Re: Digest Number 40

Paul Erlich wrote:

>>The relevant scales are presumably
> >>those in 12-equal with two quarter-tone additions. There aren't any
>>symmetrical neutronic scales here as you need three notes from the
> >>alternative spiral of fifths.
>
>Don't know what you mean. Look at Manuel's list (have you really found
>it? Where?) under 24-tone. You'll see 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 there, as well as
>some modes of "my" Arabic scale.

I downloaded the list a few months ago, presumably from the FTP site. It
may not be the very latest one, but it might be. I was looking under
"arabic" so I will try "24-tone" tonight.

>>Ah yes, if in doubt, change the rules! The version of your paper I've
> got
>>(the original HTML one) doesn't make clear any dislike of maximal
> evenness
>>that I can see.

>Uh-uh. From the HTML version of my paper:

>"The author hears the standard pentachordal modes as most stable and
>most likely to define key centers and modulatory practice. The tonic
>chords of the alternate pentachordal modes may simply serve as points of
>intermediate harmonic stability within the standard pentachordal mode.
>The symmetrical modes have a weird, bitonal quality due to their
>symmetry at the half-octave"

I maintain that this doesn't make clear any general dislike of maximal
evenness.

>>I don't think a melodic rule should presuppose both a 3/2 _and_ a 5/4.

>Neither do I! I meant allowing for a 5/4 structure _instead_ of maximal
>evenness, which started out as an _alternative_ to a 3/2 structure.

My mistake, yes. The existence of a fifth is a neccessary harmonic
condition, but not a melodic one.