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 6352
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by eldin raigmore »

(This would be a poll if I knew how to make a poll; and so it would have to be its own thread.)
(Who knows, maybe if we get enough answers, some mod will split this out to its own thread?)


Musical Perception Among Your Con-People: a Questionnaire
may be too grandiose a title, since I'm not going to talk about rhythm or timbre or dynamics (volume or speed).

Anyway:
Among real-life humans here on Datum Earth and now in our time-line, few of us have "perfect pitch", but most of us have near-perfect intervalic perception.
If we here a middle C and are later-enough asked to identify it from among a set of not-very-different other notes, we probably won't have a much better-than-chance success rate.
But, if we here a perfect fifth, and are later asked to identify it from among a set of other intervals (for instance, perfect fourths and minor sixths), most of us can do so most of the time.

[hr][/hr]

Alright, so, first let me get out of the way some things I'll otherwise just assume are true of your conpeople.

Can they tell a melodic interval (the two notes played one after another) from a harmonic interval (both notes played at once)?
Can they tell an ascending melodic interval (second note higher than first) from a descending melodic interval (second note lower than first)?
Can they identify a unison (both notes are same pitch)?
Can they tell when an interval is not a unison?
Can they identify an octave (one pitch is double the frequency of the other)?
Can they tell when an interval is less than an octave? Can they tell when an interval is more than an octave?

More technical stuff:

Intervals are usually measured in "cents". A "cent" is a 1200th of an octave; two pitches are one cent apart if the higher one's frequency is 2^(1/1200) times the lower one's frequency.
For most of us real-life humans, a "just-noticeable difference" is around 3 or 4 cents.
A "perfect twelfth" is the interval in which one pitch's frequency is three times the other's; a twelfth is about 1902 cents.

Most people have little trouble comparing intervals as long as no two of the up-to-four notes involved are more than four octaves apart from each other. If they are further apart, most people can still tell a lot about the different intervals, but for many their precision suffers somewhat.

Now, on to the questions.
  • Batch the first:
    • Can your people tell the difference between a perfect fifth (the frequencies are in the ratio 3:2, about 702 cents) and a unison?
    • And between a perfect fifth and an octave?
  • Batch the second:
    • Can they tell the difference between a perfect fourth (the frequencies are in the ratio 4:3, about 498 cents) and a unison?
    • And between a perfect fourth and a perfect fifth?
    • Can they tell the difference between a major sixth (the frequencies' ratio is 5:3, about 884 cents) and a perfect fifth?
    • and between a major sixth and an octave?
  • Batch the third:
    • Can they tell the difference between a major third (the frequencies are in the ratio 5:4, about 386 cents) and a unison?
    • And between a major third and a perfect fourth?
    • Can they tell the difference between the interval in which the frequencies' ratio is 7:5, (about 583 cents) and a perfect fourth?
    • and between the 7:5 interval and a perfect fifth?
    • Can they tell the difference between a minor sixth (the frequencies' ratio is 8:5, about 814 cents) and a perfect fifth?
    • and between a minor sixth and a major sixth?
    • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 7:4, (about 969 cents) and a major sixth?
    • and between that 7:4 interval and an octave?
  • Batch the fourth:
    • Can they tell the difference between a minor third (the frequencies are in the ratio 6:5, about 316 cents) and a unison?
    • And between a minor third and a major third?
    • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 9:7, (about 435 cents) and a major third?
    • and between that 9:7 interval and a perfect fourth?
    • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 11:8, (about 551 cents) and a perfect fourth?
    • and between that 11:8 interval and a 7:5 interval?
    • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 10:7, (about 617 cents) and a 7:5 interval? (Both intervals are equally close to half-an-octave (600 cents), which in even temperament is called an augmented fourth or a diminished fifth.)
    • and between that 10:7 interval and a perfect fifth?
    • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 11:7, (about 782 cents) and a perfect fifth?
    • and between that 11:7 interval and a minor sixth?
    • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 13:8, (about 841 cents) and a minor sixth?
    • and between that 13:8 interval and a major sixth?
    • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 12:7, (about 933 cents) and a major sixth?
    • and between that 12:7 interval and a 7:4 interval? (Both intervals are equally close to half-a-twelfth, which in even temperament is, unless I am mistaken, is somewhere between a major sixth plus a quarter-tone, or a minor seventh less a quarter-tone; "a half-augmented sixth" or a "half-diminished seventh"..)
    • Can they tell the difference between (one approximation of) a(n even-tempered) minor seventh* (the frequencies' ratio is 9:5, about 1018 cents) and a 7:4 interval?
    • and between a (9:5 "English") minor seventh* and an octave?
*(unfortunately the ratio 9:5 and the ratio 16:9 are both approximations of "minor seventh" in even-temperament. Just-temperament makes 16:9 the "minor seventh" and doesn't actually have a name for the 9:5 "English minor seventh" interval, -- again, unless I am mistaken. I am calling 1000 cents "an even-temperament minor seventh". 9:5 is about 18 cents wider than that. 16:9 is about 16 cents narrower.)

I have two more batches to go, but I'm going to put them in spoilers in case you think I've gone far enough already.
Spoiler:
Batch the fifth:
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' is 7:6, (about 267 cents) and a unison?
  • And between that 7:6 interval and a minor third?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' is 11:9, (about 347 cents) and a minor third?
  • And between that 11:9 interval and a major third?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 14:11, (about 418 cents) and a major third?
  • and between that 14:11 interval and a 9:7 interval?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 13:10, (about 454 cents) and a 9:7 interval?
  • and between that 13:10 interval and a perfect fourth?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 15:11, (about 537 cents) and a perfect fourth?
  • and between that 15:11 interval and an 11:8 interval?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 18:13 (about 563 cents) and an 11:8 interval?
  • and between that 18:13 interval and a 7:5 interval?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 17:12 (about 603 cents) and a 7:5 interval?
  • and between that 17:12 interval and a 10:7 interval? (Clearly the 17:12 interval is at most one j.n.d. from half-an-octave (600 cents); closer than either the 7:5 interval or thee 10:7 interval.)
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 13:9, (about 637 cents) and a 10:7 interval?
  • and between that 13:9 interval and a perfect fifth?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 14:9, (about 765 cents) and a perfect fifth?
  • and between that 14:9 interval and an 11:7 interval?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 19:12, (about 796 cents) and an 11:7 interval?
  • and between that 19:12 interval and a minor sixth?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 21:13, (about 830 cents) and a minor sixth?
  • and between that 21:13 interval and a 13:8 interval?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 18:11, (about 853 cents) and a 13:8 interval?
  • and between that 18:11 interval and a major sixth?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 17:10, (about 919 cents) and a major sixth?
  • and between that 17:10 interval and a 12:7 interval?
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 19:11, (about 946 cents) and a 12:7 interval?
  • and between that 19:11 interval and a 7:4 interval?
  • Can they tell the difference between a just-tempered minor seventh (the frequencies' ratio is 16:9, about 996 cents) and a 7:4 interval?
  • and between a 16:9 minor seventh and a 9:5 minor seventh? (An even-tempered minor seventh is 1000 cents; 16:9 is a just-noticeable-difference less than that, while 9:5 is 18 cents more.)
  • Can they tell the difference between the interval whose frequencies' ratio is 11:6, (about 1049 cents) and a 9:5 (approximate) minor seventh?
  • and between that 11;6 interval and an octave?
Spoiler:
Batch the last: a simpler format that maybe I should have already used for the fifth batch.
(This batch is, even in my own opinion, probably above and beyond. But you might feel like answering it anyway, because of something about your own conculture.)

Can your conpeople tell the difference between each two of the following frequency-ratio intervals?
  • 1:1 (0 cents) (unison)
  • 8:7 (231 cents)
  • 7:6 (267 cents)
  • 13:11 (289 cents)
  • 6:5 (316 cents) (minor third)
  • 17:14 (336 cents)
  • 11:9 (347 cents)
  • 16:13 (359 cents)
  • 5:4 (386 cents) (major third)
  • 19:15 (409 cents)
  • 14:11 (418 cents)
  • 23:18 (424 cents)
  • 9:7 (435 cents)
  • 22:17 (446 cents)
  • 13:10 (454 cents)
  • 17:13 (464 cents)
  • 4:3 (498 cents)
  • 19:14 (529 cents)
  • 15:11 (537 cents)
  • 26:19 (543 cents)
  • 11:8 (551 cents)
  • 29:21 (559 cents)
  • 18:13 (563 cents)
  • 25:18 (569 cents)
  • 7:5 (583 cents)
  • 24:17 (597 cents)
And your conpeople tell the difference between each two of the following frequency-ratio intervals?
  • 17:12 603 cents
  • 27:19 608 cents
  • 10:7 617 cents
  • 23:16 628 cents
  • 13:9 637 cents
  • 16:11 649 cents
  • 3:2 702 cents (perfect fifth)
  • 17:11 754 cents
  • 14:9 765 cents
  • 25:16 773 cents
  • 11:7 782 cents
  • 30:19 791 cents
  • 19:12 796 cents
  • 27:17 801 cents
  • 8:5 814 cents (minor sixth)
  • 29:18 826 cents
  • 21:13 830 cents
  • 34:21 834 cents
  • 13:8 841 cents
  • 31:19 848 cents
  • 18:11 853 cents
  • 23:14 859 cents
  • 5:3 884 cents (major sixth)
  • 22:13 911 cents
  • 17:10 919 cents
  • 29:17 925 cents
  • 12:7 933 cents
  • 31:18 941 cents
  • 19:11 946 cents
  • 26:15 952 cents
  • 7:4 969 cents
  • 23:13 988 cents
  • 16:9 996 cents (minor seventh (just tempering))
  • 25:14 1004 cents (minor seventh (twelve-tone even tempering))
  • 9:5 1018 cents (minor seventh (English))
  • 20:11 1035 cents
  • 11:6 1049 cents
  • 13:7 1072 cents
  • 2:1 1200 cents (octave)

Finally, which of the above intervals do your conpeople find harmonious, and which do they find discordant?
The answer may vary from continent to continent or country to country, as well as from century to century or even decade to decade.
Once upon a time in real-life Western Europe even the 4:3 interval (a perfect fourth) was considered discordant.
Then in the times of the first four Edwards (Edward I to Edward IV of England) not only the 4:3 interval, but also the 5:4 and 8:5 intervals and the 5:3 and 6:5 intervals, were considered harmonious.
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmony#Historical_rules which says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmony#Historical_rules wrote:Early Western religious music often features parallel perfect intervals; these intervals would preserve the clarity of the original plainsong. These works were created and performed in cathedrals, and made use of the resonant modes of their respective cathedrals to create harmonies. As polyphony developed, however, the use of parallel intervals was slowly replaced by the English style of consonance that used thirds and sixths. The English style was considered to have a sweeter sound, and was better suited to polyphony in that it offered greater linear flexibility in part-writing. Early music also forbade usage of the tritone, as its dissonance was associated with the devil, and composers often went to considerable lengths, via musica ficta, to avoid using it. In the newer triadic harmonic system, however, the tritone became permissible, as the standardization of functional dissonance made its use in dominant chords desirable.
)

So, I assume they find octaves (2:1) and twelfths (3:1) and fifths (3:2) harmonious?
So probably also fourths (4:3) and elevenths (8:3)?

How about each of the following:
    • 2:1?
    • 3:1?
    • 3:2?
    • 4:1?
    • 4:2?
    • 4:3?
    • 5:1?
    • 5:2?
    • 5:3?
    • 5:4?
    • 6:1?
    • 6:2?
    • 6:3?
    • 6:4?
    • 6:5?
All of those are considered harmonious in European music of The Standard Period (1600 to 1850, or is it 1650 to 1800?).

But what about
  • 7:1?
  • 7:2?
  • 7:3?
  • 7:4?
  • 7:5?
  • 7:6?
None of those are harmonious in the "Standard Period" tradition; but they might be harmonious in some real-life modern music.

Traditionally, if an interval was harmonious, then it's "inversion" -- the interval obtained by raising the lower note an octave -- would also be harmonious.
So,
  • If 3:2 is harmonious, then so is 4:3, and vice-versa;
  • If 5:3 is harmonious, then so is 6:5, and vice-versa;
  • If 5:4 is harmonious, then so is 8:5, and vice-versa;
  • If 7:4 is harmonious, then so is 8:7, and vice-versa;
  • If 7:5 is harmonious, then so is 10:7, and vice-versa;
  • If 7:6 is harmonious, then so is 12:7, and vice-versa.
So I won't ask about 8:anything, nor about 10:7 nor 12:7, on the theory that I've already asked about something that would (if your conculture also has this tradition) have the same answer.

But what about
  • 9:5 and 10:9?
  • 9:7 and 14:9?
  • 9:8 and 16:9?
And what about
  • 11:6 and 12:11?
  • 11:7 and 14:11?
  • 11:8 and 16:11?
  • 11:9 and 18:11?
  • 11:10 and 20:11?
Traditionally ratios involving 7 or 11 don't show up in music based on semitones (intervals of about 100 cents, a twelfth of an octave) or quarter-tones (intervals of about 50 cents, a 24th of an octave), because they (mostly) aren't close enough to multiples of 100, or even of 50, cents.
Ratios involving 9 do show up, however. But they're not (traditionally) considered harmonious, but, rather, they are (traditionally) considered discordances.
What about your conpeople?
Do they like 9:5 and/or 10:9?
9:6 is the same as 3:2 and 12:9 is the same as 4:3, so I won't ask about them.
Do they like 9:8 and/or 16:9?
Spoiler:
But an even-tempered scale that divides the octave into some other number of intervals than twelve or twenty-four, and/or divides the twelfth into some other number of intervals than nineteen or thirty-eight, might come sufficiently close to some ratio involving 7 or 11.

For instance, we could divide the octave into 48 intervals (25 cents each). 8:7 is close to 225 cents; 7:6 is close to 275 cents; 7:5 is close to 575 cents; 10:7 is close to 625 cents; 12:7 is close to 925 cents; and 7:4 is close to 975 cents. The maximum error is around 8 cents, about two j.n.d.s or at any rate a bit less than three j.n.d.s.

As for ratios involving 11; -- 11:9 is close to 350 cents; 14:11 is close to 425 cents; 11:8 is close to 550 cents; 16:11 is close to 650 cents; 11:7 is close to 775 cents; 18:11 is close to 850 cents; and 11:6 is close to 1050 cents. The ratios involving 11 and any number between 6 and 10 that isn't divisible by 7, do occur in a quarter-tone scale; The ratio 20:11 is around 1035 cents, which I guess might not be close enough to 1025 cents; or it might; it probably depends on what style of music the listener likes and/or is used to. Other than 20:11, the largest error is about 7 cents, around two jnds.

So if we use whatever-the-word-for-an-eighth-of-a tones, (25 cents), we can get close enough to several ratios involving 7 or 11, or for that matter 9.

Some ratios involving 13 are traditionally considered close enough to intervals that are multiples of semitones (multiiples of 100 cents) that they can be included in the usual twelve-tone even-temperament.
Segano
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 74
Joined: 10 Sep 2014 20:55

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Segano »

I hope it's okay to post link to Youtube videos (not my own). If it's not, please let me know and I'll remove them.

Anyway: Aroian music (Aroida is the most-populated Seragradic-speaking nation, with 6 planets) hasn't changed that much over the years. It's heavily influenced by Turkic music. Pop, rock and hip hop/rap are very common. Aroidan music sounds a bit like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJtUbLcQVvU (Tatar)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbq-ja9-Eh8 (Tatar)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRplMPOuwtM (Tatar)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tGmoLuUVEk (Bulgarian, I think)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BzkbSq7pww (Spanish)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6CC0CmsocU (Russian)

Unfortunately I'm not a very good singer, so I can't really record any Seragradic music.
Fluent: :nld: :usa: Average: :esp: Basic: :rus: :srp: Terrible: :bra: :swe:
Systemzwang
greek
greek
Posts: 541
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 15:48
Contact:

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Systemzwang »

Although this isn't meant to relate to any conculture, this is in a weird tuning:
https://soundcloud.com/markus-miekk-oja/party-solitude

The tuning's 11-tone equal temperament, and the scale within that is LsLLLL - a six-tone scale that starts out with a (super)major second (close to 8/7), a (super)minor second, and then a series of (super)major seconds.

So, it's a bastard child between a minor scale and a wholetone scale, a scale where C DEb F G# A# C consists only of major and minor seconds.

11-tone equal temperament approximates:
16/15 (minor second)
8/7 (its major second)
6/5 or 17/15 (the minor third)
9/7 (two major seconds - its major third, c.f. the slightly sharp approximation of 5/4 in most western music)
11/8 (11th overtone, two major seconds + a semitone)
And of course the inverse of each of these times two (so e.g. 11/8 => 2* 8/11)
Systemzwang
greek
greek
Posts: 541
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 15:48
Contact:

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Systemzwang »

eldin raigmore,
there is one pretty famous exception to the idea that inversions of consonant intervals are also consonant - in renaissance and to some extent early baroque polyphony, the perfect fourth is a dissonance except under certain specific situations (i.e. it's not dissonant when it's the upper interval in a triplet consisting of a root, the root's fifth and the root's octave). There's also some reason to suspect that really small intervals - seconds, especially - indeed are harsher dissonances than their inversions.

Finally, I give you a work that lacks octaves, but uses the 'tritave' instead (3:1 instead of 2:1, so basically the fifth of the regular octave). The main chord structures approximate 3:5:7, 5:7:9 and 7/7:7/5:7/3 and 9/9:9/7:9/5 (c.f. the major and minor chords 4:5:6 and 6/6:6/5:6/4).
Curlyjimsam
sinic
sinic
Posts: 221
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 15:31
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Curlyjimsam »

There are various different sorts of music in my world, most of which I haven't done much work on. One very popular style in the Viksor is the wunyibu, which consists of a tuned drums together with a lute-like stringed instrument and another instrument a bit like a recorder, and sometimes sung vocals as well. Wunyibu music is typically composed on a pentatonic scale.
The Man in the Blackened House, a conworld-based serialised web-novel
Squall
greek
greek
Posts: 526
Joined: 28 Nov 2013 14:47

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Squall »

Lyrics are not important, because they enjoy music because of the rhythm and the melody.

70% of the songs do not have voices.
20% have voice but do not have lyrics. They are sung as "/pa pa pa/", "/nã nã nã/" or "/la la la/". The voice is used as an instrument.
10% have lyrics. Lyrics are rare because they have to be deeply meaningful.

Lyrics are only used when there is a reason. Lyrics alone must have some value without the music. The concept of rhyme does not exist. Lyrics are used to tell a message, a joke, a tale or a legend. They are also used for prayers and rituals.

The military songs and lyrics are different. They are not nationalist, they are jokes sung when the soldiers are training.

There are many instruments and styles, but I will choose the instruments later. I have to listen to many instruments to choose them.

In modern times, they will invent an instrument to play chiptune sounds (such as monochromatic cellphone, game boy).
English is not my native language. Sorry for any mistakes or lack of knowledge when I discuss this language.
:bra: :mrgreen: | :uk: [:D] | :esp: [:)] | :epo: [:|] | :lat: [:S] | :jpn: [:'(]
User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 6352
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by eldin raigmore »

Systemzwang wrote:eldin raigmore,
there is one pretty famous exception to the idea that inversions of consonant intervals are also consonant - in renaissance and to some extent early baroque polyphony, the perfect fourth is a dissonance except under certain specific situations (i.e. it's not dissonant when it's the upper interval in a triplet consisting of a root, the root's fifth and the root's octave).
I knew that; I thought I mentioned that.*
I "assumed" it as a way to shorten the questionnaire. (Some people think some of my posts are rather long -- don't know why. [;)] )
Anyone whose conculture doesn't make that assumption, feel free to say so.
Anyway, thanks.
Edit: *Oh, yeah, here it is:
eldin raigmore wrote:Finally, which of the above intervals do your conpeople find harmonious, and which do they find discordant?
The answer may vary from continent to continent or country to country, as well as from century to century or even decade to decade.
Once upon a time in real-life Western Europe even the 4:3 interval (a perfect fourth) was considered discordant.
Then in the times of the first four Edwards (Edward I to Edward IV of England) not only the 4:3 interval, but also the 5:4 and 8:5 intervals and the 5:3 and 6:5 intervals, were considered harmonious.
There's also some reason to suspect that really small intervals - seconds, especially - indeed are harsher dissonances than their inversions.
Yeah, 16:9 sounds less dissonant than 9:8.

Systemzwang wrote:Finally, I give you a work that lacks octaves, but uses the 'tritave' instead (3:1 instead of 2:1, so basically the fifth of the regular octave). The main chord structures approximate 3:5:7, 5:7:9 and 7/7:7/5:7/3 and 9/9:9/7:9/5 (c.f. the major and minor chords 4:5:6 and 6/6:6/5:6/4).
I knew about that too, though I'm pretty sure I didn't mention it. Thanks again.
A "tritave" is a twelfth; it's about 1902 cents, which isn't noticeably different from 1900 cents. You (meaning anyone who reads this; I'm sure Systemzwang already knows) can look it up in Wikipedia, which includes everything I know about it that I'm saying here.
That type of temperament is based on intervals like 3:1, 5:3, 7:3, 7:5, 9:5, and 9:7 -- essentially, ratios between odd natural numbers less than or equal to 9.
The "normal" tuning is based on ratios between natural numbers less than or equal to 6 -- 2:1, 3:2, 4:3, 5:3, 5:4, 6:5.

Edit: Intervals whose frequencies' ratios are the ratios of smaller natural numbers tend to sound more consonant -- more harmonic -- than those whose frequencies' ratios have to be expressed by larger numbers -- up until the point where the ear starts having trouble telling the difference, anyway. If the frequencies' ratio is an irrational number like squrt(2) or squrt(3) or 2^(⅓) or 2^(⅔) or 3^(⅓) or 3^(⅔) etc., it will sound dissonant -- again, up to the point that the ear can't tell it apart from some more consonant (harmonious-sounding) interval.

That's why 2:1 sounds "almost identical" ("the same note only higher"), and why parallel fifths (3:2) and parallel fourths (4:3) sound boring.
But thirds (5:4 and 6:5) and sixths (5:3) sound harmonious.

One might expect 7:4 and 7:5 and 7:6 to sound more harmonious than 8:5, if one followed that line of reasoning. The trouble is just that in a twelve-semitone-per-octave even-temperament it's hard to approximate those intervals (that is, 7:4 and 7:5 and 7:6). For all I know they do sound better than 8:5 (a minor sixth; it's the inversion of 5:4).

9:8 is just about a major second, and 16:9 is a minor seventh, and in modern music they often are treated as harmonious, although old fogies like me can still remember when they weren't.
In choir and bell-choir and so on I can handle one of those per chord as long as they aren't in consecutive chords, and it sounds perfectly fine to me.

But a four-tone chord consisting of three major seconds stacked one atop another -- e.g. F G A B -- just sounds (to me) like the composer wasn't even trying; and a measure consisting of three such chords, especially if every third measure is like that, doesn't sound like music.
"That's not music: that's just noise!" (I couldn't believe I actually said that the first time I did so.)

Spoiler:
A 31-interval-per-octave even-temperament could handle all ratios between numbers less than or equal to 8.
8:7 is about 2^(6/31)
7:6 is about 2^(7/31)
6:5 is about 2^(8/31)
5:4 is about 2^(10/31)
4:3 is about 2^(13/31)
7:5 is about 2^(15/31)
3:2 is about 2^(18/31)
8:5 is about 2^(21/31)
5:3 is about 2^(23/31)
7:4 is about 2^(25/31)

A 72-interval-per-octave even-temperate could handle all ratios between numbers less than or equal to 12.
12:11 is about 2^(9/72)
11:10 is about 2^(10/72)
10:9 is about 2^(11/72)
9:8 is about 2^(12/72)
8:7 is about 2^(14/72)
7:6 is about 2^(16/72)
6:5 is about 2^(19/72)
11:9 is about 2^(21/72)
5:4 is about 2^(23/72)
9:7 is about 2^(26/72)
4:3 is about 2^(30/72)
11:8 is about 2^(33/72)
7:5 is about 2^(35/72)
10:7 is about 2^(37/72)
3:2 is about 2^(42/72)
11:7 is about 2^(47/72)
8:5 is about 2^(49/72)
5:3 is about 2^(53/72)
12:7 is about 2^(56/72)
7:4 is about 2^(58/72)
9:5 is about 2^(61/72)
11:6 is about 2^(63/72)

And a 270-interval-per-octave even-temperament could handle all the ratios between natural numbers less than or equal to 14.
But I'm not going to show you. I think you don't want to see that much. And those of you who do probably would rather work it out for yourselves.

A 494-interval-per-octave even-temperament could handle all the rational numbers where the numerator and denominator were both less than or equal to 16, but those intervals would be somewhat less than a just-noticeable difference, so there's no point IMO.

I also looked at the even-temperaments based on dividing a twelfth (the ratio 3:1) into equal parts.

I think an even temperament of 11 intervals per twelfth could handle all ratios between numbers less than or equal to 6, loosely.
5:4 is about 3^(2/11)
6:5 is also about 3^(2/11)
4:3 is about 3^(3/11)
3:2 is about 3^(4/11)
5:3 is about 3^(5/11)
2:1 is about 3^(7/11)
5:2 is about 3^(9/11)

An even temperament of 49 intervals per twelfth could handle ratios between numbers up to and including 7.
7:6 is about 3^(7/49)
6:5 is about 3^(8/49)
5:4 is about 3^(10/49)
4:3 is about 3^(13/49)
7:5 is about 3^(15/49)
3:2 is about 3^(18/49)
5:3 is about 3^(23/49)
7:4 is about 3^(25/49)
2:1 is about 3^(31/49)
7:3 is about 3^(38/49)
5:2 is about 3^(41/49)
Note how that's similar to -- about the same as -- the 31-intervals-per-octave even temperament.

An even temperament of 65 intervals per twelfth could handle ratios between numbers up to and including 10.
10:9 is about 3^(6/65)
9:8 is about 3^(7/65)
8:7 is about 3^(8/65)
7:6 is about 3^(9/65)
6:5 is about 3^(11/65)
5:4 is about 3^(13/65)
9:7 is about 3^(15/65)
4:3 is about 3^(17/65)
7:5 is about 3^(20/65)
10:7 is about 3^(21/65)
3:2 is about 3^(24/65)
8:5 is about 3^(28/65)
5:3 is about 3^(30/65)
7:4 is about 3^(33/65)
9:5 is about 3^(35/65)
2:1 is about 3^(41/65)
9:4 is about 3^(48/65)
7:3 is about 3^(50/65)
5:2 is about 3^(54/65)
8:3 is about 3^(58/65)
Note how that resembles and differs from the 41-intervals-per-octave temperament.

A 114-interval-per-twelfth even-temperamante could handle all ratios between numbers up to 12 inclusive.
12:11 is about 3^(9/114)
11:10 is about 3^(10/114)
10:9 is about 3^(11/114)
9:8 is about 3^(12/114)
8:7 is about 3^(14/114)
7:6 is about 3^(16/114)
6:5 is about 3^(19/114)
11:9 is about 3^(21/114)
5:4 is about 3^(23/114)
9:7 is about 3^(26/114)
4:3 is about 3^(30/114)
11:8 is about 3^(33/114)
7:5 is about 3^(35/114)
10:7 is about 3^(37/114)
3:2 is about 3^(42/114)
11:7 is about 3^(47/114)
8:5 is about 3^(49/114)
5:3 is about 3^(53/114)
12:7 is about 3^(56/114)
7:4 is about 3^(58/114)
9:5 is about 3^(61/114)
11:6 is about 3^(63/114)
2:1 is about 3^(72/114)
11:5 is about 3^(82/114)
9:4 is about 3^(84/114)
7:3 is about 3^(88/114)
12:5 is about 3^(91/114)
5:2 is about 3^(95/114)
8:3 is about 3^(102/114)
11:4 is about 3^(105/114)
Note how it resembles and differs from the 72-interval-per-octave temperament.

A 783-interval-per-twelfth even-temperament could handle ratios between numbers up to 16 inclusive; but those intervals would be smaller than a j.n.d. so I don't think there'd be any point in it. It would resemble the 494-interval-per-octave temperament which I also didn't cover above.

Spoiler:
If I check even temperaments of the tritave only for the ability to handle ratios whose numerator and denominator are both odd natural numbers,
I find:

An even temperament of two intervals per tritave could, if one were tolerant, handle ratios of odd numbers up to 5 inclusive: 5:3 is about 3^½.

An even temperament of four intervals per tritave could also loosely handle ratios of odd numbers up to 9 inclusive.
7:5 is about 3^(¼)
9:7 is also about 3^(¼)
5:3 is about 3^(2/4)
9:5 is also about 3^(2/4)
7:3 is about 3^(¾)

An even temperament of 17 intervals per tritave could handle ratios of odd numbers up to and including 11.
11:9 is about 3^(3/17)
9:7 is about 3^(4/17)
7:5 is about 3^(5/17)
11:7 is about 3^(7/17)
5:3 is about 3^(8/17)
9:5 is about 3^(9/17)
11:5 is about 3^(12/17)
7:3 is about 3^(13/17)

An even temperament of 39 intervals per tritave could handle ratios of odd numbers up to 15 inclusive.
15:13 is about 3^(5/39)
13:11 is about 3^(6/39)
11:9 is about 3^(7/39)
9:7 is about 3^(9/39)
15:11 is about 3^(11/39)
7:5 is about 3^(12/39)
13:9 is about 3^(13/39)
11:7 is about 3^(16/39)
5:3 is about 3^(18/39)
9:5 is about 3^(21/39)
13:7 is about 3^(22/39)
15:7 is about 3^(27/39)
11:5 is about 3^(28/39)
7:3 is about 3^(30/39)
13:5 is about 3^(34/39)

An even temperament of 131 intervals per tritave could handle ratios between odd numbers up to and including 17.
17:15 is about 3^(15/131)
15:13 is about 3^(17/131)
13:11 is about 3^(20/131)
11:9 is about 3^(24/131)
9:7 is about 3^(30/131)
17:13 is about 3^(32/131)
15:11 is about 3^(37/131)
7:5 is about 3^(40/131)
13:9 is about 3^(44/131)
17:11 is about 3^(52/131)
11:7 is about 3^(54/131)
5:3 is about 3^(61/131)
9:5 is about 3^(70/131)
13:7 is about 3^(74/131)
17:9 is about 3^(76/131)
15:7 is about 3^(91/131)
11:5 is about 3^(94/131)
7:3 is about 3^(101/131)
17:7 is about 3^(106/131)
13:5 is about 3^(114/131)

And an even temperament of 209 intervals per tritave can handle ratios between odd numbers up to and including 21.
I could show you if you wanted to see it; it's not that much bigger than the others I've shown.

Oh! And by the way!
Thanks very much for your posts, Segano, Curlyjimsam, and Squall; (and thanks for your other post(s), Systemzwang).
Birdjimmy
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 20
Joined: 17 Nov 2014 17:35

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by Birdjimmy »

In my conworld one of the cultures is linked mainly to music in time signatures like 5/4, 10/8, 5/8 - basically, in basic count of 5, rather than 4 or 3 which are more natural to us. I think it's quite unique concept, 'cause I've never read about messing with the rhythm more than with harmony or instruments. If you don't know what it's about, some examples of music in the 5/4 or 5/8 signatures.
Dave Bruebeck - Take Five
Riverside - I Believe
It's hard to find examples in folk, traditional music, but maybe you can imagine [:D]
User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 6352
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by eldin raigmore »

Birdjimmy wrote:In my conworld one of the cultures is linked mainly to music in time signatures like 5/4, 10/8, 5/8 - basically, in basic count of 5, rather than 4 or 3 which are more natural to us. I think it's quite unique concept, 'cause I've never read about messing with the rhythm more than with harmony or instruments. If you don't know what it's about, some examples of music in the 5/4 or 5/8 signatures.
Dave Bruebeck - Take Five
Riverside - I Believe
It's hard to find examples in folk, traditional music, but maybe you can imagine [:D]
Indian music has much more interesting and complicated rhythm than Western music; and much less complex and interesting harmony, according to some Indian musicians who compose in both traditions.

Lalo Schifrin's "Mission Impossible" is in the "Detroit beat" (named after the city in which Dave Brubeck's "Take Five" was first publicly danced to).
Gustav Holst's "Mars: Bringer of War", from his "The Planets" suite, is in 5-time.
Paul Yoder's "Barcelona" has its last part in 5-time and sounds very natural. (Yoder composed many schools' anthems.) You can find the first part of Barcelona being played on the Internet but that's not the part in 5-time.

Dave Brubeck's "Unsquare Dance" is in 7-time.
There was a classical piece of music, a blacksmith's song in which the percussionist hit an anvil with a hammer on every downbeat, that went seven beats per measure. (The melody had to be played on the half-beats.) My band played it in high school. I wish I could remember either the name or the composer.

(Check out Brubeck's "Blue Ronda a la Turk".)

K.L.King's march "Cyrus the Great" has a first strain 11 measures long. Preceded by the 10-measure intro, and then repeated, the intro plus the first strain add up to 10+11+11=32 measures; the sum is typical but the component lengths are unusual.

Genesis's "Abacab" is in 13-time, AIUI. It's kind of "folk", in the sense that the composer's musical literacy wasn't involved in its composition. He just played something that sounded neat to him that he could play again. When his bandmates got involved in trying to harmonize it and lyricize it and so on, then is when they realized it was in 13.

Radiohead has something in 15-time.

In traditional time-signatures, the "denominator" is always a power of two, and the "numerator" is a power of two or a power of three or some product of a power of two times a power of three.

Sometimes, though, you'll have a melody that is in a rhythm based on some number of beats divisible by a prime greater than three, harmonized with a counter-melody or descant in a rhythm based on some number of beats divisible by some different prime greater than three.
That's called "irrational". It's not really "irrational" in the mathematical meaning or "irrational"; rather, it's a ratio that, reduced to lowest terms, is between two numbers that are not only relatively prime to each other, but also at least one is odd and at least one is not divisible by 3 and neither is a power of two nor a power of three nor the product of a power of two times a power of three.
Like, maybe, the melody is in 5-time but the counter-melody is in 7-time.
Or 7:10. Or 7:11 or 10:11. Or 7:13, 10:13, or 11:13.
Or 11:14, 13:14, 11:15, 13:15. or 14:15.

But see also this search. Their idea of "irrational time signature" is different from what I said above.
And this.

(And maybe this.)
cntrational
greek
greek
Posts: 661
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 03:59

Re: Your Conculture's Music

Post by cntrational »

Question for people who have tonal languages; do songs ignore or integrate tone?

Mandarin pop ignores it, but Cantonese uses it.
Post Reply