Pythagorean tuning: Difference between revisions
ArrowHead294 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Added some things and made articles for the missing MOS scales |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
Pythagorean tuning can be considered a [[trivial temperament|trivial]] rank-2 temperament in the 2.3 subgroup, where it tempers out no commas (providing no additional mappings for intervals other than the pure just structure). As such, all rank-2 temperaments generated by 3/2 and 2/1 in the 5-limit or higher (e.g. meantone) can be seen as extensions of Pythagorean temperament. | Pythagorean tuning can be considered a [[trivial temperament|trivial]] rank-2 temperament in the 2.3 subgroup, where it tempers out no commas (providing no additional mappings for intervals other than the pure just structure). As such, all rank-2 temperaments generated by 3/2 and 2/1 in the 5-limit or higher (e.g. meantone) can be seen as extensions of Pythagorean temperament. | ||
A series of just fifths can also be considered a reasonable tuning of the [[schismatic]] temperament, where the [[Pythagorean diminished fourth|diminished fourth]] (e.g. {{dash|C, F♭}}) approximates [[5/4]], since the [[schisma]] is so small. | |||
Mark Lindley<ref>Mark Lindley, ''Pythagorean Intonation and the Rise of the Triad'', Royal Musical Association Research Chronicle, 1980</ref> argues such a system was used in Europe during the 15th century, with keyboards tuned to nearly pure fifths as | Mark Lindley<ref>Mark Lindley, ''Pythagorean Intonation and the Rise of the Triad'', Royal Musical Association Research Chronicle, 1980</ref> argues such a system was used in Europe during the 15th century, with keyboards tuned to nearly pure fifths as | ||
: {{dash|G♭, D♭, A♭, E♭, B♭, F, C, G, D, A, E, B}}. | : {{dash|G♭, D♭, A♭, E♭, B♭, F, C, G, D, A, E, B}}. | ||
When respelled enharmonically, triads such as {{dash|D, F♯, A}} are close to 4:5:6 in this tuning. | When respelled enharmonically, triads such as {{dash|D, F♯, A}} are very close to [[4:5:6]] in this tuning. | ||
It can also be used to generate a more xenharmonic [[2.3.5.13 subgroup]] [[Marveltwin]] temperament, as the triple-augmented fourth {{dash|C, F♯♯♯}} is incredibly close to [[13/8]], differing by the [[Tridecapyth comma]] which is even smaller than the schisma. | |||
== Scales == | == Scales == | ||
Pythagorean tuning generates the following [[MOS]] scales: | Pythagorean tuning generates the following [[MOS]] scales: | ||
* [[Pythagorean5]] – proper [[2L 3s]]. Also known as pythagorean pentic scale | * [[Pythagorean5]] – proper [[2L 3s]]. Also known as the '''pythagorean pentic scale.''' | ||
* [[Pythagorean7]] – improper [[5L 2s]]. Also known as pythagorean diatonic scale | * [[Pythagorean7]] – improper [[5L 2s]]. Also known as the '''pythagorean diatonic scale.''' | ||
* [[Pythagorean12]] – proper [[5L 7s]]. Also known as pythagorean chromatic scale | * [[Pythagorean12]] – proper [[5L 7s]]. Also known as the '''pythagorean chromatic scale.''' | ||
* [[Pythagorean17]] – improper [[12L 5s]]. Also known as pythagorean enharmonic scale | * [[Pythagorean17]] – improper [[12L 5s]]. Also known as the '''pythagorean enharmonic scale.''' | ||
* [[Pythagorean29]] – improper [[12L 17s]] | * [[Pythagorean29]] – improper [[12L 17s]]. | ||
* [[Pythagorean41]] – proper [[12L 29s]] | * [[Pythagorean41]] – proper [[12L 29s]]. | ||
* [[Pythagorean53]] – proper [[41L 12s]] | * [[Pythagorean53]] – proper [[41L 12s]]. | ||
The [[hardness]]es of the Pythagorean scales are about 1.442 for pentic, 2.260 for diatonic, 1.260 for chromatic, | The [[hardness]]es of the Pythagorean scales are about 1.442 for pentic, 2.260 for diatonic, 1.260 for chromatic, 3.846 for enharmonic, and 2.8459, 1.8459, 1.1822 for the other three. | ||
== Approaches == | == Approaches == | ||
There are many possible approaches to Pythagorean tuning, and each approach is associated with a different Pythagorean equave. The two most widely-used are [[octave]]-based and [[tritave]]-based Pythagorean. | There are many possible approaches to Pythagorean tuning, and each approach is associated with a different Pythagorean equave. The two most widely-used are [[octave]]-based and [[tritave]]-based Pythagorean. | ||
[[Octave]]-based Pythagorean tuning is essentially how it is used in the common-practice music of the West. This gives MOS sizes of 2, 3, 5 ([[2L 3s]] pentic), 7 ([[5L 2s]] diatonic), 12 ([[5L 7s]] chromatic), 17 ([[12L 5s]] enharmonic), 29, 41, and 53. | [[Octave]]-based Pythagorean tuning is essentially how it is used in the common-practice music of the West. This gives MOS sizes of 2, 3, 5 ([[2L 3s]] pentic), 7 ([[5L 2s]] diatonic), 12 ([[5L 7s]] chromatic), 17 ([[12L 5s]] enharmonic), 29, 41, and 53. | ||
[[Tritave]]-based Pythagorean tuning is an approach described in [https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.00375 this paper] by M. Schmidmeier. This gives MOS sizes of 2, 3, 5, 8 (3L 5s), 11 (8L 3s), 19 (8L 11s), 27 (19L 8s), 46, and 65. The 11-note scale can be regarded as the diatonic-like scale of tritave-equivalent Pythagorean, and the 19-note scale can be regarded as its respective chromatic-like scale. | [[Tritave]]-based Pythagorean tuning is an approach described in [https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.00375 this paper] by M. Schmidmeier. This gives MOS sizes of 2, 3, 5, 8 (3L 5s), 11 (8L 3s), 19 (8L 11s), 27 (19L 8s), 46, and 65. The 11-note scale can be regarded as the diatonic-like scale of tritave-equivalent Pythagorean, and the 19-note scale can be regarded as its respective chromatic-like scale. | ||