Talk:Chain-of-fifths notation: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
→Background of this article: new section |
||
| 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) | |||