Principals of Vertical Integration

[minime]

A son who is the theme of honour's tongue;
Amongst a grove, the very straightest plant;

- Henry IV, Part 1, Act I, Scene I

Discuss.

[Iamwhomiam]

Oh, can't we just skip to the end and then blow through Part 2?

[Elvis]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mIok8ThT5c

[minime]

Principals because it's more about people than ideas. Vertical integration, but more about human models than business models. As much about trickle-up theory as trickle down theory.

[minime]

To set the tone, it's important to establish a bassline, one arbitrary but yet not random. To that end...

The speaking voice encompasses more than an octave of easy negotiation. Untrained singers have few problems in singing the pitches that lie within the speaking range. When adolescent males and untrained male singers approach the termination of the comfortable speech range, they reach a point in the ascending scale where they often involuntarily raise the chin and the larynx. The corresponding pitch is the primo passaggio, or the first register transition. The vibratory sympathetic chest rumble of the voice tends to lessen or stop. The untrained singer produces pitches beyond this pivotal point, but often resorts to laryngeal elevation to do so.

As the untrained singer continues to ascend the scale, quality change becomes more audible. At pitches about the interval of a fourth above the top of the comfortable speaking range (the point at which the need to elevate the larynx was originally felt), the untrained voice will either break off or resort to a fudden falsetto. This point is the secondo passaggio, or the second register transition.

Between the primo passaggio and the secondo passaggio register points lie pitches often used in the calling voice, that require an increase in breath energy, as well as heavier mechanical action than takes place below the primo passaggio. In the singing voice, this area is termed the zona di passaggio (register transition zone), or the zona intermedia. Any tendency to carry the unmodified "call" of the speaking voice over into the singing voice must be completely negated, however.

Male voices of every category experience registration events of similar nature, at correspondingly higher and lower pitches. The basso profondo relies on the same principles of registration as does the tenore lirico, albeit at lower pitches. Differences in location of the passaggi reflect differences of structure and timbre between the bass and tenor voices. This viewpoint is in conflict with the following assumption that basses sing chiefly in chest voice, and that tenors sing in chest until F4 or F#4, after which they pass into head....

The approximate register events are fairly predictable for all categories of voice, although individual variations should not be ruled out.

The approximate register events for primo passaggio occur in a range from A3 to F4 (bass to tenor) and for secondo passaggio in a range from C4 to B4.

Ordinarily, voce di petto (chest voice) corresponds to the comfortable speaking range and terminates in the region of the primo passaggio. For the baritone, the normal use of the speaking voice lies from B3 downward, and that of the lyric tenos at about the interval of a minor third higher, near D4. The baritone, using his speaking voice to call out loudly, extends the chest range to E4, by pushing his voice through added breath pressure and sustained thyroarytenoid function, he may manage an additional half-tone extension. In the process, he will experience considerable vocal discomfort. The tenor, unless he is a high-pitched reggiero, seldom inflects the speaking voice much above D4, although he is able to "yell" up to G4, or even a semitone or two beyond. The tenor also experiences vocal discomfort in so doing. Neither the baritone nor the tenor makes shouting sounds in speech much above the secondo passaggio, unless resorting to a loud falsetto production.

[dada]

I like your approach of grounding the principals in something tangible, experiential. Like using the vertical alignment of the human spinal column as the basis for the "chakras," useful as a system of categorization. Or the "eight circuits" model using psychological and evolutionary development of the human nervous system through time as its basis.

Some thoughts...

Ascending and descending tone is a way of looking at sound. Sound is frequency, speed of vibrating air. Octaves are multiples of cycles per second. A3 is 220hz, A4 is 440hz, A5 is 880hz. "Higher and lower" pitch is a convention, a framework we adopt. When the voice produces different pitches, what the singer is really doing is tightening/loosening the vocal chords. What we perceive as higher and lower is varying speed, produced through tension and constriction.

I suggest that any principals will be metaphorical, because vertical, up-down integration is itself a metaphor. Not that it isn't useful to do this exercise, but a workable set of principals would do well to take that into account.

"orientational metaphors [...] have to do with spatial orientation: up-down, in-out, front-back, on-off, deep-shallow, central-peripheral. These spatial orientations arise from the fact that we have bodies of the sort we have and that they function as they do in our physical environment. Orientational metaphors give a concept a spatial orientation; for example, HAPPY IS UP. The fact that the concept HAPPY is oriented UP leads to English expressions like "I'm feeling up today." Such metaphorical orientations are not arbitrary. They have a basis in our physical and cultural experience. Though the polar oppositions up-down, in-out, etc., are physical in nature, the orientational metaphors based on them can vary from culture to culture. For example, in some cultures the future is in front of us, whereas in others it is in back."

Lakoff, Johnsen - Metaphors We Live By
http://shu.bg/tadmin/upload/storage/161.pdf


Let's say there's an altitude scale, on which we use animals as our integrated metaphors. Deep sea creatures would be at the bottom of the scale. Then underground animals, and those on the surface of the planet. Then the ones that lounge in the tree tops, and mountain goats, until we get to the highest flying bird.

(Now I'll put on my wizard stars and moons dunce cap and play Merlin. Be the hawk, Arthur... haha.) Are you being the hawk? Good. Now, does the hawk know he's "high up?" And what about the AI satellite. Does it look at the hawk and say, "hmm.. I must rule with eye and claw, as a hawk among the lesser birds..." Does it think using the same spatial metaphors we use, know it's even "higher" than the hawk? Go ahead, see for yourself. Be the AI satellite...

Really, "up" means further from the center of the planet. "Down" means closer. "Inner-outer" might be the technically more accurate metaphor. It might be. We shall see.

Dig a hole, like Bugs Bunny. If we keep digging, we'll end up in China. Which way is up, then? Dig down far enough, you're digging up again. Dig inward far enough, you're digging out again. The polarity reverses at the center.

Or we're standing on the perimeter of a circle. At any point on the perimeter, a vertical jump is one that moves away from the perimeter. A horizontal jump moves parallel with the perimeter. Standing at the top of the circle, a counter-clockwise jump goes to our left, clockwise to our right. At the bottom of the circle, it's the opposite. (There's an ancient video game called "Zoo Keeper," like this. Except you are standing on a square and not a circle. An animal stampede runs around, and you jump over it. It doesn't matter what side of the square you are on. When the stampede is in front of you, you jump.)

In space, orientation is relative. There's another ancient video game, called Gyruss. You fly a spaceship from Pluto to Earth, moving inward through the solar system. You're in outer space. You're only moving "inward" in relationship to the solar system.

Say you're flying through space, and a meteor or a ufo is above you. You turn left. Is it still above you?

In outer space, "Up" becomes defined as "whatever is above your spaceship." In other ancient spaceship video games - for example Time Pilot, Bosconian, and Sinistar - your spaceship is always in the center of the screen.

Something I've noticed in spaceship games, is that when a game is designed so that the playfield automatically scrolls vertically, there is a sense that you are above, "looking down" on the action. Maybe this is a principal of automatically scrolling vertical integration, I'm not sure.

Now back to planet Earth. Donkey Kong is a shit game. The little man climbs the girder structures of the construction site, to rescue the girl from the monkey. Every time he reaches the top, the monkey takes the girl higher. The story doesn't matter, it could be popeye climbing to rescue olive oil from bluto, or a square of light climbing for no reason at all than to get to the top. The vertical orientation is what's important, climbing up, up, up. The little man and the girl/goal are all that are necessary. The monkey is just for show.

It's alchemical. The little man is trying to unite with the beloved. At the top screen of the construction site, he's successful. The girders collapse, the monkey falls and hits his head. Vertical integration is disintegration.

And then it all begins again, until on the 22nd time around, the game freezes. That part isn't alchemical, though. Just a glitch in the code, overflow that messes up the countdown clock so there's no more time.

[Iamwhomiam]

I think someone slipped me some mushrooms...

[dada]

I think someone slipped me some mushrooms...

One side will make you grow larger, the other side will make you grow smaller... (smile, smile)

Am I a good trip, or a bad one? Feel free to explain, this isn't social media. Don't be shy!

[dada]

we're standing on the perimeter of a circle. At any point on the perimeter, a vertical jump is one that moves away from the perimeter. A horizontal jump moves parallel with the perimeter. Standing at the top of the circle, a counter-clockwise jump goes to our left, clockwise to our right. At the bottom of the circle, it's the opposite.

I'd like to expand on this:

If we are facing each other, counter-clockwise for me is clockwise for you.

Barney is going to invest in the market. Andy warns him to be careful, lot of con-men in the stock market. Of course Barney won't listen. He won't get suckered, not ol' eagle-eye Barn.

Andy decides to teach Barney a lesson in how gullible he really is. He tells Barney that he has a nickel worth a fortune. Because of a misprint at the mint, the buffalo on the nickel is facing the wrong way. Barney can't give his money away fast enough to buy this nickel.

Andy hands Barney the nickel. Barney takes a nickel out of his pocket to compare, realizes the buffalo are facing the same way on both nickels. Barney is upset and confused. Andy wants to take another look at the nickel Barney just bought. Barney hands it back.

They're facing each other. Andy says, pointing to his right, "the buffalo is pointing this way. Which way is it pointing on your nickel?" Barney, pointing to his right, says, "this way."

"You see?" says Andy. Barney is happy again, until Andy hands him back the "misprint" nickel. Barney finally catches on, and storms out.

In a funny twist for an Andy Griffith show, Barney ends up making a sound investment, that Andy spends the whole episode trying to talk him out of. Andy's "overly-cautious in business" nature gets the better of him. I'd say it's just a fluke. Andy is still wise, and Barney is still a sucker, and so it will always be. The episode ends with Barney reading the Wall Street Journal and smoking a cigar. Andy is happy for his friend.

Barney is a sucker, but Don Knotts is a genius. He plays such a believable sucker. Plus, he's so fucking funny, every line he delivers is pure gold. I would argue that he's the real star of the show, steals the scene every time without fail.

Stage-left is to the audience's right. The director, who is facing the stage, must think from the perspective of the performer to give stage directions. And of course, "up stage" and "down stage" aren't literally up and down. Up stage is the back of the stage, away from the audience, down stage at the front, closer to the audience.

[minime]

dada,

So many words.

Sorry, really, that I can't understand it for you, and can't feel it for you--how the up and down of the pitch has a location which informs the metaphor, however imperfectly. For some, it's self-evident and goes without saying. For others, too many words are not enough.

I thought that the quote above, from the book The Structure of Singing, made that clear. Guess not.

Found the following this evening just wandering around the Net, the reason for responding to you now (maybe at all).

Doing a Q&A at a Toronto movie theater, Murray is asked, "How does it feel to be Bill Murray?" – and he takes the extremely meta query seriously, asking the audience to consider the sensation of self-awareness. "There's a wonderful sense of well-being that begins to circulate up and down your spine," Murray says. "And you feel something that makes you almost want to smile. So what's it like to be me? Ask yourself, ‘What's it like to be me?' The only way we'll ever know what it's like to be you is if you work your best at being you as often as you can, and keep reminding yourself that's where home is." As the audience applauds, Bill Murray smiles inscrutably, alone in a crowded room, safe at home.

[dada]

Sorry, really, that I can't understand it for you, and can't feel it for you--how the up and down of the pitch has a location which informs the metaphor, however imperfectly. For some, it's self-evident and goes without saying. For others, too many words are not enough.

I thought that the quote above, from the book The Structure of Singing made that clear. Guess not.

Found the following this evening just wandering around the Net, the reason for responding to you now (maybe at all).

Nothing to apologize for. The years for which I've been a singer are many, many. For longer than that I've been a musician and sound engineer. I've looked at music from lots of different vantage points, psychologically, culturally, scientifically, dare I say 'spiritually.' Your quote from The Structure of Singing set some things brewing in me, mostly wordlessly. When they were done brewing, I composed a response. Thank you for that. It doesn't happen often, and I appreciate it when it does. I probably should have made that clear.

I don't necessarily see 'goes without saying' and 'too many words not being enough' as contradictory. It's just like wearing different hats. If I say that 'what goes without saying' is like the sky, and the many-worded thoughts are just like clouds blowing by on a breeze, nothing to get too attached to, does that make sense? I hope it gives a better idea of where I'm coming from, here.

Now I write a lot. I'd say for every four nights I write, I play music one. So maybe I've become a bit wordy recently.

Bill is alright. Funny, I could swear I read a talk by Gurdjieff where he said something extremely similar to Bill's response to that question. Is that because Bill read that same transcript? Or is there more to it. I would say there's probably much more to it.

But what do I know. I'm all crowded in an empty room, except for me and my cat. Safe as a matador, or maybe a clown in a barrel at a rodeo. And about as far from home as one can be.

Going from Bill to Gurdjieff would bring us around to the Law of Octaves, the system of vertical integration Gurdjieff often used. Some good principals in there.

[Iamwhomiam]

I think someone slipped me some mushrooms...

One side will make you grow larger, the other side will make you grow smaller... (smile, smile)

Am I a good trip, or a bad one? Feel free to explain, this isn't social media. Don't be shy!

Well, I'm glad we both agree; you're a trip!

Don't be sad, whether for good or bad,
whatever will be, you'll see
you'll be neither mad nor glad
I know you. You're not a cad.
but you don't know me:
Iamwhomiam.

But this trip's not ended.
Let pettiness lie in the past.
You'll soon learn
I'm mostly half-assed;
Iamwhomiam

[minime]

"Inner-outer" might be the technically more accurate metaphor. It might be. We shall see.

Whoosh!! Another month and then some passes by--so quickly--for me, anyway.

So many words.

At this rate, 100 substantial and revelant posts or so and I will probably have reached my end... A sobering thought for a teetotaller.

Vertical integration assumes the inner, and emphasizes the inner over the outer. That is, it is the interest part of the principal, and accruing over time.

[Iamwhomiam]

Actually, dada, your comment upthread sent my mind reeling, and not at all in a bad way.
Hence, my reference to me having eaten mushrooms, though I never have.

Edited to add:

Best wishes on your approaching in vertical integration, minime. It's really the only way to go.

[minime]

Whoooooosh!!!!