Topic: Wookie[58], a strictly proper MOS
2 scales
| File | Description | Notes | Period (ยข) |
|---|---|---|---|
| diet | Diatonic-type scale inside Wookie[58] | 7 | 1200.0 |
| wookie58 | Wookie[58], a 58&113 temperament MOS, in 171-et tuning | 58 | 1200.0 |
Thread (7 messages)
From: Gene Ward Smith (2007-02-17) Subject: Wookie[58], a strictly proper MOS Here's the 58-note MOS of wookie, the 58&113 temperament, with OE wedgie <<14 59 33 35 51 ...||. The 59 gives a high complexity to 5/4, but wookie makes up for that by having a generator of 393 cents. Meanwhile, the theoretical 5 works its magic with ratios between 5 and other odd numbers. The tuning here is 171-et, and wookie is characterized by a near-just 7-limit. The 58 note MOS is strictly proper, so I want to see if Ozan thinks it makes any sense, maqam-wise. Here's Wookie[58]: ! wookie58.scl Wookie[58], a 58&113 temperament MOS, in 171-et tuning 58 ! 21.052632 42.105263 63.157895 84.210526 105.263158 126.315789 147.368421 161.403509 182.456140 203.508772 224.561404 245.614035 266.666667 287.719298 308.771930 329.824561 350.877193 371.929825 392.982456 414.035088 435.087719 456.140351 477.192982 498.245614 519.298246 540.350877 554.385965 575.438596 596.491228 617.543860 638.596491 659.649123 680.701754 701.754386 722.807018 743.859649 764.912281 785.964912 807.017544 828.070175 849.122807 870.175439 891.228070 912.280702 933.333333 947.368421 968.421053 989.473684 1010.526316 1031.578947 1052.631579 1073.684211 1094.736842 1115.789474 1136.842105 1157.894737 1178.947368 1200.000000 Here is a diatonic scale, more or less anyway, of which many copoes can be found in Wookie[58], as in terms of wookie generators, going from F to B, we have -14,0,14,28,-13,1,15. Ozan can say if this makes a decent rast: ! diet.scl Diatonic-type scale inside Wookie[58] 7 ! 203.508772 392.982456 498.245614 701.754386 891.228070 1094.736842 1200.000000
From: Ozan Yarman (2007-02-17) Subject: Re: [tuning] Wookie[58], a strictly proper MOS ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@coolgoose.com> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com> Sent: 17 \ufffdubat 2007 Cumartesi 6:04 Subject: [tuning] Wookie[58], a strictly proper MOS > Here's the 58-note MOS of wookie, the 58&113 temperament, with > OE wedgie <<14 59 33 35 51 ...||. The 59 gives a high complexity to > 5/4, but wookie makes up for that by having a generator of 393 cents. > Meanwhile, the theoretical 5 works its magic with ratios between 5 > and other odd numbers. The tuning here is 171-et, and wookie is > characterized by a near-just 7-limit. > > The 58 note MOS is strictly proper, so I want to see if Ozan thinks > it makes any sense, maqam-wise. Here's Wookie[58]: > > > ! wookie58.scl > Wookie[58], a 58&113 temperament MOS, in 171-et tuning > 58 > ! > 21.052632 > 42.105263 > 63.157895 > 84.210526 > 105.263158 > 126.315789 > 147.368421 > 161.403509 > 182.456140 > 203.508772 > 224.561404 > 245.614035 > 266.666667 > 287.719298 > 308.771930 > 329.824561 > 350.877193 > 371.929825 > 392.982456 > 414.035088 > 435.087719 > 456.140351 > 477.192982 > 498.245614 > 519.298246 > 540.350877 > 554.385965 > 575.438596 > 596.491228 > 617.543860 > 638.596491 > 659.649123 > 680.701754 > 701.754386 > 722.807018 > 743.859649 > 764.912281 > 785.964912 > 807.017544 > 828.070175 > 849.122807 > 870.175439 > 891.228070 > 912.280702 > 933.333333 > 947.368421 > 968.421053 > 989.473684 > 1010.526316 > 1031.578947 > 1052.631579 > 1073.684211 > 1094.736842 > 1115.789474 > 1136.842105 > 1157.894737 > 1178.947368 > 1200.000000 > I don't see how this could be superior to 79/80 MOS 159-tET. > Here is a diatonic scale, more or less anyway, of which many copoes > can be found in Wookie[58], as in terms of wookie generators, going > from F to B, we have -14,0,14,28,-13,1,15. Ozan can say if this makes > a decent rast: > > ! diet.scl > Diatonic-type scale inside Wookie[58] > 7 > ! > 203.508772 > 392.982456 > 498.245614 > 701.754386 > 891.228070 > 1094.736842 > 1200.000000 > > > This scale fails to be Rast, on account of the interval between 2nd and 6th degrees not being a perfect fifth.
From: Herman Miller (2007-02-17) Subject: Re: [tuning] Wookie[58], a strictly proper MOS Gene Ward Smith wrote: > Here's the 58-note MOS of wookie, the 58&113 temperament, with > OE wedgie <<14 59 33 35 51 ...||. The 59 gives a high complexity to > 5/4, but wookie makes up for that by having a generator of 393 cents. > Meanwhile, the theoretical 5 works its magic with ratios between 5 > and other odd numbers. The tuning here is 171-et, and wookie is > characterized by a near-just 7-limit. > > The 58 note MOS is strictly proper, so I want to see if Ozan thinks > it makes any sense, maqam-wise. Here's Wookie[58]: It's spelled "Wookiee", by the way... Any particular reason for the name? Other than it being an especially large and hairy temperament?
From: Gene Ward Smith (2007-02-18) Subject: Re: Wookie[58], a strictly proper MOS --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Herman Miller <hmiller@...> wrote: > It's spelled "Wookiee", by the way... Any particular reason for the > name? Other than it being an especially large and hairy temperament? There may have been a reason; you know how these things go. What's "lemba" mean?
From: Carl Lumma (2007-02-18) Subject: Re: Wookie[58], a strictly proper MOS > What's "lemba" mean? And did lemba have a prior name on tuning-math? -Carl
From: Herman Miller (2007-02-18) Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Wookie[58], a strictly proper MOS Gene Ward Smith wrote: > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Herman Miller <hmiller@...> wrote: > >> It's spelled "Wookiee", by the way... Any particular reason for the >> name? Other than it being an especially large and hairy temperament? > > There may have been a reason; you know how these things go. > What's "lemba" mean? I was wondering if it was anything like your Japanese monster temperament names (which have a particular comma in common, IIRC). "Lemba" is one of the Zireen names for temperaments from my Zireen music page (most of which are place names from a map of the Zireen world, as it turns out). It probably means something, but I haven't developed the Lembeki language yet. :-)
From: Herman Miller (2007-02-19) Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Wookie[58], a strictly proper MOS Carl Lumma wrote: >> What's "lemba" mean? > > And did lemba have a prior name on tuning-math? "Number 82".