Andrew Heathwaite's MOS Investigations: Difference between revisions

BudjarnLambeth (talk | contribs)
m Moved from MOS scales to MOS scale
BudjarnLambeth (talk | contribs)
m Add links
 
Line 1: Line 1:
This is a page for me, Andrew Heathwaite, to organize my thoughts and questions regarding [[MOSScales|Moment of Symmetry Scales]]. I'm using it primarily to provoke and organize conversations with myself. It's a sort of personal sandbox. If it provokes conversations with others, all the better! You *yes you* are more than welcome to correct obvious errors, add clearly-demarked related material, and comment through the comments tab -- ask questions, tell me where you think I'm totally bonkers, connect me to similar ideas that you may know about, give a hurrah or two -- whatever you find suitable.
This is a page for me, [[Andrew Heathwaite]], to organize my thoughts and questions regarding [[MOSScales|Moment of Symmetry Scales]]. I'm using it primarily to provoke and organize conversations with myself. It's a sort of personal sandbox. If it provokes conversations with others, all the better! You *yes you* are more than welcome to correct obvious errors, add clearly-demarked related material, and comment through the comments tab -- ask questions, tell me where you think I'm totally bonkers, connect me to similar ideas that you may know about, give a hurrah or two -- whatever you find suitable.


==Map of Sensi[8]==
==Map of Sensi[8]==
This diagram is an experiment in combining the two ways I tend to visualize MOS scales -- as a chain of generators (x-axis) and as particular steps in pitch-space (y-axis).
This diagram is an experiment in combining the two ways I tend to visualize [[MOS scale]]s -- as a chain of [[generator]]s (x-axis) and as particular steps in pitch-space (y-axis).


[[File:map_of_sensi-8-.png|alt=map_of_sensi[8].png|map_of_sensi[8].png]][[File:map_of_sensi-11-_correction2.png|alt=map_of_sensi[11]_correction2.png|map_of_sensi[11]_correction2.png]]
[[File:map_of_sensi-8-.png|alt=map_of_sensi[8].png|map_of_sensi[8].png]][[File:map_of_sensi-11-_correction2.png|alt=map_of_sensi[11]_correction2.png|map_of_sensi[11]_correction2.png]]
Line 10: Line 10:
I am new to this and may be reinventing wheels. If you have anything to add or correct, please comment!
I am new to this and may be reinventing wheels. If you have anything to add or correct, please comment!


[[MODMOS_Scales|MODMOS Scales]] generalize the class of scales which are not [[MOSScales|MOS]], but which have been obtained by applying a finite number of chromatic alterations to an MOS. In particular, the chromatic alterations are (usually) by "chroma," a small interval obtained by subtracting s from L. (c = L-s.) With strictly proper MOS Scales (which have 2s > L), the chroma is smaller than s (s > L-s). These are the scales I've been looking at recently. I have found that the MODMOS procedure produces interesting and useful scales in sensi[8] and miracle[10], as well as porcupine[7].
[[MODMOS_Scales|MODMOS Scales]] generalize the class of [[scale]]s which are not [[MOSScales|MOS]], but which have been obtained by applying a finite number of chromatic alterations to an MOS. In particular, the chromatic alterations are (usually) by "chroma," a small interval obtained by subtracting s from L. (c = L-s.) With strictly proper MOS Scales (which have 2s > L), the chroma is smaller than s (s > L-s). These are the scales I've been looking at recently. I have found that the MODMOS procedure produces interesting and useful scales in [[sensi]][8] and [[miracle]][10], as well as [[porcupine]][7].


Mike Battaglia, whose enthusiastic promotion of the MODMOS scales of porcupine[7] has informed and inspired me, has proposed two new letters to stand for altered steps of MODMOS scales. "A" (short for "augmented") is a large step which has been widened by one chroma. (A = L+c.) Likewise, "d" (short for "diminished") is a small step which has been narrowed by one chroma. (d = s-c.) Thus, a MODMOS scale can be written like LsdLsss. I noticed that d and c can serve as "atoms" for deriving the other three steps, as follows:
[[Mike Battaglia]], whose enthusiastic promotion of the MODMOS scales of porcupine[7] has informed and inspired me, has proposed two new letters to stand for altered steps of MODMOS scales. "A" (short for "augmented") is a large step which has been widened by one chroma. (A = L+c.) Likewise, "d" (short for "diminished") is a small step which has been narrowed by one chroma. (d = s-c.) Thus, a MODMOS scale can be written like LsdLsss. I noticed that d and c can serve as "atoms" for deriving the other three steps, as follows:


d = d
d = d
Line 201: Line 201:
In playing around with these scales, I found that the sensi[8] MODMOSes sound like albitonic (approximately diatonic-sized) scales -- 8 is not too far off from 7. I also found it pretty easy to distinguish the different types of steps.
In playing around with these scales, I found that the sensi[8] MODMOSes sound like albitonic (approximately diatonic-sized) scales -- 8 is not too far off from 7. I also found it pretty easy to distinguish the different types of steps.


I found it more natural with miracle[10] MODMOSes, to take subsets. I also found it more difficult to distinguish between steps, as they are closer together. Gene Smith's "Muddle" scales make sense to apply here. That means taking a MOS-like subset of a non-equal scale. For example, take the Miracle[10] MODMOS ssdLsssLss. We may group the steps (ss)(d)(Ls)(s)(sL)(s)(s). This mirrors the structure of the MOS scale of [[10edo|10edo]] that goes 2 1 2 1 2 1 1. Since there are 7 different rotations of this MOS pattern, we may apply it in 7 different ways in our MODMOS. Here it is in steps of 72edo:
I found it more natural with miracle[10] MODMOSes, to take subsets. I also found it more difficult to distinguish between steps, as they are closer together. [[Gene Smith]]'s "Muddle" scales make sense to apply here. That means taking a MOS-like subset of a non-equal scale. For example, take the Miracle[10] MODMOS ssdLsssLss. We may group the steps (ss)(d)(Ls)(s)(sL)(s)(s). This mirrors the structure of the MOS scale of [[10edo|10edo]] that goes 2 1 2 1 2 1 1. Since there are 7 different rotations of this MOS pattern, we may apply it in 7 different ways in our MODMOS. Here it is in steps of 72edo:


parent scale: '''7 7 5 9 7 7 7 9 7 7'''
parent scale: '''7 7 5 9 7 7 7 9 7 7'''
Line 594: Line 594:
==Notes on Keenan Pepper's Diatonic-like MOS Scales==
==Notes on Keenan Pepper's Diatonic-like MOS Scales==


In the Xenharmonic Alliance Facebook Group, on Dec. 1, 2011, Keenan Pepper posted a short list of MOS scales, introducing them, '<span style="">The diatonic scale has both an extremely low average harmonic entropy, and also a very nearly maximum 'categorical channel capacity' (something I'm currently working on defining properly in terms of information theory - it basically means 'ability to tell different intervals and modes apart').</span>"
In the [[Xenharmonic Alliance]] Facebook Group, on Dec. 1, 2011, [[Keenan Pepper]] posted a short list of MOS scales, introducing them, '<span style="">The diatonic scale has both an extremely low average [[harmonic entropy]], and also a very nearly maximum 'categorical channel capacity' (something I'm currently working on defining properly in terms of information theory - it basically means 'ability to tell different intervals and modes apart').</span>"


This sounds interesting. I'm using this space to take some notes on the scales he lists:
This sounds interesting. I'm using this space to take some notes on the scales he lists:
Line 608: Line 608:
! | s:c
! | s:c
|-
|-
| | Porcupine[7] in 15edo
| | [[Porcupine]][7] in [[15edo]]
| | 160
| | 160
| | 240
| | 240
Line 616: Line 616:
| | 2:1 = 2
| | 2:1 = 2
|-
|-
| | Porcupine[7] in 37edo
| | [[Porcupine]][7] in [[37edo]]
| | 162.16
| | 162.16
| | 227.03
| | 227.03
Line 624: Line 624:
| | 5:2 = 2.5
| | 5:2 = 2.5
|-
|-
| | Porcupine[8] in 22edo
| | [[Porcupine]][8] in [[22edo]]
| | 163.64
| | 163.64
| | 212.18
| | 212.18
Line 632: Line 632:
| | 3:1 = 3
| | 3:1 = 3
|-
|-
| | Neutral 3rds [7] in 17edo
| | [[Neutral third scales|Neutral 3rds]][7] in [[17edo]]
| | 352.94
| | 352.94
| | 211.77
| | 211.77
Line 640: Line 640:
| | 2:1 = 2
| | 2:1 = 2
|-
|-
| | Neutral 3rds [7] in 27edo
| | [[Neutral third scales|Neutral 3rds]][7] in [[27edo]]
| | 355.56
| | 355.56
| | 222.22
| | 222.22
Line 648: Line 648:
| | 3:2 = 1.5
| | 3:2 = 1.5
|-
|-
| | Sensi[8] in 19edo
| | [[Sensi]][8] in [[19edo]]
| | 442.11
| | 442.11
| | 189.47
| | 189.47
Line 656: Line 656:
| | 2:1 = 2
| | 2:1 = 2
|-
|-
| | Sensi[8] in 46edo
| | [[Sensi]][8] in [[46edo]]
| | 443.48
| | 443.48
| | 182.61
| | 182.61
Line 664: Line 664:
| | 5:2 = 2.5
| | 5:2 = 2.5
|-
|-
| | Sensi[8] in 27edo
| | [[Sensi]][8] in [[27edo]]
| | 444.44
| | 444.44
| | 177.78
| | 177.78
Line 672: Line 672:
| | 3:1 = 3
| | 3:1 = 3
|-
|-
| | Negri[9] in 19edo
| | [[Negri]][9] in [[19edo]]
| | 126.32
| | 126.32
| | 189.47
| | 189.47
Line 680: Line 680:
| | 2:1 = 2
| | 2:1 = 2
|-
|-
| | Orwell[9] in 84edo
| | [[Orwell]][9] in [[84edo]]
| | 271.43
| | 271.43
| | 157.14
| | 157.14
Line 688: Line 688:
| | 8:3 = 2.67
| | 8:3 = 2.67
|-
|-
| | Orwell[9] in 53edo
| | [[Orwell]][9] in [[53edo]]
| | 271.70
| | 271.70
| | 158.49
| | 158.49
Line 696: Line 696:
| | 5:2 = 2.5
| | 5:2 = 2.5
|-
|-
| | Orwell[9] in 22edo
| | [[Orwell]][9] in [[22edo]]
| | 272.73
| | 272.73
| | 163.64
| | 163.64
Line 704: Line 704:
| | 2:1 = 2
| | 2:1 = 2
|-
|-
| | Orwell[9] in 35edo
| | [[Orwell]][9] in [[35edo]]
| | 274.29
| | 274.29
| | 171.43
| | 171.43
Line 712: Line 712:
| | 3:2 = 1.5
| | 3:2 = 1.5
|-
|-
| | Pajara[10] in 22edo
| | [[Pajara]][10] in [[22edo]]
| | 109.09
| | 109.09
| | 163.64
| | 163.64
Line 720: Line 720:
| | 2:1 = 2
| | 2:1 = 2
|-
|-
| | Blackwood[10] in 15edo
| | [[Blackwood]][10] in [[15edo]]
| | 80
| | 80
| | 160
| | 160
Line 731: Line 731:
=Porcupine Temperament=
=Porcupine Temperament=


I'm going to zoom in on [[Porcupine|Porcupine Temperament]], which has been mentioned on the Facebook Xenharmonic Alliance page recently as a xenharmonic alternative to Meantone. Here's a little list of some of the things that were mentioned, so they can be collected in one place and not lost forever in the impenetrable Facebook Caverns:
I'm going to zoom in on [[Porcupine|Porcupine Temperament]], which has been mentioned on the Facebook Xenharmonic Alliance page recently as a xenharmonic alternative to [[Meantone]]. Here's a little list of some of the things that were mentioned, so they can be collected in one place and not lost forever in the impenetrable Facebook Caverns:


<ul><li>Keenan Pepper writes about how Porcupine tempers 27/20, 15/11 and 25/18 all to the 11/8 approximation, which, he claims, is a stronger consonance than any of the intervals mentioned.</li><li>Mike Battaglia writes about how 81/80 is "tempered in" to 25/24, making it melodically useful instead of an "irritating mystery interval" which "introduces pitch drift".</li><li>MB writes about Porcupine's [[MODMOS_Scales|MODMOS]] scales (which I will deal with more below), summarizing, "<span style="">In short, when you're playing in porcupine, you should never feel like you're limited to just the 7 or 8-note MOS. Just freeform modify notes by L-s as much as you want, deliberately, in a willful attempt to explore porcupine chromaticism. It's even easier than meantone chromaticism.</span>"</li><li>MB: "I<span style="">n porcupine, bIII/bIII/bIII = IV/IV. This is the same thing as saying that 6/5 * 6/5 * 6/5 = 4/3 * 4/3</span>."</li><li>Someone argues that Porcupine doesn't do that great in the 5-limit after all, saying, "<span style="">Its only real selling-point over optimal meantone is simpler 7-limit and 11-limit approximations, but that assumes that these are a good in their own right and thus worth sacrificing some 5-limit efficiency; for anyone other than a dyed-in-the-wool xenharmonist, that's a questionable assumption to make.</span>" (As for me, I want those 7- and 11-limit approximations, and I could care less about a 5-limit temperament to rival meantone. I don't compose in 5-limit temperaments, period.)</li><li>In response to the above, Keenan Pepper says, "<span style="">You mentioned that almost every interval in the diatonic scale is a 9-limit consonance? Well, every interval in porcupine[7] is an 11-limit consonance! 1/1 10/9 9/8 6/5 5/4 4/3 11/8 16/11 3/2 8/5 5/3 16/9 9/5 2/1. Bam!</span>" (This is relevant to my work, which assumes composers want 11-limit approximations.)</li><li>I (Andrew Heathwaite) added, "<span style="">...maybe another description for what Porcupine is good for is a *gateway* from 5 and 7 to 11, for those comfortable with the former and curious about the latter. As a full 11-limit temperament, it is efficient and easy.</span>"</li></ul>
<ul><li>Keenan Pepper writes about how Porcupine tempers 27/20, 15/11 and 25/18 all to the 11/8 approximation, which, he claims, is a stronger [[consonance]] than any of the intervals mentioned.</li><li>Mike Battaglia writes about how 81/80 is "tempered in" to 25/24, making it melodically useful instead of an "irritating mystery interval" which "introduces pitch drift".</li><li>MB writes about Porcupine's [[MODMOS_Scales|MODMOS]] scales (which I will deal with more below), summarizing, "<span style="">In short, when you're playing in porcupine, you should never feel like you're limited to just the 7 or 8-note MOS. Just freeform modify notes by L-s as much as you want, deliberately, in a willful attempt to explore porcupine chromaticism. It's even easier than meantone chromaticism.</span>"</li><li>MB: "I<span style="">n porcupine, bIII/bIII/bIII = IV/IV. This is the same thing as saying that 6/5 * 6/5 * 6/5 = 4/3 * 4/3</span>."</li><li>Someone argues that Porcupine doesn't do that great in the 5-limit after all, saying, "<span style="">Its only real selling-point over optimal meantone is simpler 7-limit and 11-limit approximations, but that assumes that these are a good in their own right and thus worth sacrificing some 5-limit efficiency; for anyone other than a dyed-in-the-wool xenharmonist, that's a questionable assumption to make.</span>" (As for me, I want those 7- and 11-limit approximations, and I could care less about a 5-limit temperament to rival meantone. I don't compose in 5-limit temperaments, period.)</li><li>In response to the above, Keenan Pepper says, "<span style="">You mentioned that almost every interval in the diatonic scale is a 9-limit consonance? Well, every interval in porcupine[7] is an 11-limit consonance! 1/1 10/9 9/8 6/5 5/4 4/3 11/8 16/11 3/2 8/5 5/3 16/9 9/5 2/1. Bam!</span>" (This is relevant to my work, which assumes composers want 11-limit approximations.)</li><li>I (Andrew Heathwaite) added, "<span style="">...maybe another description for what Porcupine is good for is a *gateway* from 5 and 7 to 11, for those comfortable with the former and curious about the latter. As a full 11-limit temperament, it is efficient and easy.</span>"</li></ul>


=Porcupine Chromaticism=
=Porcupine Chromaticism=
Line 763: Line 763:
==Modes of Porcupine[7] that have one chromatic alteration==
==Modes of Porcupine[7] that have one chromatic alteration==


The following list includes all the modes (hopefully) that can be generated by shifting one tone of Porcupine[7] by one quartertone interval (chroma), which is one degree in 22edo. This produces scales with three step sizes -- in addition to a neutral tone (3\22) and large whole tone (4\22) there is now a semitone as well (2\22). In addition, two scales (and their rotations of course) have a 5-step subminor third. Underscores represent gaps in the chain of Porcupine generators. Note that lowering a tone by one quartertone interval (chroma) means sending it forward 7 spaces in the chain of generators, while raising a tone by one chroma means sending it backward 7 spaces in the chain of generators. This is how we wind up with such large gaps in the chain. Again, modes with perfect fifths from the bass are bolded.
The following list includes all the modes (hopefully) that can be generated by shifting one tone of Porcupine[7] by one [[quartertone]] interval (chroma), which is one degree in 22edo. This produces scales with three step sizes -- in addition to a neutral tone (3\22) and large whole tone (4\22) there is now a semitone as well (2\22). In addition, two scales (and their rotations of course) have a 5-step subminor third. Underscores represent gaps in the chain of Porcupine generators. Note that lowering a tone by one quartertone interval (chroma) means sending it forward 7 spaces in the chain of generators, while raising a tone by one chroma means sending it backward 7 spaces in the chain of generators. This is how we wind up with such large gaps in the chain. Again, modes with perfect fifths from the bass are bolded.


2 4 3 3 3 3 4 .. 0 _ 2 3 4 5 6 _ 8
2 4 3 3 3 3 4 .. 0 _ 2 3 4 5 6 _ 8
Line 923: Line 923:
=Orwell[9], meet Porcupine[7]=
=Orwell[9], meet Porcupine[7]=


I've done a little composing in Orwell[9], which, in 22edo, goes 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 (where L=3\22 and s=2\22), so I want to apply MODMOS to that. To make a MODMOS here, we alter a tone by a single degree of 22edo, same as we do in Porcupine[7]. This is our "chroma," and it's generated by taking L-s: so in 22edo we have 3\22-2\22=1\22. We wind up with either:
I've done a little composing in [[Orwell]][9], which, in 22edo, goes 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 (where L=3\22 and s=2\22), so I want to apply MODMOS to that. To make a MODMOS here, we alter a tone by a single degree of 22edo, same as we do in Porcupine[7]. This is our "chroma," and it's generated by taking L-s: so in 22edo we have 3\22-2\22=1\22. We wind up with either:


<ol><li>A permutation of the four large and five small steps, eg. 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2<ol><li>How many of these are there? Does anyone know a formula for finding the number of possible permutations when some of the items are interchangable? Here the question is, how many permutations can we make of 4 items of Type A and 5 items of Type B?</li></ol></li><li>A scale with three step sizes: large, small, and smaller, eg. 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 1<ol><li>In 22edo, our "smaller" step is the same as our "chroma" (which is the interval that we alter a tone by to produce a MODMOS, L-s). However, this is not the case in larger edos! Look at [[31edo|31edo]], where our initial scale is 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3. Now our chroma is 4\31-3\31=1\31 and our "smaller" step is 2\31: 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 2! We get our "smaller" step by starting with s (3\31) and taking away a chroma (1\31), so we have 3\31-1\31=2\31.</li><li>So what should we call the "smaller" interval in our scale? Maybe some kind of diminished something-or-another?</li></ol></li><li>A scale with four steps sizes: large, small, larger and smaller, eg. 4 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 2<ol><li>This is generated by starting with L and adding a chroma, so in 22edo it's 3\22+1\22=4\22. In 31edo, that would be 4\31+1\31=5\31, and the scale in question would be 5 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 3.</li><li>So what should we call the "larger" step? Some kind of augmented something-or-another?</li><li>Note that in 22edo, our "larger" step, 4\22, is the same as two of our small steps (2\22+2\22=4\22), even though we generated our "larger" step by adding a chroma to a large step (3\22+1\22). In 31edo, our "larger" step is NOT the same as two of our small steps (4\31+1\31=5\31 does not equal 3\31+3\31=6\31)!</li></ol></li></ol>
<ol><li>A permutation of the four large and five small steps, eg. 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2<ol><li>How many of these are there? Does anyone know a formula for finding the number of possible permutations when some of the items are interchangable? Here the question is, how many permutations can we make of 4 items of Type A and 5 items of Type B?</li></ol></li><li>A scale with three step sizes: large, small, and smaller, eg. 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 1<ol><li>In 22edo, our "smaller" step is the same as our "chroma" (which is the interval that we alter a tone by to produce a MODMOS, L-s). However, this is not the case in larger edos! Look at [[31edo|31edo]], where our initial scale is 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3. Now our chroma is 4\31-3\31=1\31 and our "smaller" step is 2\31: 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 2! We get our "smaller" step by starting with s (3\31) and taking away a chroma (1\31), so we have 3\31-1\31=2\31.</li><li>So what should we call the "smaller" interval in our scale? Maybe some kind of diminished something-or-another?</li></ol></li><li>A scale with four steps sizes: large, small, larger and smaller, eg. 4 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 2<ol><li>This is generated by starting with L and adding a chroma, so in 22edo it's 3\22+1\22=4\22. In 31edo, that would be 4\31+1\31=5\31, and the scale in question would be 5 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 3.</li><li>So what should we call the "larger" step? Some kind of augmented something-or-another?</li><li>Note that in 22edo, our "larger" step, 4\22, is the same as two of our small steps (2\22+2\22=4\22), even though we generated our "larger" step by adding a chroma to a large step (3\22+1\22). In 31edo, our "larger" step is NOT the same as two of our small steps (4\31+1\31=5\31 does not equal 3\31+3\31=6\31)!</li></ol></li></ol>