User:Ganaram inukshuk: Difference between revisions

Line 8:

== Main mindset ==

~~As mentioned~~, ~~I prefer to look at scales based in a temperament-agnostic sense~~, ~~specifically scales whose notes~~ are ~~a subset of an equally divided octave ([[EDO|edo]]) wherein the number of steps needed to reach~~ each successive note is one of at least two integer values. Doing so relieves me of the expectation that a certain interval must necessarily fall within a few cents of a [[Just intonation|JI]] ratio and lets me be more explorative with musical scales. (It's also less names to memorize; [[superpyth]][7] and [[meantone]][7] both entail the same abstract scale pattern composed of five large steps and two small steps, or [[5L 2s]], but changing the step ratio to anything else may result in something that may be neither superpyth nor meantone.)

I summarize my main mindset using the following trinity: '''temperaments, mosses, and edos are not each other'''.

In other ~~words~~, I ~~see temperaments~~ as ~~starting with tempered JI ratios where edos and~~ mosses are the ~~outcome~~. ~~I prefer~~ to ~~start with edos~~ and mosses ~~and have tempered JI ratios be the outcome instead~~.

Temperaments produce mosses, but two different temperaments may produce the same mos. Edos support more than one family of mos, so it's fruitless to shoehorn the notation meant for one mos for a different mos within the same edo. Two temperaments may produce the same JI ratio, but have different qualities in different mosses.

This level of decoupling makes it so I don't let any one temperament, mos, or edo influence how I look at either, so '''a perfect 5th, 3/2, and 7\12 are not each other'''. In certain contexts, they suggest one another, but they are not fundamentally each other.

That said, I focus more on mosses and, secondarily, edos when it comes to this trinity. I prefer to look at scales based in a temperament-agnostic sense, as mosses that are supported by an edo, or different edos. Doing so relieves me of the expectation that a certain interval must necessarily fall within a few cents of a [[Just intonation|JI]] ratio and lets me be more explorative with musical scales. This is also less names to memorize, since there are a lot of temperament names, and looking at mosses directly means fewer names to remember.

Other running assumptions and techniques may be found under the methodologies page below.

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 == Main mindset ==
-As mentioned, I prefer to look at scales based in a temperament-agnostic sense, specifically scales whose notes are a subset of an equally divided octave ([[EDO|edo]]) wherein the number of steps needed to reach each successive note is one of at least two integer values. Doing so relieves me of the expectation that a certain interval must necessarily fall within a few cents of a [[Just intonation|JI]] ratio and lets me be more explorative with musical scales. (It's also less names to memorize; [[superpyth]][7] and [[meantone]][7] both entail the same abstract scale pattern composed of five large steps and two small steps, or [[5L 2s]], but changing the step ratio to anything else may result in something that may be neither superpyth nor meantone.)
+I summarize my main mindset using the following trinity: '''temperaments, mosses, and edos are not each other'''.
-In other words, I see temperaments as starting with tempered JI ratios where edos and mosses are the outcome. I prefer to start with edos and mosses and have tempered JI ratios be the outcome instead.
+Temperaments produce mosses, but two different temperaments may produce the same mos. Edos support more than one family of mos, so it's fruitless to shoehorn the notation meant for one mos for a different mos within the same edo. Two temperaments may produce the same JI ratio, but have different qualities in different mosses.
+This level of decoupling makes it so I don't let any one temperament, mos, or edo influence how I look at either, so '''a perfect 5th, 3/2, and 7\12 are not each other'''. In certain contexts, they suggest one another, but they are not fundamentally each other.
+That said, I focus more on mosses and, secondarily, edos when it comes to this trinity. I prefer to look at scales based in a temperament-agnostic sense, as mosses that are supported by an edo, or different edos. Doing so relieves me of the expectation that a certain interval must necessarily fall within a few cents of a [[Just intonation|JI]] ratio and lets me be more explorative with musical scales. This is also less names to memorize, since there are a lot of temperament names, and looking at mosses directly means fewer names to remember.
 Other running assumptions and techniques may be found under the methodologies page below.