User talk:Aura/Aura's Diatonic Scales: Difference between revisions

← Older edit Newer edit →

VisualWikitext

Revision as of 22:59, 13 March 2021 view source Aura (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled 5,920 edits No edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 22:59, 13 March 2021 view source Aura (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled 5,920 edits No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 25:		Line 25:
	:: I think 77/64 is fine as it is. I was just curious about your reasoning. (Fun fact, I really like the interval 29/16, which is approximately a perfect fifth above 77/64. I'm not really sure if that fact is useful for your diatonic scales, but I thought that that was a nice coincidence) --[[User:Userminusone\|Userminusone]] ([[User talk:Userminusone\|talk]]) 21:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)		:: I think 77/64 is fine as it is. I was just curious about your reasoning. (Fun fact, I really like the interval 29/16, which is approximately a perfect fifth above 77/64. I'm not really sure if that fact is useful for your diatonic scales, but I thought that that was a nice coincidence) --[[User:Userminusone\|Userminusone]] ([[User talk:Userminusone\|talk]]) 21:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

	::: Well, if I ever get to 29-limit material, you've at least ~~give~~ me a good cause to look at it beyond the expected reasons. Still, I'm thinking that I perhaps need tweak some of my scales a little bit somehow- just to make it so that there are once again only three step sizes in the scale instead of like four or five. --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 22:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)		::: Well, if I ever get to 29-limit material, you've at least given me a good cause to look at it beyond the expected reasons. Still, I'm thinking that I perhaps need tweak some of my scales a little bit somehow- just to make it so that there are once again only three step sizes in the scale instead of like four or five. --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 22:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)