Supra vs machine

What are the comparative merits of supra (2.3.7.11 with commas 64/63 and 99/98) and machine (2.9.7.11 with commas 64/63 and 99/98?) They have the same tuning and error. Suprapyth (2.3.5.7.11 with commas 55/54, 64/63 and 99/98) is a little less accurate, but I'm not sure accuracy is why Mike is so jazzed on machine, and the 5-limit stuff of suprapyth is nice if your generator chain reaches that far. You could always use the same tuning anyway. Of course I suppose I'm supposed to call all of them superpyth.

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:32 AM, genewardsmith
<genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> What are the comparative merits of supra (2.3.7.11 with commas 64/63 and
> 99/98) and machine (2.9.7.11 with commas 64/63 and 99/98?) They have the
> same tuning and error. Suprapyth (2.3.5.7.11 with commas 55/54, 64/63 and
> 99/98) is a little less accurate, but I'm not sure accuracy is why Mike is
> so jazzed on machine, and the 5-limit stuff of suprapyth is nice if your
> generator chain reaches that far. You could always use the same tuning
> anyway. Of course I suppose I'm supposed to call all of them superpyth.

The big deal about machine is that machine
- is extremely low complexity
- has MOS's with a great melodic structure
- is supported with reasonable accuracy in low-numbered EDOs like
11-EDO and 17-EDO
- leads to a new basis for harmony with 4:7:9:11 which neither requires 3 nor 5
- is a warped diatonic scale so it lets you mess around with strange
category-bending effects
- doesn't have any ambiguous intervals in its albitonic MOS

All these things make it very different from scales a 12-EDO listener
are used to, but still have generalized versions of the same
properties we like about them. So I like it a lot.

Supra is also good. First off, you're saying "you're supposed to call
supra superpyth," but that's not what I was saying: you don't have to
do that any more than you're "supposed to" call meanenneadecal
meantone. I proposed that it just be looked at as a higher-limit
extension of superpyth and that it be in the superpyth family.

Within that paradigm, supra here is the extension of superpyth that I
probably use the most, just because it's so obvious. IMO, it's more
important than the 2.3.5.7 extension of superpyth. I don't care about
mapping 5/1 that much (although sometimes I like that, in the 2.3.5.7
version, the aug5 is 5/3), but it just makes no sense to me to not
call the dim5 11/8. This is why I've liked "supra," and "suprapyth,"
more than the official 2.3.5.7.11 "superpyth" for some time now.

That being said, they're just different. Supra is like a staple
temperament that everyone should know about, like 7-limit meantone or
something. It's an alternate way to intone the diatonic and chromatic
scales. For people who are trying desperately to get away from the
diatonic and chromatic scales, this isn't what you want, but obviously
it has its uses.

But machine is notable for having lots of desirable properties and
also sounding completely different. Of course, since supra contains
machine, it's obviously "better" in the sense that supra gives you
both.

-Mike