Stearns 144edo notation (was: Notating ETs with one comma per prime)

hi Joe,

> ****Personally, I think this "elaboration" of 72-tET into 144-tET is
> a *wonderful* idea!
>
> I'm hoping, though, just for "consistency" if the notation is to be
> performed with our past traditions, the basis is 12-tET...

here's a detailed explanation of my version of Dan's 144edo notation:
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/dict/144edo.htm

and yes, it is based on 12edo. the reason i like this 144edo
notation so much is because, as Dan points out, it's based on
the very good 72edo notation we've already adopted (whether
HEWM or Sims/Maneri -- the basis is the same) with only one
additional symbol, the tilde ~ which Dan calls a "cross-hatch".

note that on this page (as well as on the 72edo page) i give
the r a n g e of cents-values which fall within each of the
notational symbols. this is to emphasize that neither Dan nor
i favor 144edo as a t u n i n g , but only as a notation;
and also to make it easy to see which notes of whatever tuning
happen to fall within a particular 144edo notational symbol.

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

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

/tuning/topicId_34407.html#34407

> here's a detailed explanation of my version of Dan's 144edo
notation:
> http://www.ixpres.com/interval/dict/144edo.htm

***Hi Monz!

Yes, I remember when this first came out... I must have been
considerably more than a year ago, and I viewed it rather as
a "curiosity."

However, now that I've seen and been "convinced" of the utility of 72-
tET as a notation, it obviously has even greater significance for me.

Yes, I understand the purpose is as a *practical* notation, not an
analytical tool.

It's great, particularly, in my view, in conjunction with the Sims
notation which, as you know, I prefer....

Thanks!

Joe

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

> here's a detailed explanation of my version of Dan's 144edo
notation:
> http://www.ixpres.com/interval/dict/144edo.htm

Err, Monz, this is fine, but how come you claim the ASCII notation
used on that page is an ASCII adaptation of the _Sims_ notation, when
in fact it uses up and down arrows in a manner entirely inconsistent
with that notation?