[seqfan] Re: Need suggestions for test for compatible sequences for "voice leading"

Antti Karttunen antti.karttunen at gmail.com
Sat Dec 5 13:04:32 CET 2015


On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 10:34 AM,  <seqfan-request at list.seqfan.eu> wrote:

>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 01:04:09 -0600
> From: "Bob Selcoe" <rselcoe at entouchonline.net>
> To: "Sequence Fanatics Discussion list" <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
> Subject: [seqfan] Re: Need suggestions for test for compatible
>         sequences for   "voice leading"
> Message-ID: <8F0DC89F5A4447EC96449081879B1293 at OwnerPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
>         reply-type=original
>
> Hi Allen, Jean-Paul, Neil and all,
>
> As I mentioned before, IMHO this isn't the forum to address issues of
> voice-leading theory; but we can still make rules for multiple sequences
> which perhaps lend themselves to the metaphor of voicing-leading - all we
> have to do is decide what the rules are.  Obviously, what is considered
> aesthetically "pleasing" (mathematically) will not be uniformly shared; but
> first thing would be to figure out what we want the sequences actually to
> accomplish.  But please trust me on this: there is no point proceeding if we
> take the musical metaphor too seriously.  Many musicians (myself included)
> and composers scoff at the notion that such "rules" in compositional form
> and structure have any legitimacy whatsoever with respect to generalizable
> aesthetics (I won't bore you with details); but - I bet we can create
> agreed-upon multi-sequence rules loosely analogous to somebody's conception
> of "proper" voice-leading (or other types of musical "rules"), and see what
> happens - it might be fun!
>
> Neil - you had mentioned a few sequences which you thought might be
> "compatible" (A5, A203, A6520) - I asked what you meant specifically by
> this, using just A203 and A6520 as an example (not sure if my question ever
> posted).

Maybe there's a typo in the sequence number A006520 ?
I guess Neil meant such sequence pairs where one would expect a
nonrandom correlation between them. E.g. if they are both "number
theoretical" like A000005 and A000203 or both are base-2-based, etc.

>  Your ideas might be a good launching point for generating some
> generally acceptable rules.

Yes, that's what I thought as well: take an idea like this
voice-leading, and then do not apply it "literally", but
"metaphorically", by to generate ideas for sequence transformations by
some analogous condition.


>
> Cheers,
> Bob
>

Best,

Antti


More information about the SeqFan mailing list