December 14, 2010
Dolores Catherino is a multi-instrumentalist based in Anchorage, Alaska. She has owned a TPX6 Tonal Plexus keyboard since July, 2008, and dedicates significant time to the study of the instrument. I recently posed the following interview questions to Dolores by email.
Q: Your work combines interests in music and medicine. Can you say a bit about that and how you've come to be doing what you're doing?
Almost as early as I can remember, I was aware of a sense that all 'new' musical ideas seemed reminiscent of something else. During my undergraduate training in music, it intuitively felt like everything truly original had already been done in the 12 pitch musical language and that the space for creative exploration was too narrow. The study of the fretless bass initially keyed me into the compromises and limitations of 12ET and the paradox of simultaneous in-tune intervals in a harmonic configuration (meter stick vs yardstick analogy: 4 stacked 'pure' fifths yield a sharper major 3rd than a 'pure' major 3rd relative to the root).
My approach toward music has always been much more intuitive than analytical. Seneca once said that 'art is the imitation of nature', I feel that great art is the expression/interpretation of an unified and unreified nature, of a deeper qualitative reality.
My initial motivation within microtonal temperament was to strive for a more 'pure' intonation, like the harmonies and physically penetrating intonation of great a-cappella barber shop quartets and vocal jazz groups. However, my conception evolved, with deeper microtonal study, toward discoveries and appreciation of unique harmonic vibrational tendencies and '3-D' aural shapes embedded in harmonic micropitch combinations. Through this learning process, I began to appreciate a gestalt of various pitch combinations; i.e. penetrating, outward/inward movement tendencies beyond the traditional 'in-tune'/'out-of-tune' dualistic reductionism. This lead to a conception of the relatively static (2-D) tendency of 'in tune' harmonies, and its musical application as a tool to be used for contrast, not the rule or goal.
Postgraduate science and medical training has informed me of the importance of ergonomics in musical technique and lead to explorations of complementary TPX pitch layouts which are synergistically applicable to the structure of the hand. Also, it has engaged my interest in the study of hearing and psychoacoustics. As part of my process of exploration in pursuing a deeper understanding of music, hearing and musical perception, I found that our medical/scientific understanding of the world of hearing is very fragmented within diverse specialties each with its own incommensurable language; i.e. music, acoustics, psychoacoustics, otology, audiology, neurology, and cymatics. It is a goal for me to try to expand and unify our conceptual understanding of sound, music and hearing.
Q: How did you find out about the Tonal Plexus, and how has the instrument been useful for you so far?
An internet search for microtonal midi instruments led me to the h-pi website. The TPX has made possible the exploration of 106ET, and the excellent tuning editor, TPXE, enables me to try tuning layout ideas relatively quickly and easily.
How does the Tonal Plexus learning curve compare against other instruments you've studied?
The toughest part for me was designing a pitch layout scheme for the TPX. With an ergonomic pitch layout, the TPX combines the technical challenges of developing piano technique with the geometrical approach of multiple-position fingerings of modern guitar technique. The result is potentially a technical fluency that is beyond the capability of each instrument alone.
I find the technical difficulty to be moderate for a trained musician as a secondary instrument. Theoretically, 106ET is a microtonal expansion that is still able to easily function in 'quasi' 12ET settings. The nomenclature is a easy conceptual evolution utilizing colored noteheads for each micropitch contained within a 12ET metapitch. Most of the difficulty comes in with the TPX's potential comprehensiveness - as least 7 geometrical fingerings for each scale, multiple unique harmonic shapes depending on the key, and seemingly limitless microtonal possibilities.
The more challenging part for me is the fingering/pitch variances in each octave (pitch relativity) of a traditional 7 tone scale configuration. Pitch relativity is a musical adaptation to nonlinear pitch perception characteristics of the human ear: interval pitch space increases as notes proceed sharpward and decreases as they proceed flatward.
Q: You are using your own tuning layouts on the TPX that you've created in TPXE. Can you tell me a bit about those?
The TPX instrument design is potentially able to more fully exploit the ergonomic features of the hand. Specifically, the hand has 2 horizontal planes of motion, the lower plane encompassing the thumb and higher plane the fingers 2-5. In general, older instruments compensated for this by elongating the depth of keys in keyboard instruments and, in other instruments, utilizing grasping function of the thumb to hold a neck, pick, bow or support the weight of the instrument. Marginal application of thumb technique is achieved with special LH thumb position technique for the cello/bass. Guitar and electric bass technique utilizes the RH thumb in a limited fashion on the lower strings.
By tuning the TPX in adjacent modules a fifth apart, the thumb is able to be fully utilized and complex/extended harmonic fingerings are within reach of a hand span. Specifically, the RH fingering layout is optimal for scalar/melodic playing and the LH is optimized for harmonic playing. However, because of the opposing symmetry of the R and L hands the key design would need to be rotated 180 degrees in the horizontal plane, with pitch ascension headed leftward to fully capture the unique symmetrical advantages of both hands. Analogically, it is reminiscent of a double manifold organ, but instead of 2 identical keyboards, there is a left hand symmetrical TPX below (for LH melodic and RH chordal facilitation) and a traditional (RH symmetrical) TPX layout above. With this configuration the TPX would be capable of the development of a comprehensive virtuoso level microtonal technique, as well as an ability to play exceptionally well in backward-compatible 'quasi-12ET' playing situations.
Q: You are also using color as a means to define your pitch layouts?
I use 106 equal temperament which I think of as 53ET 'gross' temperament with each pitch assigned to a colored notehead along with interposed 'fine tuning' pitches (106ET). The colored noteheads are assigned as OYGBI (portion of the visual color spectrum) with OYG fifths below on same shaped key and BI fifths above. Overlapping vertical enharmonic pitches I=V and R=O are utilized for major/minor practicability in all 5 spectral micro-keys. I find it very easy to write ideas in musical notation by just coloring the note heads of each colored 53ET pitch and using ?? modifiers to depict interposed 106ET pitches.
I think of the Yellow colored pitches as 'home' and they are tuned in a 'Quasi' 12ET fashion for easy adaptability to current 12ET playing contexts.
Q: Gear talk: can you describe your hardware / software setup, and how your TPX6 figures into the mix?
The Continuum is a polyphonic continuous controller, so, as with any fretless instrument, development of microtonal intonation is essential. The TPX provides this foundation. Also, I find it too difficult to play anything greater than 4 simultaneous pitches consistently so the TPX will always be a go-to instrument for complex harmonic application. The Continuum's strength is its capability for melodic nuance and expression via its seamless 3 dimensional pitch control (up/down, left/right, and touch pressure).
I use a Microzone u-648 with TBX1 to get retuned output. The u-648 has 60 keys per octave, great touch sensitive key feel, onboard layout configuration for up to 32 overlapping zones, 24 full controller setups (songs) and 30 keymaps. The creation of onboard nonlinear pitch arrays is manually possible, but there is no mac software or software development happening for this instrument, although there is an older PC software editor available. The onboard programming is tedious but rewarding. I find the TBX1 to be an essential component of my Microzone setup. The TBX1 editor (CSE) is excellent and continually being improved/updated. I find it easiest to program the pitch arrays/zone layout within the u-648 and then assign pitches to this layout, by midi note number, via CSE.
I think of the Tonal Plexus, Continuum, and Microzone as unique instruments which are not directly comparable. Similar to selecting the 'best' instrument, keyboard vs. violin vs. guitar, they each have different potential strengths and limitations. I think of the Tonal Plexus as a 'mother' instrument in the same way that the piano is conceived as such currently in music training. The 'mother' instrument concept meaning that overall microtonal musical development is enhanced and informed by the study and understanding of the Tonal Plexus, no matter which instrument a musician/vocalist plays.
Q: What's on the horizon for you?
Ongoing study of technique and micropitch perception with emphasis on microtonal composition.
Development of an intuitively based microtonal ear training system via the website expandingmusicalconsciousness.com with integrated aural/visual instruction for the refinement of pitch and gestalt harmonic micropitch perception.
[ Showing 1 entry | Next entry | Show all entries ]