5/4 sounding Minor in Asymmetric Augmented Chords

Okay gang, here's another example chord progression I cooked up, this time in 19-EDO. It's based on chords that approximate 28:35:45 and 28:36:45, i.e. triads built out of a 5/4 "minor" third and a 9/7 "major" third.

/tuning/files/IgliashonJones/SuperMajorvsMajor.mp3

I'm not gonna bother making you guess which is which in this one, because it's painfully obvious. But give it a listen and see if the final chord sounds "major" or "minor" to you in comparison with the chord that precedes it.

-Igs

Hi Igs,

It's not painfully obvious to me! I could probably figure it
out, but I'd have to listen carefully and do something resembling
work. Neither of these triads is remotely tonal. -Carl

> Okay gang, here's another example chord progression I cooked up,
> this time in 19-EDO. It's based on chords that approximate
> 28:35:45 and 28:36:45, i.e. triads built out of a 5/4 "minor"
> third and a 9/7 "major" third.
>
> /tuning/files/IgliashonJones
> /SuperMajorvsMajor.mp3
>
> I'm not gonna bother making you guess which is which in this one,
> because it's painfully obvious. But give it a listen and see if
> the final chord sounds "major" or "minor" to you in comparison
> with the chord that precedes it.
>
> -Igs

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Igs,
>
> It's not painfully obvious to me! I could probably figure it
> out, but I'd have to listen carefully and do something resembling
> work. Neither of these triads is remotely tonal. -Carl

Wow, there must be something weird with my ears, then.

Listen to the 2nd and 3rd chord, they have two notes in common (the 28th and the 45th harmonic), and the middle note goes from 35th harmonic to 36th, sort of like a C#min-->C#maj. directly contrasting the major with the minor. That change in quality is so obvious to me that it might as well be 20:24:30 changing to 20:25:30.

No, these chords are neither rooted nor especially concordant, but compared to the 5:6:7 example I posted previously, I can hear the difference between the two types of chord quite clearly. The penultimate chord feels prominently "major" and resolves half-decently to the final chord (which is also the first chord), which itself sounds prominently "minor" to me (at least in comparison to the preceding chord).

Admittedly, these chords are much stranger than their "diminished-esque" counterparts--there's no "ghost fundamental" anywhere to be found, which gives the chords a thin and hollow sound. But I swear, I can hear the difference in chord type no problem. I wonder why that is?? Am I hard-wired to prefer non-concordant chords?

Well, anyway, I'll post an example using 16:18:21 chords later tonight, hopefully. I'll be curious to see if, in that forthcoming example, whether people hear the otonal chords as "major"--i.e. "bright", "happy", etc--or the utonal ones.

-Igs

Hi Igs,

> Listen to the 2nd and 3rd chord, they have two notes in
> common (the 28th and the 45th harmonic), and the middle note
> goes from 35th harmonic to 36th, sort of like a C#min-->C#maj.
> directly contrasting the major with the minor. That change in
> quality is so obvious to me that it might as well be 20:24:30
> changing to 20:25:30.

Yeah, that'd be analytical listening, which I can do, but it's
way harder than just hearing the quality of the chords as in
your previous test. For one thing it would have helped if I'd
noticed that the chords were the same except for the middle note.
Then I'd have known what to listen for. Incidentally, this
motion reminded me of Ivor Darreg's prelude in 19... I wonder if
they're the same intervals or if I'm just recognizing the
characteristic step sizes in 19.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "cityoftheasleep" <igliashon@...> wrote:
>
> Okay gang, here's another example chord progression I cooked up, this time in 19-EDO. It's based on chords that approximate 28:35:45 and 28:36:45, i.e. triads built out of a 5/4 "minor" third and a 9/7 "major" third.

I'm giving up on your examples, as I don't think using pounding percussive chords rather than sustained ones is the way to go, and the chord progressions are too mechanical.

Gene wrote:

> I'm giving up on your examples, as I don't think using pounding
> percussive chords rather than sustained ones is the way to go,
> and the chord progressions are too mechanical.

Huh, I found Igs' renderings much more pleasant to hear
than the competition. At least the 18-ET one. Maybe this
19-ET one is a bit more harsh somehow... perhaps because
of the chords displayed. -Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@...> wrote:
>
>
> Gene wrote:
>
> > I'm giving up on your examples, as I don't think using pounding
> > percussive chords rather than sustained ones is the way to go,
> > and the chord progressions are too mechanical.
>
> Huh, I found Igs' renderings much more pleasant to hear
> than the competition.

The format got in the way for me; I didn't want to give them much of a listen.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> I'm giving up on your examples, as I don't think using pounding percussive chords rather
> than sustained ones is the way to go, and the chord progressions are too mechanical.
>

What format would you prefer? I can re-render if that would be helpful. Some kind of plain soft-envelope sustained harmonic timbre, or something? Obviously, the point of this is to demonstrate the chords, not to be a piece of music, so to me the format is irrelevant. I can gussy it up however you like, if you actually want me to.

-Igs

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:45 PM, cityoftheasleep
<igliashon@...> wrote:
>
> Okay gang, here's another example chord progression I cooked up, this time in 19-EDO. It's based on chords that approximate 28:35:45 and 28:36:45, i.e. triads built out of a 5/4 "minor" third and a 9/7 "major" third.
>
> /tuning/files/IgliashonJones/SuperMajorvsMajor.mp3
>
> I'm not gonna bother making you guess which is which in this one, because it's painfully obvious. But give it a listen and see if the final chord sounds "major" or "minor" to you in comparison with the chord that precedes it.
>
> -Igs

The final chord to me sounds augmented, neither major or minor - it
doesn't sound like a warped minor chord. Note that you've messed
around with father temperament more than I have, so perhaps you're
used to dealing with crazy sharp fifths. I can see if I start to put
myself into father mode I can sort of hear it as minor, but it's
difficult because I'm very new to father temperament (mavila's about
as far out as I've gone, but after knowsur's album I'm ready to go
buck w-wild)

But what did sound minor was at 0:35, where you play something that
sounds like an F augmented chord, and then you move the lower note up
- that sounded like you moved to a distorted F# minor. Now I'm
listening to it again, and the F augmented chord now sounds ilke
F-Bb-Db instead of F-A-Db, and it moves up to Gb-Bb-Db. That is, it
went from Bbm/F -> Gbmaj. I can flip it either way.

But if by "last chord" you mean the low one that it drops back to, I
don't hear that as anything but augmented... Some father tempering of
my brain would probably do the trick.

-Mike

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "cityoftheasleep" <igliashon@...> wrote:

> What format would you prefer?

Something more like Mike' examples; sustained chords.