Pashkuli: PMN (Plain Music Notation)

[Pashkuli]

Right, I'm staying out of this now. Whenever somebody says something you don't like, you turn it around or create a false accusation. I have been studying music since I started playing the flute in the second year of junior school and I am now nearly 57 years old so don't tell me I don't know anything about it! I found traditional notation childs play compared to this ill thought out nonsense. Good luck, but you're pretty much on your own. Get over it!

You fell in the provocation trap of jancicil.
Now you blame me for falling into it, whilst trying to dig it deeper.

You find traditional notation because someone else taught onto it. You simply let it happen.
You got used to it after years of learning and practice.
Yet, you expect to learn PMN in a few attempts.
How wise is that?



You say you are 57. That is a well paved fairly long life. It will be a disaster to go back and rebuild the road.

So, do not tell me what has been easier for you (trad. notation), because it was a joke for me.
Your path is not the one I am walking on.

[jancivil]

And, like every idiot internet troll ever, it advises you do the reading. Not a scintilla of a hint of a point as to why it's this way, where the problem lies, it's just that before this no one knew about anything. This is the very definition of the Dunning-Kruger Effect, a person is certain they're acing a test, everyone else is flailing, while their score is in fact in the bottom quartile. "I can only advise you" - if you had this you COULD say why this or the other thing isn't any good.
But the entire exercise is someone faking it, showing no competence or anything in the vague vicinity of it. "Go, learn something." The ball has never left your court. I dare you to submit a paper to a reputable journal and be the f**k peer-reviewed. But you have that answer ready, doncha: they're the ones that don't have it. Every last one of them.

You're the donald trump of music, son. If I had to bet on whether or not this is even your concept I'd bet against.

[zerocrossing]

I’ve invented a new type of pizza where you’ll never burn the roof of your mouth again. The crust is on the top to protect it and then there’s a layer of sauce and cheese on the bottom. I’m still working out the kinks, but I think it’ll be a hit.

[shawshawraw]

Hey why's everybody else driving the wrong way??!!

[Hink]

well if they were all coming your way you'd clearly be in the wrong lane

[BertKoor]

I have seen many including the ones Schoenberg proposed mid last century.
More on the entertaining side, rather than really something useful.

Not much different from your system then.

You say indoctrination a lot. But how? Does the traditional system impose values like wrong or right, ugly or beautiful? I say no. You are free to write whatever you want in traditional notation.

[gaggle of hermits]

I have seen many including the ones Schoenberg proposed mid last century.
More on the entertaining side, rather than really something useful.

well, of course. you didn't invent it.

how could some rank amateur like Schoenberg expect to come up with something even vaguely useful? the very thought, it's insane.

[Pashkuli]

You are free to write whatever you want in traditional notation.

Nah, not true. You have to write too much unnecessary stuff... by the "rules".
Constant reference to a prescribed "natural" mode as either by default or as a key signature.
It is just clumsy, bad inheritance and quite frankly... wrong!

[Pashkuli]

how could some rank amateur like Schoenberg expect to come up with something even vaguely useful? the very thought, it's insane.

Too much indoctrination. That is enough. And it is normal. But it is also a bit on the pathetic side.

[Pashkuli]

from another forum (which has less indoctrinated audience), my words:

Well, not exactly Physics you mean, rather pure mathematics, Pythagoras was not that keen on Physics, rather Mathematics.
But that is irrelevant. Yes, I do agree we have to establish a certain base, axioms if you will (like the 5 axioms in Geometry).
But they also get revised at some point in the future. Even the numbers have been expanded to the so called "complex" (rather "plane") numbers.

As with the ratios you mentioned, I also used integers: 0, 1, 2, 3 in terms of frequency. Yes it is entangled with units of time. But sound is a function of time.
It is vibrations of elastic medium, cause by movement of discrete parts of that medium (matter).
In the future we will adjust slightly this unit of time, when we discover the deeper layers of the atom (which are 7 but do not take that as a proof about 7 note scales).
7 is really remarkable number. But also 12 is. Let's not go that deep into Physics, because it will be devastating for the discussion.

When I was a kid, rather young teen, I wanted the notes to be assigned to respective: D, R, M, F, S, L, T letters as per the 'indoctrination' (chant of a psalm).
I just intuitively wanted to somehow match them. I still think of the notes in that way, not C, D, E, F (coincidental match, btw), G, A.

Never understood the "fear" people experienced, when I suggested... well lets have 5 more for the pentatonic. It was considered a "devilish" music nevertheless.
So, let's find a "diabolical" text (lyrics) and extract respective syllables from there, but exclude the already used: D, R, M, F, S, L, T
I think that would have been fair. (and of course I was being sarcastic at the same time)
White and bright, vs black and shady... keys! Luke vs. Vader. Duality of forces, having the same origin... really.

Being a metal fan (many people usually are quite concerned, incl. my mom, that I started listening to metal around age of I had plenty of "dark" lyrics.
There were ancient dark lyrics. Dante, Goethe, Egypt, Sumerian.

Well, this is all pretty much indoctrination.

I think musicians, we should establish a turning point with regards to those matters. Not because of some "intellectual mind-game", rather because the time is right.
We have developed means of audio recordings, audio and sound parameter automations, sound to digital data communication protocols.
Those already use some of this ideas implemented rather numerically (behind the scene), whilst still displaying an old and clumsy system of nomenclature for the musical elements.

I think we should not favour any alphabetical sequence of letters. Do, Re, Mi does not (it favours a special lyrics, but let's forget about that).
I personally do not mind the "white keys" being D, R, M... as long as the "black keys" also get their unique letters.
I also do think (I know it is quite related to PMN as it is now) to choose such syllables (rather the vowels after the above mentioned note-letters) such as that:
· they would reflect symmetrical tonal substructures as mentioned before, leaving us with maximum of 4 vowels → result of 4 "augmented" arpeggios.
(this way we exclude only the hard to be sung vowels [ i ] (as in 'lips') and [ ə ] (as in 'girl')
this would result in (for example as intended in PMN):
Bo, Lo, Ro
Da, Ma, Sa
Fe, Ne, Te
Gu, Pu, Vu

I also tend to avoid the common 'consonant + vowel' for humming and "generic crowd singing" such as: Nanana, Papapa, Tututu, Dududu, Lalalala
to avoid mismatching.

That's pretty much it. And those consonants could be in other sequence (at the moment in PMN they are alphabetic)... but once established should be set in stone.
When I see 12 letters, 12 syllables, 12 noteheads (12 notes) for the 12 tones... I will be glad and grateful.

[Pashkuli]

And because some of the participants here, prefer quotes from "well known" music theorists on music composition and composers... here is one.

“The need for a new notation, or a radical improvement of the old, is greater than it seems, and the number of ingenious minds that have tackled the problem is greater than one might think.”

— Arnold Schoenberg

I have to admit that "ingenious minds" is a bit of a stretch... but who am I to correct Schoenberg. He is right.

[gaggle of hermits]

like Arnold, I’m all up for a new notation, especially one that can handle non-12tet music as well. yours doesn’t look it’s the one, that’s all.

[Pashkuli]

like Arnold, I’m all up for a new notation, especially one that can handle non-12tet music as well. yours doesn’t look it’s the one, that’s all.

Does not look to you. But it is. Take a good and deeper look. Make suggestions.
Discuss it! Do not expect someone like myself to prepare the meal for you and bring it on a plate.
Do something. Be proactive if you really want what you want!

[gaggle of hermits]

if you’ve been in any way responsive to suggestions, I must have missed here. ‘not invented here’ seems to be your entire approach.

and it helps to have a good starting point. I want something that allows for multiple independent lines to be viewable easily. Yours is an unmitigated disaster for that.

[Pashkuli]

I want something that allows for multiple independent lines to be viewable easily. Yours is an unmitigated disaster for that.

This is a good starting point. Please, could you explain what you mean with some examples, you probably might have been working on?

I am not really proficient in micro-tonal or is it related to "multiple independent lines", not sure whether you mean 'counterpoint' (kontrapunkt) or anything else specific?
Disaster in what aspect? Any comparison, maybe within standard notation?