Talk:MOS naming: Difference between revisions

Line 10:

: In any case, I would recommend specifying that these intervals names be ''co-official with the harmonic maj/min/aug/dim/#/b''. They can be regular or inverted depending on MOS pattern, since the two systems have separate objectives.

: As a side note on diamond MOS, have you thought about using ''+ and -'' (as in A+ B-) instead of ''& and @''? I find the current system very indistinct for inline text and difficult to follow. [[User:Ayceman|Ayceman]] ([[User talk:Ayceman|talk]]) 17:11, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

:: I do find "enlarged" and "reduced" appealing. Maybe "generating" can be used instead of "perfect".

:: I do find "enlarged" and "reduced" appealing. Maybe "generating" can be used instead of "perfect". This would eliminate any need for a ''mos-'' prefix.

:: The & and @ are supposed to be accidentals that are readable on a staff (when stylized) and distinct enough. [[User:Inthar|Inthar]] ([[User talk:Inthar|talk]]) 17:31, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 : In any case, I would recommend specifying that these intervals names be ''co-official with the harmonic maj/min/aug/dim/#/b''. They can be regular or inverted depending on MOS pattern, since the two systems have separate objectives.
 : As a side note on diamond MOS, have you thought about using ''+ and -'' (as in A+ B-) instead of ''& and @''? I find the current system very indistinct for inline text and difficult to follow. [[User:Ayceman|Ayceman]] ([[User talk:Ayceman|talk]]) 17:11, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
-:: I do find "enlarged" and "reduced" appealing. Maybe "generating" can be used instead of "perfect".
+:: I do find "enlarged" and "reduced" appealing. Maybe "generating" can be used instead of "perfect". This would eliminate any need for a ''mos-'' prefix.
 :: The & and @ are supposed to be accidentals that are readable on a staff (when stylized) and distinct enough. [[User:Inthar|Inthar]] ([[User talk:Inthar|talk]]) 17:31, 13 April 2021 (UTC)