User:Ganaram inukshuk: Difference between revisions

From Xenharmonic Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older editNewer edit →
VisualWikitext
Ganaram inukshuk (talk | contribs)
autopatrolled, emailconfirmed
4,810 edits
Ganaram inukshuk (talk | contribs)
autopatrolled, emailconfirmed
4,810 edits
No edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:


== Main mindset ==
== Main mindset ==
As mentioned, I prefer to look at scales based in a temperament-agnostic sense, specifically scales whose notes are a subset of an equally divided octave ([[EDO|edo]]) wherein the number of steps needed to reach each successive note is one of at least two integer values. Doing so relieves me of the expectation that a certain interval must necessarily fall within a few cents of a [[Just intonation|JI]] ratio and lets me be more explorative with musical scales. (It's also less names to memorize; [[superpyth]][7] and [[meantone]][7] both entail the same abstract scale pattern composed of five large steps and two small steps, or [[5L 2s]], but changing the step ratio to anything else may result in something that may be neither superpyth nor meantone.)
I summarize my main mindset using the following trinity: '''temperaments, mosses, and edos are not each other'''.


In other words, I see temperaments as starting with tempered JI ratios where edos and mosses are the outcome. I prefer to start with edos and mosses and have tempered JI ratios be the outcome instead.
Temperaments produce mosses, but two different temperaments may produce the same mos. Edos support more than one family of mos, so it's fruitless to shoehorn the notation meant for one mos for a different mos within the same edo. Two temperaments may produce the same JI ratio, but have different qualities in different mosses.
 
This level of decoupling makes it so I don't let any one temperament, mos, or edo influence how I look at either, so '''a perfect 5th, 3/2, and 7\12 are not each other'''. In certain contexts, they suggest one another, but they are not fundamentally each other.
 
That said, I focus more on mosses and, secondarily, edos when it comes to this trinity. I prefer to look at scales based in a temperament-agnostic sense, as mosses that are supported by an edo, or different edos. Doing so relieves me of the expectation that a certain interval must necessarily fall within a few cents of a [[Just intonation|JI]] ratio and lets me be more explorative with musical scales. This is also less names to memorize, since there are a lot of temperament names, and looking at mosses directly means fewer names to remember.


Other running assumptions and techniques may be found under the methodologies page below.
Other running assumptions and techniques may be found under the methodologies page below.

Revision as of 22:50, 31 May 2023

I generally go by "Ganaram" or some variant of that (ganaram_inukshuk, gdinuk). (Discord: Ganaram Inukshuk#1325; I'm generally more active on the Xen Discord.)

I've heard about microtonality on and off over the years, but what drew me into the topic was two things: HEHEHE I AM A SUPAHSTAR SAGA's video series on 19edo and Patricia Taxxon's song Spiral Staircase.

From a compositional perspective, my goal is to incorporate xenharmonic elements into an otherwise normal-sounding song, though my more ambitious goal is to not use the diatonic (LLLsLLs) scale structure at all.

From a theory perspective, my goal is to better understand xenharmony from a temperament-agnostic perspective. This primarily means edos and MOSses, but extends to MV3 scales and higher.

Main mindset

I summarize my main mindset using the following trinity: temperaments, mosses, and edos are not each other.

Temperaments produce mosses, but two different temperaments may produce the same mos. Edos support more than one family of mos, so it's fruitless to shoehorn the notation meant for one mos for a different mos within the same edo. Two temperaments may produce the same JI ratio, but have different qualities in different mosses.

This level of decoupling makes it so I don't let any one temperament, mos, or edo influence how I look at either, so a perfect 5th, 3/2, and 7\12 are not each other. In certain contexts, they suggest one another, but they are not fundamentally each other.

That said, I focus more on mosses and, secondarily, edos when it comes to this trinity. I prefer to look at scales based in a temperament-agnostic sense, as mosses that are supported by an edo, or different edos. Doing so relieves me of the expectation that a certain interval must necessarily fall within a few cents of a JI ratio and lets me be more explorative with musical scales. This is also less names to memorize, since there are a lot of temperament names, and looking at mosses directly means fewer names to remember.

Other running assumptions and techniques may be found under the methodologies page below.

TO-DO list, major contributions, and wish list

Contributions

To-do list

  • Clean up mos recursion page (because I feel bad leaving the algorithms untouched and untested for so long).
    • Replace pseudocode for is-this-scale-a-mos? program with python code; clarify with more examples.
    • Relate mos recursion with the mos family tree.
  • Refine TAMNAMS proposals with guidance of inthar and others:
    • TAMNAMS naming extension for mosses with more than 10 notes.
      • Standardize terminology
      • Names go up to and, in some cases, beyond 3rd mosdescendants
      • Make it clear that prefixes for differentiating different mosdescendants are optional
      • Discuss temperament-agnostic alternatives to mosdescendant prefixes???
  • Constructing a circle of generating intervals for any MOS supported by a specific edo.
  • Constructing key signatures for any MOS.
  • Composing music with these abstract ideas.

Wish list

  • Important edo pages have a subpage or related page that lists all of the possible mosses for every possible generator.
    • I've provided examples for 17edo and 31edo as a table, but it should be possible to turn this into a template.
  • Mos pages, at least the important pages, should be standardized to have the following things at a minimum:
    • The intro of the mos page should be standardized, not unlike the edo intro template.
    • Mos pages have a listing of its modes and names if applicable.
      • Already fulfilled by me, except for mode names.
    • Mos pages have a listing of its interval sizes.
    • Mos pages have a listing of its immediate descendants up to 2 generations away, as well as its ancestors up to 2 generations away.
    • Mos pages have a scale tree that shows a range of possible edos supported by the mos.
      • Already fulfilled by CompactStar.
    • There should be a means of looking up mos names, such as TAMNAMS names.
      • Already fulfilled by Inthar for most TAMNAMS names.
      • For mosses with more than 10 notes, mos descendant names are used. (These names currently aren't standardized, so this currently can't be done.)
      • Certain non-octave mosses should have their own names. (I have such a system, but it hasn't been discussed with others yet.)

Subpages

These pages contain content that currently don't have an exact place elsewhere on the Wiki, or contains personal notes that otherwise don't have an exact place on the Wiki. I do my best to explain these things as though I magically forgot everything I know about xenharmony, so I consider it a bonus if someone else found this easy to understand.

These pages are descriptions on how I approach various things, such as compositional techniques and how I approach a scale I've never used before.

Sandbox page (for testing things)

Retrieved from "https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?title=User:Ganaram_inukshuk&oldid=115334"