Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Fw: [tuning] Re: Silver scale revisited...apparently enjoyed by a handful of people, if just that

Cameron>"Played through your scale and marked the notes that stuck out a little- they turned out on examination to only those
without a superparticular relation within the tuning."

Once again, you have done a fantastic job of ironing out the kinks in my tuning.
Once again the scale (now updated/improved/tweaked by Cameron) is:

1/1 0.000 unison, perfect prime
13/12 138.573 tridecimal 2/3-tone
9/8 203.910 major whole tone
39/32 342.483 39th harmonic, Zalzal wosta of
117/88 493.120
63/44 621.418
3/2 701.955 perfect fifth
25/16 772.627 classic augmented fifth
5/3 884.359 major sixth, BP sixth
16/9 996.090 Pythagorean minor seventh
24/13 1061.427 tridecimal neutral seventh
25/13 1132.100
2/1 1200.000 octave

Chris, I'd hate to be an indecisive bastard...but now I'm changing my mind again and suggesting you use Cameron's modified version of the 12-tone scale instead of my last 12-tone one. :-)

A side question: Cameron, what formulas/interval-relations did you use to re-tune the "non-superparticular" tones (particularly ones like 63/44 and 117/88)?

-Michael

🔗sevishmusic <sevish@...>

Michael, I have enough trouble keeping up with your various scales! :D One day you should really consider writing a comprehensive guide to all your work, I think it would be fascinating to read. You're a true experimental scalesmith full of surprising ideas.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> Cameron>"Played through your scale and marked the notes that stuck out a little- they turned out on examination to only those
> without a superparticular relation within the tuning."
>
> Once again, you have done a fantastic job of ironing out the kinks in my tuning.
> Once again the scale (now updated/improved/tweaked by Cameron) is:
>
> 1/1 0.000 unison, perfect prime
> 13/12 138.573 tridecimal 2/3-tone
> 9/8 203.910 major whole tone
> 39/32 342.483 39th harmonic, Zalzal wosta of
> 117/88 493.120
> 63/44 621.418
> 3/2 701.955 perfect fifth
> 25/16 772.627 classic augmented fifth
> 5/3 884.359 major sixth, BP sixth
> 16/9 996.090 Pythagorean minor seventh
> 24/13 1061.427 tridecimal neutral seventh
> 25/13 1132.100
> 2/1 1200.000 octave
>
> Chris, I'd hate to be an indecisive bastard...but now I'm changing my mind again and suggesting you use Cameron's modified version of the 12-tone scale instead of my last 12-tone one. :-)
>
> A side question: Cameron, what formulas/interval-relations did you use to re-tune the "non-superparticular" tones (particularly ones like 63/44 and 117/88)?
>
> -Michael
>

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

>"Michael, I have enough trouble keeping up with your various scales! :D
One day you should really consider writing a comprehensive guide to all
your work, I think it would be fascinating to read. You're a true
experimental scalesmith full of surprising ideas."
You know it might not be a bad idea and thank you. Thing is I would probably need a lot of supports from tuning experts (particularly those on this list) along with people on the forefront of composing with new tunings (such as yourself, along with all-important song samples of the scales being used well) to really get anywhere with it. I certainly want it to come across as proven and not just me on my soapbox.

I will summarize the PHI section, Silver section, and 7-tone Ptolemic scale along with the 12-tone version I just posted along with a few other scales (including a few of my old pure-JI ones) in a future posting.

The thrust of ideas in these scales are (in general)
A) Adherence to the critical band in root tones (one thing IMVHO all too often ignored)...this I've found to hover around 1.08 (13/12) to 1.09 (12/11) minimum. This often causes scales to lean a bit toward ET configurations.
B) Periodicity (the obvious one and the basis of JI as I see it) of both root tones and harmonics
C) Symmetrical sections (the extreme case is Silver and PHI section scale where each note in the scale splits two other ALA the way the golden ratio does in architecture and supposedly the way we read human facial proportion attractiveness). This also relates to "mirroring" notes around well-known intervals IE the mirror of 4/3 around 2/1 is 1.77777 since (4/3 over 3/2) * 2/1 = 1.777777.
D) Symmetry in difference tones IE dyads beat at rates that are either fractional multiples or sections of each other.

Of those four I usually see leading scales following B. My sections scales focus on C and D (the Silver also adds a tad of B) plus the Ptolemic-ratio-based ones focus on A,B,C and D, for example. The other thing is I'm going to have to make sure I'm at some sort of a resting point where I feel fairly close to finding some sort of final "answer"...right now for every new thing I find out psycho-acoustically I figure old scales need to be tweaked yet again. :-)

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

Mike,

I suggest opening an account on the xenharmonic wiki if you haven't already.

http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/introduction

That would give you a neutral host to put your ideas down in type.

I'd bet the experts here would help you.

Chris

On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

>
>
> >"Michael, I have enough trouble keeping up with your various scales! :D
> One day you should really consider writing a comprehensive guide to all your
> work, I think it would be fascinating to read. You're a true experimental
> scalesmith full of surprising ideas."
> You know it might not be a bad idea and thank you. Thing is I would
> probably need a lot of supports from tuning experts (particularly those on
> this list) along with people on the forefront of composing with new tunings
> (such as yourself, along with all-important song samples of the scales being
> used well) to really get anywhere with it. I certainly want it to come
> across as proven and not just me on my soapbox.
>
>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

A good way to publish scales is to make .scl files for them,
zip them up, and then put a link to the zip file on your
home page. Google sites provides nice free home pages

http://sites.google.com

You can also send them to Manuel and he'll put them in the
Scala scale archive, which is hosted in a similar manner on
the Scala website.

-Carl

Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:

> Mike,
>
> I suggest opening an account on the xenharmonic wiki if you
> haven't already.
>
> http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/introduction
>
> That would give you a neutral host to put your ideas down in type.
> I'd bet the experts here would help you.
>
> Chris

🔗cameron <misterbobro@...>

The intervals between the scale steps were all superparticular (n+1/n) except those couple, so I just made the steps superparticular. Scales that are composed only of superparticular steps tend to be smooth and "as one" sounding, something noticed and applied thousands of years ago.

Do you have John Chalmer's Divisions of the Tetrachord? It is now available free online.