It's sort of, like, to me, of no consequence as long as our language doesn't get in the way of our brains :-). Any suggestion of "falseness" would lead to a dismissal of the origin of beats; saying they're real forces the analysis. But I appreciate what you're driving at. PR-J IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH, STOP HAVING OPINIONS! In a message dated 02/20/07 08:17:02 Central Standard Time, formsma at gmail.com writes: What about describing it as "falseness"? As opposed to the truest tone which should be there, free from falseness. JF Whoever would know the truth must know Jesus Christ, who is the way, the truth, and the life. On 2/20/07, PAULREVENKOJONES <paulrevenkojones at aol.com> wrote: Alan, that's a hoot! I love "rotten" strings. You're right about other lexicons. I'll be interested to hear. But don't you think maybe it's cart before horse to want a word before we know the phenomenon it's trying to denote? That might just leave us in the same stew. My notion of "real" vs "false" is simply so that we aim our words a bit better at the physical nature of the phenomenon instead of being diverted from it. The beat really is genuine. How many people have dressed capos incorrectly because it's called a V-bar? It's actually an italic U bar :-). But that's another topic. IF YOU WANT TO OPINE MY TRUTHINESS, STOP HAVING THE WANTS!! Paul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20070220/46183910/attachment.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC