User:Overthink/EDO impressions: Difference between revisions

Overthink (talk | contribs)
Overthink (talk | contribs)
Line 11: Line 11:
19: Due to the flat tendency of the system, melody seems to have a feeling that is hard to describe, that you can't replicate with 12edo. So far my biggest issue is that the minor seconds are too wide.
19: Due to the flat tendency of the system, melody seems to have a feeling that is hard to describe, that you can't replicate with 12edo. So far my biggest issue is that the minor seconds are too wide.


22: The diatonic scale sounds even brighter than in 17, with thirds and sixths having a more obvious septimal flavor. I actually do not feel like the diatonic semitone is too small, though I have made very little pieces to test it in various aspects, so I may change my mind.  
22: The diatonic scale sounds even brighter than in 17, with thirds and sixths having a more obvious septimal flavor. The diatonic semitone is a little smaller than ideal, but still usable.


31: TBA
31: TBA


41: Chords are quite consonant, and this system seems to do well in approximating up to the 11-limit. It is a bit complex, however.
41: While this EDO has be cited as good for approximating JI, it has quite a few problems. For example, 5/4 is too flat, and 7/4 is too flat. In general pental and septimal intervals are too far from their nearest pythagorean intervals, as the comma step is over 29 cents.


53: TBA
53: Excellent 5- and 7-limit harmonies. 5/4 is now only slightly flat, and the 7/4 is a bit sharp. Chords are significantly more consonant than in 41. Definitely would recommend.


72: TBA
72: TBA