con/dis chord progression chart

To anyone:

Has a chart(table) ever been compiled that would display
the most consonant to the most dissonant chord progressions?
I'm thinking about 3 major triads (0-400-700) in a progression.
The most consonant 24 , let's say,3 chord progressions would
be at the top and the most dissonant 120 at the bottom.
The graph, or whatever, would have 144 EDO accuracy or higher
for the tonic notes.
Would having such a table allow for more consonant music
to be made, or would it be of no real use?

Thanks,

Stephen Szpak

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "stephenszpak" <stephen_szpak@h...>

/tuning/topicId_50616.html#50616

wrote:
>
> To anyone:
>
> Has a chart(table) ever been compiled that would display
> the most consonant to the most dissonant chord progressions?
> I'm thinking about 3 major triads (0-400-700) in a progression.
> The most consonant 24 , let's say,3 chord progressions would
> be at the top and the most dissonant 120 at the bottom.
> The graph, or whatever, would have 144 EDO accuracy or higher
> for the tonic notes.
> Would having such a table allow for more consonant music
> to be made, or would it be of no real use?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen Szpak

***Hi Stephen,

I don't believe that "dissonant chord progressions" make any sense.
It would be difficult to disassociate the progression from the actual
sounding chords to be used. Each chord can be evaluated according to
ideas of "concordance" using different models. One is Paul Erlich's
Harmonic Entropy model. We evaluated the consonance of several
tetrads on my "Tuning Lab" site:

http://www.soundclick.com/tuninglab

best to you!

Joseph Pehrson

>From: "Stephen Szpak" <stephen_szpak@hotmail.com>

>
>--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
>--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "stephenszpak" <stephen_szpak@h...>
>
>/tuning/topicId_50616.html#50616
>
>
>wrote:
>>
>> To anyone:
>>
>> Has a chart(table) ever been compiled that would display
>> the most consonant to the most dissonant chord progressions? I'm >>thinking about 3 major triads (0-400-700) in a progression.
>> The most consonant 24 , let's say,3 chord progressions would
>> be at the top and the most dissonant 120 at the bottom.
>> The graph, or whatever, would have 144 EDO accuracy or higher
>> for the tonic notes. Would having such a table allow for more >>consonant music
>> to be made, or would it be of no real use?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Stephen Szpak
>
>
>***Hi Stephen,
>
>I don't believe that "dissonant chord progressions" make any sense.
>It would be difficult to disassociate the progression from the actual
>sounding chords to be used. Each chord can be evaluated according to
>ideas of "concordance" using different models. One is Paul Erlich's
>Harmonic Entropy model. We evaluated the consonance of several
>tetrads on my "Tuning Lab" site:
>
>http://www.soundclick.com/tuninglab
>
>best to you!
>
>Joseph Pehrson
> STEPHEN SZPAK WRITES::::::::::::::::::::::
>
> {{{ First, just so we understand each other, I'm speaking of 000-400-700 >major triads only.
> I couldn't tell from what you wrote if you picked up on that.}}}
>
> In 12 EDO there are certain chord progessions that keep coming up >over and over.
>
> Cmajor --- Fmajor ----G major
>
> has the tonics 0---500-700 and is (or seems) more consonant than
>
>
> Cmajor --- D# major ---A major
>
> with its tonics of 0---300---900
>
> Do you believe this is true? If it is NOT true then every chord >progression has to
> be equally consonant. Perhaps it is?!
>
> Please note that your link results in ERROR 404.
>
> Thanks for your comments,
>
>
> Stephen Szpak
>

_________________________________________________________________
Take advantage of our limited-time introductory offer for dial-up Internet access. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Szpak" <stephen_szpak@h...>

/tuning/topicId_50616.html#50782

***Hello Stephen!

It seems our conversation is verging a bit on *semantics* more than
anything.

It seems to me, to use ridiculously simple examples, that a chord
progression that uses all 12-tET major triads and goes C-G-F is just
*as* "consonant" as a chord progression that goes, say, C-D#-A in
major triads.

What you might say is that the progression is more *chromatic* since
the roots are chromatic rather than diatonic.

However, it seems to me that one series of major triads is just
as "consonant" as another series of them, regardless of the root...

J. Pehrson

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Szpak" <stephen_szpak@h...>

/tuning/topicId_50830.html#50949

> STEPHEN SZPAK WRITES:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
>
> This can't be this hard. To clarify... 144 EDO was my suggestion
as a
>substitute for an
> infinite EDO. If 1200 EDO is easier for you to grab on to that's
fine. To
>clarify... the
> 0-400-700 triads would be used as a start. (maybe some other kind
later).
>

***Hi Stephen,

Oh *finally* I see what you're getting at! :)

Well, Paul Erlich made a chart of sonorities (and "quasi" sonorities
and dissonances) for the 21-note "Blackjack" scale derived from 72-
tET... which is a "stepping stone" to the full inflections of 144-tET.

J. Pehrson
--- End forwarded message ---

This sounds like a possibility. Thanks.

Stephen Szpak

_________________________________________________________________
Worried about inbox overload? Get MSN Extra Storage now! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es