Lumatone mapping for neutral thirds scales: Difference between revisions
anti-double-bosanquet worse ergonomics for M2s |
ArrowHead294 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
=="Double-Bosanquet"== | =="Double-Bosanquet"== | ||
This is called '''"Double-Bosanquet"''' since the diatonic scale is the same as in the [[Standard Lumatone mapping for Pythagorean| | This is called '''"Double-Bosanquet"''' since the diatonic scale is the same as in the [[Standard Lumatone mapping for Pythagorean|Bosanquet–Wilson layout]], except with rows of non-diatonic pitches inserted every other row. In other words it has exactly 2x as many pitches as Bosanquet, and if you removed all the half-sharps, half-flats etc. and slid the remaining rows together, it would become Bosanquet. | ||
{{Lumatone mapping| | {{Lumatone mapping| | ||
| Line 610: | Line 610: | ||
Pros: | Pros: | ||
* Over 5 complete octaves. | * Over 5 complete octaves. | ||
* Neutral seconds have good ergonomics, because they have the same shape that major seconds do in | * Neutral seconds have good ergonomics, because they have the same shape that major seconds do in Bosanquet–Wilson. | ||
Cons: | Cons: | ||