User talk:Aura/Aura's Diatonic Scales
Lists
... are normally done by starting a line with an * for each item (no surplus blank lines are needed then). --Xenwolf (talk) 06:30, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Great 🙂 I now also added a space after the
*. This is maybe a matter of taste, but from my experience this makes it easier to distinguish content and form. I hope this is okay for you. BTW: What about adding links to interval pages? --Xenwolf (talk) 09:48, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Great 🙂 I now also added a space after the
Link text
In my opinion, "Wikipedia article" is probably the worst text to chose for a link if there are more than one article you refer to. Imagine you only read/only copy/only print the text, all information where to look will be lost (Wikipedia has lots of articles). The easiest option to do better is using an interwiki-style link (i.e. see Wikipedia:Mediant or see Wikipedia: Mediant), another option is copy the original HTML title and URL (i.e. Mediant - Wikipedia) - maybe your browser has a plugin for that. At the risk of repeating myself: I really don't like these A/B links. They complicate the reading without bringing any advantage. --Xenwolf (talk) 15:27, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- Right, I attempted to fix it with links in the style of Wikipedia:Mediant. --Aura (talk) 15:38, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
About minor thirds
Why do you prefer 77/64 over 6/5? Is it mainly used for melodic or harmonic reasons in your scales? --Userminusone (talk) 20:28, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
- It's more for harmonic reasons, especially the fact that the scales with the best tonal harmonies- at least in my thinking- have all their notes as either overtones or undertones of the Tonic, while 6/5 doesn't meet either of those criteria when used as an interval between the Tonic and another note in the scale. That said, since 6/5 is a harmonic entropy minimum, it pays to try and find a ratio that's close by, and 77/64 is one of the simpler among such ratios, not to mention that 77/64 has connections to both 7-based and 11-based harmony, which I seem to use a lot, especially since it turns out that harmony based on 11/8 and 16/11 is hugely underrated. --Aura (talk) 21:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
- I should mention, however, that while I think I've presented what are probably the best tunings for Ionian and Lydian, I'm more open to changing the tunings for Dorian, Phrygian, Mixolydian, Aeolian and Locrian- provided that the new tunings not only demonstrate Rothenberg propriety, but still have all notes in the scale as either harmonics or subharmonics of the Tonic. --Aura (talk) 21:51, 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) --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. --Aura (talk) 22:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)