Another notation proposition

Paul is on a bus on his way back to Boston right now... but he came
up with a brilliant solution to our 72-tET notation ascii dilemma.

How about this one:

^ = twelfth-high (these are Maneri's verbal names)
v = twelfth-low
> = sixth-high
< = sixth-low
] = quarter-high
[ = quarter-low

The brackets REALLY LOOK like the Sims quarter-high and quarter-low
symbols (see the written notation in the Joseph Pehrson files area
Sims.gif).. or at least as close as ascii can come to it...

________ _______ _______
Joseph Pehrson

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> Paul is on a bus on his way back to Boston right now... but he came
> up with a brilliant solution to our 72-tET notation ascii dilemma.
>
> How about this one:
>
> ^ = twelfth-high (these are Maneri's verbal names)
> v = twelfth-low
> > = sixth-high
> < = sixth-low
> ] = quarter-high
> [ = quarter-low
>
> The brackets REALLY LOOK like the Sims quarter-high and quarter-low
> symbols (see the written notation in the Joseph Pehrson files area
> Sims.gif).. or at least as close as ascii can come to it...

I'll buy it. I thought about the square brackets for this reason
before, but I didn't like them because their directionality is even
more ambiguous than < and >. But given that we've accepted < and >,
and the directions of [ and ] are consistent with < and >, as well as
the Sims glyphs, why not.

Let's just go ahead and start using these.

Of course no-one can force anyone to stop using ^ and v to mean
something else. But Monz and Graham, pretty-please :-).

Maybe Monz can accept these as an ASCII version of the Richter-Herf
notation as well, because these quarter tone symbols do have a bit of
vertical-arrow-ness about them?

Maybe Graham can accept the < and > as the ASCII version of the
Miracle decimal accidentals, even if his non-ASCII ones are up and
down triangles?

Fingers crossed.
-- Dave Keenan

In-Reply-To: <9ev7g3+45r1@eGroups.com>
Dave Keenan wrote:

> Maybe Graham can accept the < and > as the ASCII version of the
> Miracle decimal accidentals, even if his non-ASCII ones are up and
> down triangles?

The non-ASCII ones are going to be the Sims half-arrows as handwritten.
Those look like a really good way of rendering ^ and v on the score.
They're distinctive without being ambiguous about which line or space they
belong to. For ASCII, I was hoping to keep with ^ and v, so would it be
possible to replace them with / and \ for the 12*6 notation?

I'm thinking of people coming to the theory new, without knowing Sims or
even staff notation. ^ and v should make it a lot easier for them to get
a handle on the ideas. One less arbitrary thing to worry about.

When there's a finally final agreement, I'll update that conversion page
of my website to show it.

Graham

--- In tuning@y..., "Dave Keenan" <D.KEENAN@U...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_23914.html#23917

> --- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> > Paul is on a bus on his way back to Boston right now... but he
came
> > up with a brilliant solution to our 72-tET notation ascii dilemma.
> >
> > How about this one:
> >
> > ^ = twelfth-high (these are Maneri's verbal names)
> > v = twelfth-low
> > > = sixth-high
> > < = sixth-low
> > ] = quarter-high
> > [ = quarter-low
> >
> > The brackets REALLY LOOK like the Sims quarter-high and quarter-
low
> > symbols (see the written notation in the Joseph Pehrson files
area
> > Sims.gif).. or at least as close as ascii can come to it...
>
> I'll buy it. I thought about the square brackets for this reason
> before, but I didn't like them because their directionality is even
> more ambiguous than < and >. But given that we've accepted < and >,
> and the directions of [ and ] are consistent with < and >, as well
as the Sims glyphs, why not.
>
> Let's just go ahead and start using these.
>

Also, Dave, as far as "directionality" goes:

] in standard text proofreading means PLUS... move the line ahead

and

[ means move the line MINUS or backward

(I'm sure Harry Partch knew these, since he was a part-time
proofreader of text)

So the "directionality" works in that respect as well!

______ ______ ______
Joseph Pehrson

--- In tuning@y..., graham@m... wrote:
> In-Reply-To: <9ev7g3+45r1@e...>
> Dave Keenan wrote:
>
> > Maybe Graham can accept the < and > as the ASCII version of the
> > Miracle decimal accidentals, even if his non-ASCII ones are up and
> > down triangles?
>
> The non-ASCII ones are going to be the Sims half-arrows as
handwritten.

That's fine by me.

> Those look like a really good way of rendering ^ and v on the score.
> They're distinctive without being ambiguous about which line or
space they
> belong to. For ASCII, I was hoping to keep with ^ and v, so would
it be
> possible to replace them with / and \ for the 12*6 notation?

Oh dear. While there doesn't seem to be any great objection to / and \
for the twelfth-tones, I'm afraid, Graham, that you're the only one
who thinks that ^ and v look more like half-headed arrows than
full-headed arrows.

Sure, if someone had only seen the half-headed arrows they might
readily accept ^ and v as an ASCII equivalent, but don't you agree
that anyone who has seen _all_ of Sims glyphs and was then told to
guess which ones the ASCII ^ and v were intended to represent, would
always choose the full-headed arrow?

> I'm thinking of people coming to the theory new, without knowing
Sims or
> even staff notation. ^ and v should make it a lot easier for them
to get
> a handle on the ideas. One less arbitrary thing to worry about.

You mean "a handle on the decatonic ideas"? Yes. I agree with this
point. As a compromise, could you come up with a completely different
pair of ASCII accidentals for the decimal system. i.e other than
[<v^>]. I guess they should be other than +-/\ too. And of course you
wouldn't want to use {} or () for the same reason you don't want to
use <>. And you can't use #b|; and you don't want to use punctuation
marks that look like "line noise". Or anything that might be mistaken
for a half-sharp or half-flat. Doesn't leave much does it?

An underscore "_" is clearly "down" or "low" but what could you pair
with it? Double-quote """? Tilde "~"? Asterisk "*"? Yeah how about

9_ 9 9*

Trouble is you can't tell which line the underscore belongs to, in

9_
9

Maybe * is ok as an ascender. How about pairing it with something else
that descends. qypgj? I think p is already used for something. y and j
look like the best bets to me. j looks like ] but if j is only used
for ASCIIfied decimal notation that wouldn't matter.

9j 9 9*

9y 9 9*

If you can't find anything that satisfies you, and you still want to
use ^ and v for the ASCII decimal accidental, could you please include
a warning with your legend. Something like:

"Please note that I am using ^ and v to stand for the Sims'
half-headed arrows which correspond to shifts of a sixth-tone (two
steps of 72-EDO). Others use ^ and v to stand for Sims' full arrows
which correspond to twelfth-tones (one step of 72-EDO)."

--- In tuning@y..., "Dave Keenan" <D.KEENAN@U...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_23914.html#23991

> If you can't find anything that satisfies you, and you still want
to
> use ^ and v for the ASCII decimal accidental, could you please
include
> a warning with your legend. Something like:
>
> "Please note that I am using ^ and v to stand for the Sims'
> half-headed arrows which correspond to shifts of a sixth-tone (two
> steps of 72-EDO). Others use ^ and v to stand for Sims' full arrows
> which correspond to twelfth-tones (one step of 72-EDO)."

This is rather humorous...

_______ _____ _______
Joseph Pehrson