4/3: Difference between revisions
Minor cleanup |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
Much like 3/2, 4/3 is valuable as a framework for constructing [[chord]]s. However, while 3/2 provides the framework for [[5-limit]] triads involving intervals like 5/4 and [[6/5]], 4/3 provides a possible framework for [[7-limit]] triads involving intervals like [[7/6]] and [[8/7]], though such triads are [[Condissonance|ambisonances]] (that is, they're both consonant and dissonant at the same time) at best. | Much like 3/2, 4/3 is valuable as a framework for constructing [[chord]]s. However, while 3/2 provides the framework for [[5-limit]] triads involving intervals like 5/4 and [[6/5]], 4/3 provides a possible framework for [[7-limit]] triads involving intervals like [[7/6]] and [[8/7]], though such triads are [[Condissonance|ambisonances]] (that is, they're both consonant and dissonant at the same time) at best. | ||
Because up to two instances of 4/3 can fit within the span of an octave, it is very easy to create xenharmonic chords using 4/3 as a framework, though because [[16/9]] clashes with the | Because up to two instances of 4/3 can fit within the span of an [[octave]], it is very easy to create xenharmonic chords using 4/3 as a framework, though because [[16/9]] clashes with the octave through crowding{{citation needed}}, these types of chords are dissonances. | ||
Regardless, the usage of 4/3 as a framework for chords is intimately connected with the use of [[tritave]]s in the same capacity- at least in [[Octave #Octave equivalence|octave-equivalent]] systems.{{clarify|please explain why this is in a bit more detail}} | Regardless, the usage of 4/3 as a framework for chords is intimately connected with the use of [[tritave]]s in the same capacity- at least in [[Octave #Octave equivalence|octave-equivalent]] systems.{{clarify|please explain why this is in a bit more detail}} | ||