Sound file/melodic example of my 13/9 alternative fifth "I hate 22/15" scale :-D

Sound file/melodic example of my 13/9 alternative fifth "I hate 22/15" scale :-D

/tuning/files/MichaelSheiman/I%20hate%20twenty%20two%20over%20fifteen%20MELODIC%20EXAMPLE.mp3

You know I'm starting to think John O Sullivan might have proved me wrong and 13/9 can be a much better "alternative fifth" than 22/15... :-D

   Using this scale, which uses a "hack" of tempering the 13/9 fifth so its octave inverse acts more like a 7/5 than the typical 18/13 octave inverse of 13/9...this sounds, gasp, more stable than my "Dimension" scale to my ears.  Shocker...  I'm
going to have to investigate this further...don't be surprised if you see 9 and 12 tone extensions to this 7-tone scale soon... :-D

--- On Sun, 2/13/11, tuning@yahoogroups.com <tuning@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

From: tuning@yahoogroups.com <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [tuning] New file uploaded to tuning
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 1:38 PM

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that

a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the tuning

group.

File : /MichaelSheiman/I hate twenty two over fifteen MELODIC EXAMPLE.mp3

Uploaded by : djtrancendance <djtrancendance@...>

Description : Melodic example of 13/9 alternative fifth MOS scale

You can access this file at the URL:

/tuning/files/MichaelSheiman/I%20hate%20twenty%20two%20over%20fifteen%20MELODIC%20EXAMPLE.mp3

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:

http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.html

Regards,

djtrancendance <djtrancendance@...>

And to make something BLATANTLY clear

A)  My inspiration for making the scale, originally, was the fact 13/9 was near the top IE least dissonant far as John's list of "bad" intervals (IE was one of the "least bad" intervals), while 22/15 appeared nowhere even on the bad list and was assumed to be "below the bottom of the bad list" as he called it "very dissonant".   Basically, I assumed it meant 13/9 is rated significantly better than 22/15 and is at least "less bad" if not "good".

B) John started a separate thread claiming I tried to make the scale and assumed he liked 13/9 better than 22/15 as an attempt to "troll" him, rather than accepting that what I was doing (and all I was doing), which was testing if 13/9 could be a good alternative fifth.. 

C) When I made the scale and sound example and commented I thought it sounded better than my Dimension scale I was NOT being sarcastic or poking fun at John.  Furthermore I honestly made a statement AGAINST my own scale system "Dimension" saying 13/9 works better (IE I was honestly challenging my own original claim, trying to disprove the 'null hypothesis' and actually managed to).
   Look...in conclusion, I seriously LIKE has 13/9 works in my scale and honestly DO think it sounds more stable than the use of 22/15 in my Dimension scale system...period.  This is NOT a joke or sarcastic statement!

   Since John would rather call me a troll than acknowledge my attempt to give him credit, however, I am stating the idea of using 13/9 as MY IDEA/'discovery' and NOT Johns any longer.

  John, don't worry, I will never use your name to refer to inspiration for any ideas I may have or "troll" you by doing so any longer.  Nor will I give you honest suggestions like considering octave inversions for you interval calculator (an idea Gene, honestly, inspired me to do), as you seem to take every bit of honest work I give toward your ideas in vain. 
  
   Even though you may hate me and my scale based on 13/9, I will say I love the sound of it and hope others will also enjoy it.
    

--- On Sun, 2/13/11, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

From: Michael <djtrancendance@...>
Subject: [tuning] Sound file/melodic example of my 13/9 alternative fifth "I hate 22/15" scale :-D
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 1:45 PM

Sound file/melodic example of my 13/9 alternative fifth "I hate 22/15" scale :-D

/tuning/files/MichaelSheiman/I%20hate%20twenty%20two%20over%20fifteen%20MELODIC%20EXAMPLE.mp3

You know I'm starting to think John O Sullivan might have proved me wrong and 13/9 can be a much better
"alternative fifth" than 22/15... :-D

   Using this scale, which uses a "hack" of tempering the 13/9 fifth so its octave inverse acts more like a 7/5 than the typical 18/13 octave inverse of 13/9...this sounds, gasp, more stable than my "Dimension" scale to my ears.  Shocker...  I'm
going to have to investigate this further...don't be surprised if you see 9 and 12 tone extensions to this 7-tone scale soon... :-D

--- On Sun, 2/13/11, tuning@yahoogroups.com <tuning@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

From: tuning@yahoogroups.com <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [tuning] New file uploaded to tuning
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 1:38 PM

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that

a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the tuning

group.

File : /MichaelSheiman/I hate twenty two over fifteen MELODIC EXAMPLE.mp3

Uploaded by : djtrancendance <djtrancendance@...>

Description : Melodic example of 13/9 alternative fifth MOS scale

You can access this file at the URL:

/tuning/files/MichaelSheiman/I%20hate%20twenty%20two%20over%20fifteen%20MELODIC%20EXAMPLE.mp3

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:

http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.html

Regards,

djtrancendance <djtrancendance@...>

Michael,

you slippery rat, your 13/9 clip sounds perfect to me but I find it hard to believe that it's based on 13/9. Does anyone in this group have the means to identify whether or not 13/9 occurs in the piece Michael posted?

John.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> And to make something BLATANTLY clear
>
> A)  My inspiration for making the scale, originally, was the fact 13/9 was near the top IE least dissonant far as John's list of "bad" intervals (IE was one of the "least bad" intervals), while 22/15 appeared nowhere even on the bad list and was assumed to be "below the bottom of the bad list" as he called it "very dissonant".   Basically, I assumed it meant 13/9 is rated significantly better than 22/15 and is at least "less bad" if not "good".
>
> B) John started a separate thread claiming I tried to make the scale and assumed he liked 13/9 better than 22/15 as an attempt to "troll" him, rather than accepting that what I was doing (and all I was doing), which was testing if 13/9 could be a good alternative fifth.. 
>
> C) When I made the scale and sound example and commented I thought it sounded better than my Dimension scale I was NOT being sarcastic or poking fun at John.  Furthermore I honestly made a statement AGAINST my own scale system "Dimension" saying 13/9 works better (IE I was honestly challenging my own original claim, trying to disprove the 'null hypothesis' and actually managed to).
>    Look...in conclusion, I seriously LIKE has 13/9 works in my scale and honestly DO think it sounds more stable than the use of 22/15 in my Dimension scale system...period.  This is NOT a joke or sarcastic statement!
>
>    Since John would rather call me a troll than acknowledge my attempt to give him credit, however, I am stating the idea of using 13/9 as MY IDEA/'discovery' and NOT Johns any longer.
>
>   John, don't worry, I will never use your name to refer to inspiration for any ideas I may have or "troll" you by doing so any longer.  Nor will I give you honest suggestions like considering octave inversions for you interval calculator (an idea Gene, honestly, inspired me to do), as you seem to take every bit of honest work I give toward your ideas in vain. 
>   
>    Even though you may hate me and my scale based on 13/9, I will say I love the sound of it and hope others will also enjoy it.
>     
>
> --- On Sun, 2/13/11, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> From: Michael <djtrancendance@...>
> Subject: [tuning] Sound file/melodic example of my 13/9 alternative fifth "I hate 22/15" scale :-D
> To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 1:45 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sound file/melodic example of my 13/9 alternative fifth "I hate 22/15" scale :-D
>
> /tuning/files/MichaelSheiman/I%20hate%20twenty%20two%20over%20fifteen%20MELODIC%20EXAMPLE.mp3
>
> You know I'm starting to think John O Sullivan might have proved me wrong and 13/9 can be a much better
> "alternative fifth" than 22/15... :-D
>
>    Using this scale, which uses a "hack" of tempering the 13/9 fifth so its octave inverse acts more like a 7/5 than the typical 18/13 octave inverse of 13/9...this sounds, gasp, more stable than my "Dimension" scale to my ears.  Shocker...  I'm
> going to have to investigate this further...don't be surprised if you see 9 and 12 tone extensions to this 7-tone scale soon... :-D
>
>
> --- On Sun, 2/13/11, tuning@yahoogroups.com <tuning@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
> From: tuning@yahoogroups.com <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [tuning] New file uploaded to tuning
> To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 1:38 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> This email message is a notification to let you know that
>
> a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the tuning
>
> group.
>
>
>
> File : /MichaelSheiman/I hate twenty two over fifteen MELODIC EXAMPLE.mp3
>
> Uploaded by : djtrancendance <djtrancendance@...>
>
> Description : Melodic example of 13/9 alternative fifth MOS scale
>
>
>
> You can access this file at the URL:
>
> /tuning/files/MichaelSheiman/I%20hate%20twenty%20two%20over%20fifteen%20MELODIC%20EXAMPLE.mp3
>
>
>
> To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
>
> http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.html
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> djtrancendance <djtrancendance@...>
>

John>"you slippery rat, your 13/9 clip sounds perfect to me but I find it hard to believe that it's based on 13/9"

    Well...I have the musical source. :-P  Second note in the high melody is a 13/9, which drones over the seventh note in the lower melody, which is the root 1/1 (or "9/9").

  Note though, there is only one tempered 13/9 interval in the entire scale...all the rest of the 5ths are near-perfect (and in all my scales, including Dimension, a large majority of the fifths are perfect and I use my "alternative 22/15 fifths" sparingly in that scale)..

    Also note: 19TET does a pretty good approximation of the scale I used in this little example...in fact it pretty much pans out to be a version of "19TET diatonic"...the interesting part being the 13/9-ish and a tad under 7/5 intervals formed are certainly not 12TET-ish sounding.
  In general, you get a BP fourth and undecimal diminished 6th in place of the two tri-tones in 12TET...that's the "only" major difference.

   Granted though, minus those two intervals...virtually everything in the scale interval-wise is either "plain old" 5-limit-esque or 12TET-like (IE the 16/9-ish interval included)...so if it tricked you into thinking it "was 12TET", there's good reason...

--- On Sun, 2/13/11, john777music <jfos777@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: john777music <jfos777@...>
Subject: [tuning] Re: Sound file/melodic example of my 13/9 alternative fifth "I hate 22/15" scale :-D
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 4:44 PM

Michael,

you slippery rat, your 13/9 clip sounds perfect to me but I find it hard to believe that it's based on 13/9. Does anyone in this group have the means to identify whether or not 13/9 occurs in the piece Michael posted?

John.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

>

> And to make something BLATANTLY clear

>

> A)  My inspiration for making the scale, originally, was the fact 13/9 was near the top IE least dissonant far as John's list of "bad" intervals (IE was one of the "least bad" intervals), while 22/15 appeared nowhere even on the bad list and was assumed to be "below the bottom of the bad list" as he called it "very dissonant".   Basically, I assumed it meant 13/9 is rated significantly better than 22/15 and is at least "less bad" if not "good".

>

> B) John started a separate thread claiming I tried to make the scale and assumed he liked 13/9 better than 22/15 as an attempt to "troll" him, rather than accepting that what I was doing (and all I was doing), which was testing if 13/9 could be a good alternative fifth.. 

>

> C) When I made the scale and sound example and commented I thought it sounded better than my Dimension scale I was NOT being sarcastic or poking fun at John.  Furthermore I honestly made a statement AGAINST my own scale system "Dimension" saying 13/9 works better (IE I was honestly challenging my own original claim, trying to disprove the 'null hypothesis' and actually managed to).

>    Look...in conclusion, I seriously LIKE has 13/9 works in my scale and honestly DO think it sounds more stable than the use of 22/15 in my Dimension scale system...period.  This is NOT a joke or sarcastic statement!

>

>    Since John would rather call me a troll than acknowledge my attempt to give him credit, however, I am stating the idea of using 13/9 as MY IDEA/'discovery' and NOT Johns any longer.

>

>   John, don't worry, I will never use your name to refer to inspiration for any ideas I may have or "troll" you by doing so any longer.  Nor will I give you honest suggestions like considering octave inversions for you interval calculator (an idea Gene, honestly, inspired me to do), as you seem to take every bit of honest work I give toward your ideas in vain. 

>   

>    Even though you may hate me and my scale based on 13/9, I will say I love the sound of it and hope others will also enjoy it.

>     

>

> --- On Sun, 2/13/11, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

>

> From: Michael <djtrancendance@...>

> Subject: [tuning] Sound file/melodic example of my 13/9 alternative fifth "I hate 22/15" scale :-D

> To: tuning@yahoogroups.com

> Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 1:45 PM

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>  

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Sound file/melodic example of my 13/9 alternative fifth "I hate 22/15" scale :-D

>

> /tuning/files/MichaelSheiman/I%20hate%20twenty%20two%20over%20fifteen%20MELODIC%20EXAMPLE.mp3

>

> You know I'm starting to think John O Sullivan might have proved me wrong and 13/9 can be a much better

> "alternative fifth" than 22/15... :-D

>

>    Using this scale, which uses a "hack" of tempering the 13/9 fifth so its octave inverse acts more like a 7/5 than the typical 18/13 octave inverse of 13/9...this sounds, gasp, more stable than my "Dimension" scale to my ears.  Shocker...  I'm

> going to have to investigate this further...don't be surprised if you see 9 and 12 tone extensions to this 7-tone scale soon... :-D

>

>

> --- On Sun, 2/13/11, tuning@yahoogroups.com <tuning@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

>

> From: tuning@yahoogroups.com <tuning@yahoogroups.com>

> Subject: [tuning] New file uploaded to tuning

> To: tuning@yahoogroups.com

> Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 1:38 PM

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>  

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Hello,

>

>

>

> This email message is a notification to let you know that

>

> a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the tuning

>

> group.

>

>

>

> File : /MichaelSheiman/I hate twenty two over fifteen MELODIC EXAMPLE.mp3

>

> Uploaded by : djtrancendance <djtrancendance@...>

>

> Description : Melodic example of 13/9 alternative fifth MOS scale

>

>

>

> You can access this file at the URL:

>

> /tuning/files/MichaelSheiman/I%20hate%20twenty%20two%20over%20fifteen%20MELODIC%20EXAMPLE.mp3

>

>

>

> To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:

>

> http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.html

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

> djtrancendance <djtrancendance@...>

>