Scala goes Sagittal

Well, I'll be.

The version of Scala that I have, 2.2 *does* Sagittal.

Now the Sagittal paper just came out.

And, I haven't downloaded a version of Scala for at least a year now,
maybe longer.

So, did Scala have a Sagittal "heads up" over the rest of us for some
time??

Just curious... :)

Committee?? :)

J. Pehrson

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...>
wrote:
> Well, I'll be.
>
> The version of Scala that I have, 2.2 *does* Sagittal.
>
> Now the Sagittal paper just came out.
>
> And, I haven't downloaded a version of Scala for at least a year
now,
> maybe longer.
>
> So, did Scala have a Sagittal "heads up" over the rest of us for
some
> time??

Yes. But I don't think it's been as long as a year.

> Committee?? :)

I don't understand the question.

Joe P:
>>So, did Scala have a Sagittal "heads up" over the rest of us for > some >>time??

Dave K:
> Yes. But I don't think it's been as long as a year.

I remember having a holiday in May of last year, and seeing Manuel, and him talking about his Sagittal implementation. The details hadn't been worked out, but it could well have been in official releases of Scala. And he was certainly in contact with you.

Graham

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Keenan" <d.keenan@b...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_54417.html#54441

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...>
> wrote:
> > Well, I'll be.
> >
> > The version of Scala that I have, 2.2 *does* Sagittal.
> >
> > Now the Sagittal paper just came out.
> >
> > And, I haven't downloaded a version of Scala for at least a year
> now,
> > maybe longer.
> >
> > So, did Scala have a Sagittal "heads up" over the rest of us for
> some
> > time??
>
> Yes. But I don't think it's been as long as a year.
>
> > Committee?? :)
>
> I don't understand the question.

***Sorry... I was asking "Hermes..." (fortunately it
wasn't "Herpes...")

JP

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Graham Breed <graham@m...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_54417.html#54466

> Joe P:
> >>So, did Scala have a Sagittal "heads up" over the rest of us for
> > some
> >>time??
>
> Dave K:
> > Yes. But I don't think it's been as long as a year.
>
> I remember having a holiday in May of last year, and seeing Manuel,
and
> him talking about his Sagittal implementation. The details hadn't
been
> worked out, but it could well have been in official releases of
Scala.
> And he was certainly in contact with you.
>
>
> Graham

***Yes, I remember it now, too. It was *at least* a year ago, at the
release of Scala 2.2....

J. Pehrson

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Graham Breed <graham@m...> wrote:
> Joe P:
> >>So, did Scala have a Sagittal "heads up" over the rest of us for
> > some
> >>time??
>
> Dave K:
> > Yes. But I don't think it's been as long as a year.
>
> I remember having a holiday in May of last year, and seeing
Manuel, and
> him talking about his Sagittal implementation. The details hadn't
been
> worked out, but it could well have been in official releases of
Scala.
> And he was certainly in contact with you.

I stand corrected. Time flies like an arrow. :-)

I hope Xenharmonikon 18 is not delayed too much longer.

Manuel's vote of confidence in working with us to implement it so
early was very important to us. Thanks Manuel.

Dave wrote:
>Manuel's vote of confidence in working with us to implement it so
>early was very important to us. Thanks Manuel.

Sure, my pleasure. Inferring from the article, the file holding
the ET parameters, sag_et.par, is a bit behind the developments
now. And a great website you made.

Manuel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Manuel Op de Coul"
<manuel.op.de.coul@e...> wrote:
> Dave wrote:
> >Manuel's vote of confidence in working with us to implement it so
> >early was very important to us. Thanks Manuel.
>
> Sure, my pleasure. Inferring from the article, the file holding
> the ET parameters, sag_et.par, is a bit behind the developments
> now.

Huh? I believe that every ET for which we give a symbol sequence in
the XH article is also in either the sag_et.par or the sag_12r.par
file. These are only the ones that we were reasonably sure that we
weren't going to change.

But it now appears that we were wrong about some of those, per our
discussion with Jacob & Herman re multiples of 5 and 7, so we'll have
to revise sag_et.par soon on account of that. (However, we wouldn't
have found this out so quickly if we hadn't released these, so
there's an upside to that.)

While we have also agreed on symbol sequences for lots of other ETs,
they're still tentative and therefore subject to change (as explained
in the article).

If anyone reading this needs to notate any ET not listed in the
article, please let us know, and we can discuss it and then make a
modified sag_et.par file for testing it in Scala.

--George

George wrote:
>Huh? I believe that every ET for which we give a symbol sequence in
>the XH article is also in either the sag_et.par or the sag_12r.par
>file.

I don't have these: 135, 45; 128, 64 and 147, 49. Or did you mention
them in the article but the symbol sequence isn't ready yet?

Manuel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Manuel Op de Coul"
<manuel.op.de.coul@e...> wrote:
>
> George wrote:
> >Huh? I believe that every ET for which we give a symbol sequence
in
> >the XH article is also in either the sag_et.par or the sag_12r.par
> >file.
>
> I don't have these: 135, 45; 128, 64 and 147, 49. Or did you mention
> them in the article but the symbol sequence isn't ready yet?

We're not ready to commit ourselves to symbol sequences for 128, 135,
or 147 yet, but we wanted to indicate in the article that
the "subset" notations (perhaps a better term than "preferred") for
45, 49, and 64 should be considered as an alternative to their native-
fifth notations.

--George