Talk:4:5:6: Difference between revisions

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 ::: —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 12:37, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
+:::: I dissagree that "rootedness" can be a source of stability, because that stability is abstract and does not truly exist, barring my perceived notion that it "feels wrong" to call these chords the same. 4:5:6 being the octave reduced voicing of 1:3:5 is just a mathematical fact, as the two chords are sonically distinct.
+:::: What I agree on is calling a certain octave-reduced rotation of the chord the "root", which represents the "figurehead" of the unique octave-agnostic (or equave-agnostic) combination of integers that make up a chord. Purely arbitrary, just a denomination; due to tradition, due to whatever reason. That way, we have a way of identifying the constituyents of a chord and their voicings across equaves: here, its odd parts. This sense of octave-agnosticism is useful for organizing chords that sound similar, but are not the same.
+:::: The '3 '5 nomenclature is similar to that to what xenpaper does, which is adding octaves. So '3 here means "the voicing where the odd 3 is one octave higher than usual". So for example, 1:3:5 would be a voicing of 4:5:6 ('3''5).
+:::: --[[User:Eufalesio|Eufalesio]] ([[User talk:Eufalesio|talk]]) 15:08, 12 November 2025 (UTC)