Topic: CS vs Proper
2 scales
| File | Description | Notes | Period (ยข) |
|---|---|---|---|
| propsep | proper septicyclic 1029/1024-tempered scale in 252 et | 11 | 1200.0 |
| septicyc | septicyclic 1029/1024-tempered scale, 252 et | 11 | 1200.0 |
Thread (4 messages)
From: Gene Ward Smith (2006-07-21) Subject: CS vs Proper Here are two interesting and unusual scales, both are built from 11-note cycles of (with apologies to Carl) major, minor, and subminor thirds; that is, 4 5/4s, 4 6/5s, and 3 7/6s, which close due to tempering out 1029/1024. One is constant structure but not proper, and the other is proper but not constant structure. If M is a major third, m a minor third, and s a septimal minor or subminor third, then the first has the cycle MmsMmsMmsMm and the second has the cycle MmMsMmMsmms. You can see just by examining these cycles how various assorted triads and tetrads will appear. Here they both are in 252-et tuning: ! septicyc.scl septicyclic 1029/1024-tempered scale, 252 et 11 ! 152.380952 233.333333 385.714286 466.666667 500.000000 700.000000 733.333333 885.714286 966.666667 1119.047619 1200.000000 ! MmsMmsMmsMm ! propsep.scl proper septicyclic 1029/1024-tempered scale in 252 et 11 ! 38.095238 152.380952 304.761905 385.714286 538.095238 619.047619 700.000000 852.380952 933.333333 1085.714286 1200.000000 ! MmMsMmMsmms
From: Carl Lumma (2006-07-21) Subject: Re: [tuning-math] CS vs Proper >Here they both are in 252-et tuning: > >! septicyc.scl The name says it all. Just kidding. :) -Carl
From: Gene Ward Smith (2006-07-22)
Subject: Re: CS vs Proper
--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith"
<genewardsmith@...> wrote:
> One is constant structure but not proper, and the other is proper but
> not constant structure.
Constant structure does not seem to be as stringent a criterion; we have
466 of these which are CS but only one which is proper. Since strictly
proper ==> CS if I'm using the right definiton for CS (that is, it
does for the definition I'm using) that's not a surprise.
The definition for CS I'm using, in case anyone wants to object, is that
i != j ==> Class(i) intersect Class(j) = {}; which is to say, the
intervals in distinct interval classes are distinct.
From: Kraig Grady (2006-07-22)
Subject: Re: [tuning-math] Re: CS vs Proper
i assume you did it this way to allow overlapping. the only thing i can
think might violate the spirit of this if one had a scale or series of
tones where none is repeated.
So i don't know how you put in that at least some intervals are
repeated somehow, or if it really necessary until a real example comes
up. possible a class implied a family of more than one
Gene Ward Smith wrote:
>
> --- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:tuning-math%40yahoogroups.com>, "Gene Ward Smith"
> <genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> > One is constant structure but not proper, and the other is proper but
> > not constant structure.
>
> Constant structure does not seem to be as stringent a criterion; we have
> 466 of these which are CS but only one which is proper. Since strictly
> proper ==> CS if I'm using the right definiton for CS (that is, it
> does for the definition I'm using) that's not a surprise.
>
> The definition for CS I'm using, in case anyone wants to object, is that
> i != j ==> Class(i) intersect Class(j) = {}; which is to say, the
> intervals in distinct interval classes are distinct.
>
>
--
Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles