Talk:Chain-of-fifths notation - Revision history

FloraC: FloraC moved page Talk:Circle-of-fifths notation to Talk:Chain-of-fifths notation: Per discussion on Discord

2023-12-18T08:53:32Z

FloraC moved page Talk:Circle-of-fifths notation to Talk:Chain-of-fifths notation: Per discussion on Discord

← Older revision	Revision as of 08:53, 18 December 2023
(No difference)

Xenwolf: /* Sufficient condition */ re

2020-11-15T21:33:53Z

Sufficient condition: re

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:33, 15 November 2020
Line 14:		Line 14:

	: Inaccuracy of the fifth doesn't technically invalidate the system. It only has to do with how much sense it makes. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 17:55, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		: Inaccuracy of the fifth doesn't technically invalidate the system. It only has to do with how much sense it makes. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 17:55, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

			:: Above condition seemed not sufficient to me from a practical standpoint where the relevant intervals (whole tone, semitone, chroma) should have a positive size. I updated the article accordingly. What do you think? --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 21:33, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

	== Background of this article ==		== Background of this article ==

FloraC: re

2020-11-15T17:55:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:55, 15 November 2020
Line 12:		Line 12:

	The decisive point for the usability of this notation is, that the representations of octave and fifth are relatively prime. I'd like to introduce this without making the article to a mathematical text, maybe there is somebody willing to help. I also wonder if the precision of the fifth representation is relevant at all. This would open the discussion about really interesting cases like [[23edo]]. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		The decisive point for the usability of this notation is, that the representations of octave and fifth are relatively prime. I'd like to introduce this without making the article to a mathematical text, maybe there is somebody willing to help. I also wonder if the precision of the fifth representation is relevant at all. This would open the discussion about really interesting cases like [[23edo]]. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

			: Inaccuracy of the fifth doesn't technically invalidate the system. It only has to do with how much sense it makes. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 17:55, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

	== Background of this article ==		== Background of this article ==
Line 24:		Line 26:

	What is the correct lemma? Is it correct to place dashes between the first tree words? Thanks in advance for your help! --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 14:23, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		What is the correct lemma? Is it correct to place dashes between the first tree words? Thanks in advance for your help! --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 14:23, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

			: I suppose the current lemma is correct. Hyphens, not dashes. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 17:55, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Xenwolf: /* Spelling */ new section

2020-11-15T14:23:19Z

Spelling: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:23, 15 November 2020
Line 20:		Line 20:

	So I thought it might be worthwhile to shed a little more light on the matter. I already knew this notation from 17, 19 and 31edo, but I hadn't yet examined when exactly you can and cannot use it. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 14:20, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		So I thought it might be worthwhile to shed a little more light on the matter. I already knew this notation from 17, 19 and 31edo, but I hadn't yet examined when exactly you can and cannot use it. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 14:20, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

			== Spelling ==

			What is the correct lemma? Is it correct to place dashes between the first tree words? Thanks in advance for your help! --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 14:23, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Xenwolf: /* Background of this article */ new section

2020-11-15T14:20:30Z

Background of this article: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:20, 15 November 2020
Line 12:		Line 12:

	The decisive point for the usability of this notation is, that the representations of octave and fifth are relatively prime. I'd like to introduce this without making the article to a mathematical text, maybe there is somebody willing to help. I also wonder if the precision of the fifth representation is relevant at all. This would open the discussion about really interesting cases like [[23edo]]. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		The decisive point for the usability of this notation is, that the representations of octave and fifth are relatively prime. I'd like to introduce this without making the article to a mathematical text, maybe there is somebody willing to help. I also wonder if the precision of the fifth representation is relevant at all. This would open the discussion about really interesting cases like [[23edo]]. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

			== Background of this article ==

			When listening to (and reading in) the [https://youtu.be/rivfU8Rw4IM Scherzo in 26 EDO for Oboe, Horn, and Organ], I (used to the sight-reading of classical music) observed a strange relation between notation and voice leading. The I read the description that (emphasis mine)

			: ''The notation is '''normal circle of fifths notation''', except the fifths are 15/26th of an octave, about 10 cents flat of just. This means that sharps and flats raise and lower notes by a little less than a quartertone.''

			So I thought it might be worthwhile to shed a little more light on the matter. I already knew this notation from 17, 19 and 31edo, but I hadn't yet examined when exactly you can and cannot use it. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 14:20, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Aura at 13:18, 15 November 2020

2020-11-15T13:18:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:18, 15 November 2020
Line 7:		Line 7:
	: Btw it's never dictated that only double sharp to double flat should be used. Without higher-order sharp/flats, larger edos are very limited. 26edo, for example, requires Gx to Abb to access every note in the key of C major. Now modulate to any key with more than three accidentals and boom. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		: Btw it's never dictated that only double sharp to double flat should be used. Without higher-order sharp/flats, larger edos are very limited. 26edo, for example, requires Gx to Abb to access every note in the key of C major. Now modulate to any key with more than three accidentals and boom. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

	:: For the record, I have made a two-ring circle chart for 24edo before, and I will say that I have a few tricks for positioning the additional rings relative to one another. If your main ring starts with C-Natural, and F-Demisharp and G-Demiflat are both on the same secondary ring, then the secondary ring is positioned so that F-Demisharp and G-Demiflat are the same distance from C-Natural. However, if your main ring starts with C-Natural, and F-Demisharp and G-Demiflat are on two separate rings, then the two separate secondary rings are perhaps best aligned with the primary ring so that F-Demisharp, C-Natural and G-Demiflat form a straight line.		:: For the record, I have made a two-ring circle chart for 24edo before, and I will say that I have a few tricks for positioning the additional rings relative to one another. If your main ring starts with C-Natural, and F-Demisharp and G-Demiflat are both on the same secondary ring, then the secondary ring is positioned so that F-Demisharp and G-Demiflat are the same distance from C-Natural. However, if your main ring starts with C-Natural, and F-Demisharp and G-Demiflat are on two separate rings, then the two separate secondary rings are perhaps best aligned with the primary ring so that F-Demisharp, C-Natural and G-Demiflat form a straight line. --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 13:18, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

	== Sufficient condition ==		== Sufficient condition ==

	The decisive point for the usability of this notation is, that the representations of octave and fifth are relatively prime. I'd like to introduce this without making the article to a mathematical text, maybe there is somebody willing to help. I also wonder if the precision of the fifth representation is relevant at all. This would open the discussion about really interesting cases like [[23edo]]. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		The decisive point for the usability of this notation is, that the representations of octave and fifth are relatively prime. I'd like to introduce this without making the article to a mathematical text, maybe there is somebody willing to help. I also wonder if the precision of the fifth representation is relevant at all. This would open the discussion about really interesting cases like [[23edo]]. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Aura at 13:18, 15 November 2020

2020-11-15T13:18:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:18, 15 November 2020
Line 6:		Line 6:

	: Btw it's never dictated that only double sharp to double flat should be used. Without higher-order sharp/flats, larger edos are very limited. 26edo, for example, requires Gx to Abb to access every note in the key of C major. Now modulate to any key with more than three accidentals and boom. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		: Btw it's never dictated that only double sharp to double flat should be used. Without higher-order sharp/flats, larger edos are very limited. 26edo, for example, requires Gx to Abb to access every note in the key of C major. Now modulate to any key with more than three accidentals and boom. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

			:: For the record, I have made a two-ring circle chart for 24edo before, and I will say that I have a few tricks for positioning the additional rings relative to one another. If your main ring starts with C-Natural, and F-Demisharp and G-Demiflat are both on the same secondary ring, then the secondary ring is positioned so that F-Demisharp and G-Demiflat are the same distance from C-Natural. However, if your main ring starts with C-Natural, and F-Demisharp and G-Demiflat are on two separate rings, then the two separate secondary rings are perhaps best aligned with the primary ring so that F-Demisharp, C-Natural and G-Demiflat form a straight line.

	== Sufficient condition ==		== Sufficient condition ==

	The decisive point for the usability of this notation is, that the representations of octave and fifth are relatively prime. I'd like to introduce this without making the article to a mathematical text, maybe there is somebody willing to help. I also wonder if the precision of the fifth representation is relevant at all. This would open the discussion about really interesting cases like [[23edo]]. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		The decisive point for the usability of this notation is, that the representations of octave and fifth are relatively prime. I'd like to introduce this without making the article to a mathematical text, maybe there is somebody willing to help. I also wonder if the precision of the fifth representation is relevant at all. This would open the discussion about really interesting cases like [[23edo]]. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Xenwolf: /* Sufficient condition */ new section

2020-11-15T12:13:30Z

Sufficient condition: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:13, 15 November 2020
Line 6:		Line 6:

	: Btw it's never dictated that only double sharp to double flat should be used. Without higher-order sharp/flats, larger edos are very limited. 26edo, for example, requires Gx to Abb to access every note in the key of C major. Now modulate to any key with more than three accidentals and boom. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		: Btw it's never dictated that only double sharp to double flat should be used. Without higher-order sharp/flats, larger edos are very limited. 26edo, for example, requires Gx to Abb to access every note in the key of C major. Now modulate to any key with more than three accidentals and boom. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

			== Sufficient condition ==

			The decisive point for the usability of this notation is, that the representations of octave and fifth are relatively prime. I'd like to introduce this without making the article to a mathematical text, maybe there is somebody willing to help. I also wonder if the precision of the fifth representation is relevant at all. This would open the discussion about really interesting cases like [[23edo]]. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

FloraC: /* What about 53edo? */ answer

2020-11-15T06:15:46Z

What about 53edo?: answer

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:15, 15 November 2020
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Do you supposed that this circle of fifths notation makes sense for 53edo at all, or is it really completely impractical? I mean, I have an idea as to how I would do it... --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 00:17, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		Do you supposed that this circle of fifths notation makes sense for 53edo at all, or is it really completely impractical? I mean, I have an idea as to how I would do it... --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 00:17, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

			: It's a subset of ups and downs notation. It's possible to notate any "single-ring" EDOs, in which every note can be accessed by a stack of fifths.

			: Btw it's never dictated that only double sharp to double flat should be used. Without higher-order sharp/flats, larger edos are very limited. 26edo, for example, requires Gx to Abb to access every note in the key of C major. Now modulate to any key with more than three accidentals and boom. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Aura at 00:17, 15 November 2020

2020-11-15T00:17:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:17, 15 November 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== What about 53edo ==		== What about 53edo? ==

	Do you supposed that this circle of fifths notation makes sense for 53edo at all, or is it really completely impractical? I mean, I have an idea as to how I would do it... --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 00:17, 15 November 2020 (UTC)		Do you supposed that this circle of fifths notation makes sense for 53edo at all, or is it really completely impractical? I mean, I have an idea as to how I would do it... --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 00:17, 15 November 2020 (UTC)