User:BudjarnLambeth/12edo as a 2.3.5.17.19 tuning: Difference between revisions
m Add section on notation of dual-3 edos |
|||
| Line 210: | Line 210: | ||
== Notation of dual-3 EDOs == | == Notation of dual-3 EDOs == | ||
Most EDO notation systems, including the near-universal [[ups and downs notation]], are built upon [[chain of fifths notation]]. How then should an EDO be notated if it has two mappings of 3: 3+ and 3-? | Most EDO notation systems, including the near-universal [[ups and downs notation]], are built upon [[chain-of-fifths notation]]. How then should an EDO be notated if it has two mappings of 3: 3+ and 3-? | ||
The most straightforward solution is to just choose whichever 3 is closer to just 3/1, and pretend that’s the "real 3" for notation purposes. Treat the other 3 as just another prime, like 5 or 7. In most cases, I advise to do that. | The most straightforward solution is to just choose whichever 3 is closer to just 3/1, and pretend that’s the "real 3" for notation purposes. Treat the other 3 as just another prime, like 5 or 7. In most cases, I advise to do that. | ||
If you happen to be mainly using an EDO as a tuning for one specific non-dual [[regular temperament]] like meantone, mavila, etc., then pretend that temperament’s mapping of 3 is the ‘real’ one for the purpose of notation, and pretend the other 3 is just like any other larger prime. | If you happen to be mainly using an EDO as a tuning for just one specific non-dual [[regular temperament]] like meantone, mavila, etc., then pretend that temperament’s mapping of 3 is the ‘real’ one for the purpose of notation, and pretend the other 3 is just like any other larger prime. | ||
Of course, this results in multiple notation systems for the same EDO, but that’s already the case. All of those already exist, I’m not adding any new | Of course, this results in multiple notation systems for the same EDO, since different people use different temperaments or none at all, but that’s already the case. All of those notation systems already exist, I’m not adding any new ones, I’m just saying that the ones we already have all have a valid place and it’s okay to use one some day and another some other day on a project-by-project basis. | ||
As long as you name and briefly explain your notation system at the start of your score, use whatever system you want. Use whichever one works for you and the musicians collaborating with you. Invent one | As long as you name and briefly explain your notation system at the start of your score, use whatever system you want. Use whichever one works in practice for you and the musicians collaborating with you. Invent one, if the existing ones don’t work. It’s fine. Not everything has to be standardized and homogenized. | ||
Because I’m a fan of mixing and matching multiple temperaments, and other things that aren’t temperaments like approximated JI scales, MOS scales, MODMOS & inflected MOS scales and even randomly generated scales, I usually like to go with the first option: ups and downs notation using whichever 3 is closest to just | Because I’m personally a fan of mixing and matching multiple temperaments, and other things that aren’t temperaments like approximated JI scales, MOS scales, MODMOS & inflected MOS scales and even randomly generated scales, I usually like to go with the first option: ups and downs notation, in particular using whichever 3 is closest to just for its chain of fifths, and the other 3 being treated as just another available prime like 5, 7 or 11. | ||
== Interpreting 12edo as a 2.3.5.17.19 system== | == Interpreting 12edo as a 2.3.5.17.19 system== | ||