--- In crazy_music@yahoogroups.com, "xenharmonic" <xed@e...> wrote:

> As a result, practitioners of musically meaningless numerology
> like Gene "Woolly-Headed Numerology" Smith and his ilk find themselves
> with nothing to do but indulge in hysterical name-calling when faced
> with facts and logic.

I propose an experiment--why don't you provide either facts or logic
or (best of all) both, and see how I respond?

> If you want to know why I've abandoned the internet, Gene
> "Woolly-Headed Numerology" Smith's recent spasm of name-calling
> offers us Exhibit One.

Good. Buhbye.

> MCLAREN -- 14 CDs of microtonal and 22 compilation CDs of
> microtonal music playing with other microtonalists, virtually
> no words online

None that make any sense, at any rate.

> What does common sense suggest when Gene "Woolly-Headed
> Numerology" Smith's arguments on the internet cause a 7-year-old child
> to giggle uncontrollably?

At a guess, that you had ketchup on your nose.

> I have composed more microtonal music in more tunings (JI, ET and
> NJ NET) than other human being alive or dead...

Bully. Of course when you listen to other people's music which use a
variety of tunings, you think you are listening to 12-equal, which
suggests you are a bit tone-deaf.

> Here are some of the comments virtuoso performers and scholars and
> professional musicians have made about my CDs of microtonal music:

Gosh. Actually, though, people sometimes say nice things about my
music as well.

> Instead of being distracted, let us center in on the facts. Where
> is the hard evidence that any of the meantone tunings Gene
> "Woolly-Headed Numerology" Smith has wasted his life numerologizing
> about on the Alternative Lying List can be objectively and verifiably
> distinguished from a typical piano in 12 equal under objective blind
> listening tests?

Anyone (emphatically including you) who cannot tell a piece in
Ennealimmal[54] from 12-equal is either tone-deaf, completely deaf, or
not very bright.