Talk:56/45: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m →Criterion for a Marvelous intervals: link to cat added |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Maybe the [https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?title=56/45&diff=prev&oldid=53728 addition to the marvel category] was wrong. How can we decide which intervals belong into [[:Category:Marvel]]? --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 13:51, 29 November 2020 (UTC) | Maybe the [https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?title=56/45&diff=prev&oldid=53728 addition to the marvel category] was wrong. How can we decide which intervals belong into [[:Category:Marvel]]? --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 13:51, 29 November 2020 (UTC) | ||
: I'm personally thinking that "marvelous intervals" are indeed those that differ from 3-limit and 5-limit. Where the resulting 7-limit interval is something like 7/4 or 8/7, that is a different story, and furthermore, we should remember that marvelous intervals always have a second function, and that function should be acknowledged. After all, there's a reason I call 7/4 a "Varicant"- it simultaneously acts as both a subminor seventh and a type of sixth, with the former behavior being consistent with the nature of its relation to both [[4/3]] and [[3/2]], and the latter behavior being consistent with the nature of its relation to both [[5/4]] and [[11/8]]. I don't know how good this idea is, but I suspect that it's a start. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 14:22, 29 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:22, 29 November 2020
Criterion for a Marvelous intervals
Maybe the addition to the marvel category was wrong. How can we decide which intervals belong into Category:Marvel? --Xenwolf (talk) 13:51, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- I'm personally thinking that "marvelous intervals" are indeed those that differ from 3-limit and 5-limit. Where the resulting 7-limit interval is something like 7/4 or 8/7, that is a different story, and furthermore, we should remember that marvelous intervals always have a second function, and that function should be acknowledged. After all, there's a reason I call 7/4 a "Varicant"- it simultaneously acts as both a subminor seventh and a type of sixth, with the former behavior being consistent with the nature of its relation to both 4/3 and 3/2, and the latter behavior being consistent with the nature of its relation to both 5/4 and 11/8. I don't know how good this idea is, but I suspect that it's a start. --Aura (talk) 14:22, 29 November 2020 (UTC)