Another "translation" from Keenanese to Monzonote

I did another translation to Monzo notation and 72 degrees from the
12-note scale that Dave Keenan was kind enough to post a while ago in
message 22655.

Frankly, this scale appeals to me more than the very recent "white
note" version of "blackjack" since there are no repeating frequencies.

! 12-of-blackjack-11.scl
!
A 12-tone 11-limit subset of Blackjack
12
!
33.33333333 ! C|
150.0 ! D;
266.6666667 ! D#
383.3333333 ! E
500.0 ! F
583.3333333 ! F#
700.0 ! G
816.6666667 ! Ab
933.3333333 ! A|
1050.0 ! B;
1083.333333 ! B
1200.0 ! C

Here is my "translation":

A 12-tone 11-limit subset of Blackjack
12
!

MONZ 72 degrees

33.33333333 ! C| C> 2
150.0 ! D; Dv 9
266.6666667 ! D# Eb- 16
383.3333333 ! E E- 23
500.0 ! F F 30
583.3333333 ! F# F#- 35
700.0 ! G G 42
816.6666667 ! Ab G#+ 49
933.3333333 ! A| A> 56
1050.0 ! B; Bv 63
1083.333333 ! B B- 65
1200.0 ! C C 72

Again, did I do this correctly?? I see some questions. For example,
several of the notes have a flatting by 1/12 tone in the Monz and
it's not indicated like that in the Keenan.

What's going on?

Frankly, I'm not "getting" the Keenan notation. Probably if I spent
about 5 more hours on it, it would become clear to me, but I really
don't want to spend that time... since I don't have it, and want to
get back to writing music!

Thanks for any assistance!!!!!!

No hard feelings, I hope, Dave.... I appreciate your genius... I'm
just not following it!!!!

__________ _______ ______
Joseph Pehrson

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_23542.html#23542

> I did another translation to Monzo notation and 72 degrees
> from the 12-note scale that Dave Keenan was kind enough to
> post a while ago in message 22655.

Here's the correct version, Joe:

! 12-of-blackjack-11.scl
!
A 12-tone 11-limit subset of Blackjack
12
!
33.33333333 ! C| C> 2
150.0 ! D; Dv 9
266.6666667 ! D# Eb< 16
383.3333333 ! E E- 23
500.0 ! F F 30
583.3333333 ! F# F#- 35
700.0 ! G G 42
816.6666667 ! Ab G#+ 49
933.3333333 ! A| A> 56
1050.0 ! B; Bv 63
1083.333333 ! B B- 65
1200.0 ! C C 72

Only one correction here too: your Eb- should have been Eb<.

-monz
http://www.monz.org
"All roads lead to n^0"

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <joemonz@y...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_23542.html#23545

>
> --- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
>
> /tuning/topicId_23542.html#23542
>
> > I did another translation to Monzo notation and 72 degrees
> > from the 12-note scale that Dave Keenan was kind enough to
> > post a while ago in message 22655.
>
>
> Here's the correct version, Joe:
>
> ! 12-of-blackjack-11.scl
> !
> A 12-tone 11-limit subset of Blackjack
> 12
> !
> 33.33333333 ! C| C> 2
> 150.0 ! D; Dv 9
> 266.6666667 ! D# Eb< 16
> 383.3333333 ! E E- 23
> 500.0 ! F F 30
> 583.3333333 ! F# F#- 35
> 700.0 ! G G 42
> 816.6666667 ! Ab G#+ 49
> 933.3333333 ! A| A> 56
> 1050.0 ! B; Bv 63
> 1083.333333 ! B B- 65
> 1200.0 ! C C 72
>
>
> Only one correction here too: your Eb- should have been Eb<.
>
>

Thanks so much, Monz, for the quick posts of your notation regarding
the 12-note Blackjack subsets.

I really appreciate the quick work. Well, I made a couple of
mistakes, but I think I'm getting the hang of it.

THANKS FOR THE CORRECTIONS.

By the way, do you think you or somebody else could post a "gentle
introduction" to why Dave Keenan uses the symbols he uses...

I'm really getting confused with the \\\\ and ////

It either makes me want to go to a website or a directory on my hard
drive!!!!!!!

THANKS AGAIN!

Joe

_______ ______ _____
Joseph Pehrson

In-Reply-To: <9ee1sp+m6pn@eGroups.com>
I've adapted my decimal conversion program to speak Keenanese. So this
should be it:

Av A
A A//
A^ A^/
Bv Bb/
B Bv
B^ B\
Cv B//
C C\\
C^ C
Lv C^
L C#\
L^ Db/
Dv D\\
D D
D^ D//
Nv D#\
N Eb/
N^ Ev
Ev E
E E//
E^ F\\
Fv F/
F F^
F^ F#\
Gv Gv\
G G\\
G^ G
Hv G^
H G#\
H^ Ab/

That gets you most of Miracle, and you can work out the rest.

I'm defining Monzonote like this:

monz72.accidentals = {
-6:'b', -5:'b+', -4:'v-', -3:'v', -2:'<', -1:'-',
0:'', 1:'+', 2:'>', 3:'^',4:'^+',5:'#-', 6:'#'}

If that's not right, send the corrections and I'll update it. As it
stands, I have this:

Av A
A A>
A^ A^+
Bv Bb+
B Bv
B^ B-
Cv B>
C C<
C^ C
Lv C^
L C#-
L^ Db+
Dv D<
D D
D^ D>
Nv D#-
N Eb+
N^ Ev
Ev E
E E>
E^ F<
Fv F+
F F^
F^ F#-
Gv Gv-
G G<
G^ G
Hv G^
H G#-
H^ Ab+

If that's okay, I can update it all on my website sometime.

Graham

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:

> Frankly, I'm not "getting" the Keenan notation. Probably if I
spent
> about 5 more hours on it, it would become clear to me, but I really
> don't want to spend that time... since I don't have it, and want to
> get back to writing music!
>
> Thanks for any assistance!!!!!!
>
> No hard feelings, I hope, Dave.... I appreciate your genius... I'm
> just not following it!!!!

I'd suggest forgetting about it (again, with a deep bow to Dave's
genius). The Keenan notation is based on meantone, while 72-tET is
not a meantone tuning. So it's automatically very confusing, though
both Dave Keenan and Graham Breed seem quite enthusiastic about it.
Personally, I feel that the "bike gears" of 72-tET notation are much
easier to understand.

--- In tuning@y..., graham@m... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_23542.html#23547

> I'm defining Monzonote like this:
>
> monz72.accidentals = {
> -6:'b', -5:'b+', -4:'v-', -3:'v', -2:'<', -1:'-',
> 0:'', 1:'+', 2:'>', 3:'^',4:'^+',5:'#-', 6:'#'}
>
> If that's not right, send the corrections and I'll update it.

Hi Graham,

There's nothing incorrect here, just one minor quibble:

-4 can be notated in "Monzonote" 72-EDO as either "v-"
or "b>", in the same way that -3 can be either "v" or "b^",
and -2 can be either "<" or "^+", etc. for the positive
values (i.e., +3 can be either "^" or "#v").

I prefer to use "v" and "^" only with the actual 1/4-tones,
and to indicate inflections of 1/6 tones consistently with
"<" and ">" accompanied by "#" or "b" if necessary.

As it stands, I'm already guilty of using both of the
enharmonic 1/4-tone notations. I generally prefer the
simplest, which would be the one without the "#" or "b",
but sometimes the derivation of the pitch makes it useful
to notate it with "#" or "b".

So all of these little quibbles are simply the result of
enharmonicity... pretty much a simple case of "I'll take
one from column A and one from column B".

I think the main point Dave Keenan is making about my 72-EDO
notation is that it uses extra symbols where they really
aren't necessary, because a smaller subset of symbols can
be made to do service if they are repeated. Correct me if
I'm off the mark here, Dave.

> As it stands, I have this:
>
> Av A
> A A>
> A^ A^+
>
> <etc. snipped>
>
> If that's okay, I can update it all on my website sometime.

Graham, if you could include the 72-EDO degrees that would
make it a lot easier for me to proofread your conversion.
Thanks.

-monz
http://www.monz.org
"All roads lead to n^0"