Ed5/3: Difference between revisions

Contribution (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Fredg999 category edits (talk | contribs)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:


== Properties ==
== Properties ==
Division of 5/3 into equal parts does not necessarily imply directly using this interval as an [[equivalence]]. The question of equivalence has not even been posed yet. The utility of 5/3, 11/7 or another sixth as a base though, is apparent by being named directly in the standard definition of such as the octave based [[sensi]] temperament or factoring into chord inversions. 5/3 is also the most consonant interval in the range between 3/2 and 2/1, which makes the equivalence easier to hear than for more complex ratios. Many, though not all, of these scales have a false octave, with various degrees of accuracy, but which context(s), if any, it is very perceptually important in is as yet an open question.
Division of 5/3 into equal parts does not necessarily imply directly using this interval as an [[equivalence]]. Many, though not all, ed5/3 scales have a perceptually important [[Pseudo-octave|false octave]], with various degrees of accuracy.


Incidentally, one way to treat 5/3 as an equivalence is the use of the 6:7:8:(10) chord as the fundamental complete sonority in a very similar way to the 4:5:6:(8) chord in meantone. Whereas in meantone it takes four 3/2 to get to 5/1, here it takes four 4/3 to get to 8/7 (tempering out the comma 225/224). So, doing this yields 7-, 9-, and 16-note [[mos]] either way, the 16-note mos being 7L 9s. While the notes are rather closer together, the scheme is uncannily similar to meantone. "Microdiatonic" might be a good term for it (even better than for [[edf]]s as the generator it uses is an excellent fit for heptatonic mos) if it has not been named yet.
5/3 is the most consonant interval in between 1/1 and 2/1, so this suggests it could be useful either as an equivalence, or as just an important structural feature.
 
[[Joseph Ruhf]] suggested the use of the 6:7:8:(10) chord as the fundamental complete sonority in a very similar way to the 4:5:6:(8) chord in meantone as a way to evoke 5/3-equivalence. Though it could also be used just as a useful sonority, even without equivalence. Whereas in meantone it takes four 3/2 to get to 5/1, here it takes four 4/3 to get to 8/7 (tempering out the comma 225/224). So, doing this yields 7-, 9-, and 16-note [[mos]] either way, the 16-note mos being 7L 9s. While the notes are rather closer together, the scheme is uncannily similar to meantone. "Microdiatonic" might be a good term for it (even better than for [[edf]]s as the generator it uses is an excellent fit for heptatonic mos) though it is, technically speaking, micro-[[7L 2s|armotonic]].


If we instead opt to continue using 4:5:6 as the fundamental sonority, then it will take three 3/2 to get to 5/4, resulting in [[Blackcomb]] temperament that tempers out the comma 250/243. This yields mos scales of 4, 5, 6, 11, 16, and 21 notes. Although, it should be noted that doing this will often create a pseudo-octave unlike the 6:7:8 approach.
If we instead opt to continue using 4:5:6 as the fundamental sonority, then it will take three 3/2 to get to 5/4, resulting in [[Blackcomb]] temperament that tempers out the comma 250/243. This yields mos scales of 4, 5, 6, 11, 16, and 21 notes. Although, it should be noted that doing this will often create a pseudo-octave unlike the 6:7:8 approach.
Line 71: Line 73:
|}
|}


[[Category:Ed5/3| ]] <!-- main article -->
[[Category:Ed5/3's| ]]
<!-- main article -->
[[Category:Edonoi]]
[[Category:Edonoi]]
[[Category:Lists of scales]]
[[Category:Lists of scales]]
{{todo|inline=1|cleanup|explain edonoi|text=Most people do not think 5/3 sounds like an equivalence, so there must be some other reason why people are dividing it — some property ''other than'' equivalence that makes people want to divide it. Please add to this page an explanation of what that reason is... The page also needs a general overall cleanup.}}