Talk:Meantone: Difference between revisions
→“Meantone” ≠ “Septimal meantone”: new section |
|||
Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
--[[User:Bcmills|Bcmills]] ([[User talk:Bcmills|talk]]) 05:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC) | --[[User:Bcmills|Bcmills]] ([[User talk:Bcmills|talk]]) 05:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC) | ||
: See ''Temperament naming'' for the basics of how temps are named. In ''most'' tuning between 11\19 and 7\12 of meantone, you get septimal intervals for free, which is why septimal meantone inherits the name. Historically, septimal intervals were known no later than Helmholz and Ellis (1875), tho they didn't use them to analyse meantone. But that's already one and a half centuries. It doesn't do any benefit to stop there when we can apply the knowledge of septimal intervals to reveal what meantone is actually up to. | |||
: The most important corollary of accepting meantone as a 7-limit temp is just that: introducing a number of essentially tempered chords, and to realize most if not all chords in common practice were 9-odd-limit concords, either essentially tempered or essentially just. While many consider 9-odd-limit as concordance and thus will rule out discordance in the analysis of common practice music, septimal intervals and the related essentially tempered chords are still more complex, and contextually later, than say 5-limit triads, so that treating them as discordance is still possible. Since they are basically free to be laid on or taken out, the distinction of classical and septimal meantone seems practically pointless. I can only see the need of it in very technical contexts such as tuning optimization. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 08:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC) |