User talk:Aura/Aura's Diatonic Scales: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
→Why 77/64?: new section |
||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
:::::::: I will say that 128/85 is useful as an alternate fifth in certain contexts, even though resolutions using it are not as complete as those offered by 3/2. Oh, and a good chunk of what determines when I'll get to 29-limit stuff proper is the pace at which I end up working out a few necessary things in lower limits. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 04:54, 17 March 2021 (UTC) | :::::::: I will say that 128/85 is useful as an alternate fifth in certain contexts, even though resolutions using it are not as complete as those offered by 3/2. Oh, and a good chunk of what determines when I'll get to 29-limit stuff proper is the pace at which I end up working out a few necessary things in lower limits. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 04:54, 17 March 2021 (UTC) | ||
== Why 77/64? == | |||
Both the pythagorean 32/27 and 19/16 are simpler. Maybe for a smaller prime limit? It contains no simple ratios to other notes, so I don't understand the meaning for a smaller prime limit. (Sorry that English is not my native language, maybe my words are not proper) | |||