Re: [tuning] Re: Housekeeping (CHALLENGE for Carl)

--but first he'd better
--understand how to use the real numbers.
    Haha...well the reason I bothered bringing up surreal numbers in the first place...is because it seemed like a joke.  Almost like saying "haha...I know this and you don't" for no apparent reason (AKA no productive reason) other than to piss me off. 

   Guess what?  Since irrational numbers are real numbers your "but first he'd better

understand how to use the real numbers" -Carl
......reeks of bull crap and just "accusing for the sake of accusing"...not learning/teaching, productivity, or anything else. 
     I've never used surreal numbers (that are not ALSO real numbers) or imaginary number.  I'll be damned if anyone making scales has

   Carl, as I recall you were whining about real numbers in an effort to persuade me to use either CENTS or fractions to express my scales in any argument.  
    While (back in the real world), as I told you, there reason I don't document the cent value of my scales is simply because my DAW operates in decimal-point values and I don't have the time to run around converting them for every little change I make.  And...I don't want to publish un-current scales.  I damn well know how to convert to cents...or simple fractions when possible (which in the case of
irrational numbered scales...often it is not).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Now here comes the gist of it:
again, you (Carl) said "but first he'd better understand how to use the real numbers"

    So what on earth does that have to do with making good scales (especially considering, given that virtually any scale, including mine, is composed of real numbers, whether it's creators are anal-retentively knowledge-able about the definition of the term or not)?
  
   Carl...the same goes for your "you don't know what 7-limit, therefore you don't know JI" when I defined a large set of correct PRIME 7-limit and you ragged on me for not naming ODD limit chords. 

    Granted, your opinion (esp. on wiki-pedia) combined with your response to me tetrad examples...seems to
state:
    A) You think ODD LIMIT is the ONLY real "true" definition of consonance, JI or otherwise (and "reserve the right" to publicly flog me for disagreeing with you as if your opinion is 100% fact').   Quoted from wikipedia "(Prime limit) it does not produce a psychoacoustically valid consonance ranking on bare intervals, as odd-limit does." -Carl

   B) You think the only (not dumb) ways to build a "chord scale" (which is, admittedly, my goal), is to either stack tetrads  or use partials straight from the harmonic series as a scale. 
   I respect that you introduced the example on tetrads as an honest attempt to productively solve my chord/scale problem with tetrads...but having only 4 notes available per octave for "7-limit-level consonance" just doesn't cut it, or even approach it.
    My own scales give 7+ per octave...and, judging by the sound example survey
results, a few people even found it more pleasing than a scale containing harmonics 7 to 14 of the harmonic series.

   Translation: Carl, I still don't buy your opinion (AND NOT PURE FACT!) that limits and things like stacking tetrads completely define what makes JI work and music consonant. 
   I understand a good 80% or so of what you are doing with your old JI example (though I know from experience you'll whining that missing 20% somehow means I know nothing). 
For the record, the JI approximation of my PHI scale translates to about 13 odd limit in estimated rational fractions...yet it many (if not most) possible 4 note chords in it sound about equally natural to my ears to your 7-limit tetrads. 

****************************************************************************************************
*************************************************************************************************
CARL,

    Want to convince me my theories are relatively dumb and useless (or somehow that knowing some anal-retentive terms are suddenly going to exponentially boost my scale making abilities)?  Or that I should be following virtually 100% of your advice instead of the 60% or so I actually have tested AND also found sounds good to my ears?

   Then why don't you actually make some chord-scales of your own and we'll have a sound-test challenge.  YES, I'm dead serious.  We can try for the best-sounding chord scale with 6,7,8,9, and 10 notes per approximately. 2/1 octave (up to a 2.05 "stretched octave").

  Or are you too caught up in your rational mathematical superiority and knowledge of many term (which may very well not contribute much far as making actual scales that work well) to put it to
the test in the real point: making beautiful scales?
*************************************************************************************************
-Michael