Topic: To Carl...[Re: Scala archives]

2 scales

Thread (2 messages)

From: J.Smith (2006-12-17)
Subject: To Carl...[Re: Scala archives]

Carl, you wrote:



"1. Send it to Manuel.

2. I don't think the quality of scales in the archive is very high,
so I doubt your scale could damage it.

3. I respect your music, so your scales are almost certainly (and
if not, by definition) of good quality.

4. It would be good to have a more open scale repository, to which
anyone can contribute. And where users can vote on the interestingness
of the scales. Hell, maybe even post mp3 files to compete for
'best piece in this scale' status.

-Carl"



Thanks for the input, Carl. Just so everyone's clear on this, my posted
reply to Gene was written with tongue firmly in cheek (sorry Gene). I
suppose I should preface such things with an appropriate warning ( ie,
"The following message contains wry humor and should be taken with
remedial grains of salt" or similar).

Honestly, my question about the archives was more out of curiosity and
less because I thought I had some unique tuning as such. I've been
toying with a 17-tone irregular temperament since the September 17 TPP
concert. I wanted something tweaked away from EDO and bit more toward
just ratios. But after George Secor brought up his "well-tempered" 17, I
sort of put mine on a shelf -- though I'm looking at it again for a new
work.

Rounded to the nearest cent:

!

71

137

208

288

345

416

496

567

633

704

784

841

912

992

1049

1120

1200



Best,

jls

From: Gene Ward Smith (2006-12-17)
Subject: To Carl...[Re: Scala archives]

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@...> wrote:

> Rounded to the nearest cent:

And with this information, we can see it is closely related to Margo's
neo-Gothic 17-note scale, and Leapday[17], the 17-note MOS of leapday
temperament.

Here's your scale in Scala format:

! jsmith17.scl
J. Smith 17-note well-temperament
17
!
71.
137.
208.
288.
345.
416.
496.
567.
633.
704.
784.
841.
912.
992.
1049.
1120.
1200.

Here's Leapday[17] in 46-edo tuning:

! leapday17.scl
Leapday[17] in 46-et tuning
17
!
78.260870
130.434783
208.695652
286.956522
339.130435
417.391304
495.652174
573.913043
626.086957
704.347826
782.608696
834.782609
913.043478
991.304348
1043.478261
1121.739130
1200.000000

If you look at the respective cicles of fifths, you can see that your
scale is a sort of modified leapday with 704 cent fifth generator
(which is to say, leapday in 75-et, not 46-et.) Possibly I should have
given that tuning instead.