User talk:Xenwolf: Difference between revisions

Line 276:

::: I picked out your ''more feedback on our current 159edo system'' because I find that it would be helpful to wait for responses from people who did not participate in the development, like Kite. I'm still not experienced with high-order EDOs. I think all these additional characters reduce the legibility of the notation in a considerable way. When I compare this with the conventional system, say for baroque music, where I casually pick up the accidentals and do not really have to decipher them, also because there is usually only one variant that makes musical sense, I get almost dizzy in our "battle of symbols". In the classic notation, accidentals are not just modifiers for single notes, but signs that indicate the change of the tonal base. I'm still searching for a parallel in alternative tonal systems. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 22:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

:::: You are right in saying that in the classic notation, accidentals are not just modifiers for single notes, but signs that indicate the change of the tonal base. The classical and quartertone accidentals as found in this system actually have the same function, believe it or not. I mean, if Jacob Collier can seamlessly modulate from E-Natrual Major to G-Demisharp Major, I want to know the specifics of the notes he uses, and changing keys seamlessly like that involves using different tunings for notes, I want to see the tuning changes in action. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 22:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

:::: You are right in saying that in the classic notation, accidentals are not just modifiers for single notes, but signs that indicate the change of the tonal base. The classical and quartertone accidentals as found in this system actually have the same function, believe it or not. I mean, if Jacob Collier can seamlessly modulate from E-Natrual Major to G-Demisharp Major, I want to know the specifics of the notes he uses, and if changing keys seamlessly like that involves using different tunings for notes, I want to see the tuning changes in action. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 22:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:50, 6 October 2020 view source Aura (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, emailconfirmed 5,920 edits No edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 22:51, 6 October 2020 view source Aura (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, emailconfirmed 5,920 edits No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 276:		Line 276:
	::: I picked out your ''more feedback on our current 159edo system'' because I find that it would be helpful to wait for responses from people who did not participate in the development, like Kite. I'm still not experienced with high-order EDOs. I think all these additional characters reduce the legibility of the notation in a considerable way. When I compare this with the conventional system, say for baroque music, where I casually pick up the accidentals and do not really have to decipher them, also because there is usually only one variant that makes musical sense, I get almost dizzy in our "battle of symbols". In the classic notation, accidentals are not just modifiers for single notes, but signs that indicate the change of the tonal base. I'm still searching for a parallel in alternative tonal systems. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 22:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)		::: I picked out your ''more feedback on our current 159edo system'' because I find that it would be helpful to wait for responses from people who did not participate in the development, like Kite. I'm still not experienced with high-order EDOs. I think all these additional characters reduce the legibility of the notation in a considerable way. When I compare this with the conventional system, say for baroque music, where I casually pick up the accidentals and do not really have to decipher them, also because there is usually only one variant that makes musical sense, I get almost dizzy in our "battle of symbols". In the classic notation, accidentals are not just modifiers for single notes, but signs that indicate the change of the tonal base. I'm still searching for a parallel in alternative tonal systems. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 22:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

	:::: You are right in saying that in the classic notation, accidentals are not just modifiers for single notes, but signs that indicate the change of the tonal base. The classical and quartertone accidentals as found in this system actually have the same function, believe it or not. I mean, if Jacob Collier can seamlessly modulate from E-Natrual Major to G-Demisharp Major, I want to know the specifics of the notes he uses, and changing keys seamlessly like that involves using different tunings for notes, I want to see the tuning changes in action. --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 22:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)		:::: You are right in saying that in the classic notation, accidentals are not just modifiers for single notes, but signs that indicate the change of the tonal base. The classical and quartertone accidentals as found in this system actually have the same function, believe it or not. I mean, if Jacob Collier can seamlessly modulate from E-Natrual Major to G-Demisharp Major, I want to know the specifics of the notes he uses, and if changing keys seamlessly like that involves using different tunings for notes, I want to see the tuning changes in action. --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 22:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)