Klarinet Archive - Posting 000490.txt from 2000/08

From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: Re: [kl] inharmonic (anharmonic) vs. decay vs periodic vs recipe
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:29:30 -0400

On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:59:39 -0700 (PDT), Bilwright@-----.net said:

> Okay, at this point, I'm going to drop out of the conversation.

I'm sorry you want to drop out of the conversation, partly because I
think these ideas are important, and need to be understood.

I would have hoped that you would be a colleague in explaining them,
once you had understood what I was saying about them.

> As I've said oftentimes, I don't enjoy debate for its own sake,
> especially when I have less musical skill and experience than the
> person with whom I'm debating.

But the thing is, what I was talking about *isn't a debate*. I'm quite
secure in what I'm saying, because it isn't a point of view. It's the
truth about the acoustics of what we're talking about. Obviously,
you're going to 'lose' if you challenge that.

> But honestly, Tony, I feel that you are redefining the word 'harmonic'
> in such a drastic way that almost every statement will be dangerous
> and will confuse at least one listener.

I wasn't redefining the word 'harmonic'. I was using it to characterise
a particular quality. What word would *you* suggest?

> But the world is big enough to accommodate both of us and perhaps a
> few other persons as well, eh?

Oh, come off it.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE GMN family artist: www.gmn.com
tel/fax 01865 553339

... I'm no stranger, just a friend you haven't met...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org