Topic: Ennealimmal 45 vs Miracle 41
2 scales
| File | Description | Notes | Period (ยข) |
|---|---|---|---|
| ennea45 | Ennealimmal-45, in a 7-limit least-squares tuning | 45 | 1200.0 |
| miracle41 | Miracle-41, in a 7-limit least-squares tuning | 41 | 1200.0 |
Thread (8 messages)
From: genewardsmith (2001-12-06) Subject: Ennealimmal 45 vs Miracle 41 Paul asked how these compared, so I fired up Scala and checked. I got 28 major and 28 minor triads in Miracle41, all of which are extendable to tetrads, as well as 27 supermajor and 27 subminor triads. In Ennealimmal45, by way of contrast, I got 28 major and 28 minor triads, all of which are extendable to tetrads, as well as 27 supermajor and 27 subminor triads. Ennealimmal45 cheats by having four extra notes per octave, but makes up for it by being in much better tune, for those people who might notice or care. Paul called it "immensely complex", but I think that overstates it. Ennealimmal45 can be done by stacking five 9-ets, separated by something very close to 36/35. Each octave is simply a 5x9 rectangle of 45 notes. For those who want to try this comparison out here they are: ! ennea45.scl ! Ennealimmal-45, in a 7-limit least-squares tuning 45 ! 35.3350 48.9992 84.3342 97.9983 133.3333 168.6684 182.3325 217.6675 231.3316 266.6667 302.0017 315.6658 351.0008 364.6650 400.0000 435.3350 448.9992 484.3342 497.9983 533.3333 568.6684 582.3325 617.6675 631.3316 666.6667 702.0017 715.6658 751.0008 764.6650 800.0000 835.3350 848.9992 884.3342 897.9983 933.3333 968.6684 982.3325 1017.6675 1031.3316 1066.6667 1102.0017 1115.6658 1151.0008 1164.6650 2/1 ! miracle41.scl ! Miracle-41, in a 7-limit least-squares tuning 41 ! 34.2705 68.5411 82.3024 116.5729 150.8435 185.1140 198.8754 233.1459 267.4164 301.6870 315.4483 349.7188 383.9894 418.2599 432.0213 466.2918 500.5623 534.8328 548.5942 582.8647 617.1353 651.4058 665.1672 699.4377 733.7082 767.9787 781.7401 816.0106 850.2812 884.5517 898.3130 932.5836 966.8541 1001.1246 1014.8860 1049.1565 1083.4271 1117.6976 1131.4589 1165.7295 2/1
From: paulerlich (2001-12-06) Subject: Re: Ennealimmal 45 vs Miracle 41 --- In tuning@y..., "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote: > Paul asked how these compared, so I fired up Scala and checked. I got > 28 major and 28 minor triads in Miracle41, all of which are > extendable to tetrads, as well as 27 supermajor and 27 subminor > triads. In Ennealimmal45, by way of contrast, I got 28 major and 28 > minor triads, all of which are extendable to tetrads, Something's not adding up, Gene. How can there be 28 of _anything_, when the scale exactly repeats itself 9 times per octave? I get 18 major and 18 minor tetrads all extendable to triads.
From: genewardsmith (2001-12-06) Subject: Re: Ennealimmal 45 vs Miracle 41 --- In tuning@y..., "paulerlich" <paul@s...> wrote: > Something's not adding up, Gene. How can there be 28 of _anything_, > when the scale exactly repeats itself 9 times per octave? I get 18 > major and 18 minor tetrads all extendable to triads. Sorry, you are right. I guess I read the data cross-eyed.
From: [email protected] (2001-12-06)
Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Ennealimmal 45 vs Miracle 41
Paul:
> > Something's not adding up, Gene. How can there be 28 of _anything_,
> > when the scale exactly repeats itself 9 times per octave? I get 18
> > major and 18 minor tetrads all extendable to triads.
Gene:
> Sorry, you are right. I guess I read the data cross-eyed.
So it's 18 for Ennealimmal45 and 28 for Miracle41?
Graham
From: genewardsmith (2001-12-06) Subject: Re: Ennealimmal 45 vs Miracle 41 --- In tuning@y..., graham@m... wrote: > Paul: > > > Something's not adding up, Gene. How can there be 28 of _anything_, > > > when the scale exactly repeats itself 9 times per octave? I get 18 > > > major and 18 minor tetrads all extendable to triads. > > Gene: > > Sorry, you are right. I guess I read the data cross-eyed. > > So it's 18 for Ennealimmal45 and 28 for Miracle41? Right--my "18" somehow ended up looking a lot like "28" and I misread it. Paul spotted it because he actually thought about it. I get, for intervals: 3/2: 27 35 5/4: 18 34 7/4: 27 39 5/3: 36 28 7/6: 45 33 7/5: 36 36 and for extra, 9/7: 27 27
From: jpehrson2 (2001-12-09) Subject: Re: Ennealimmal 45 vs Miracle 41 --- In tuning@y..., "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tuning/message/31110 Gene... would you mind please running by me how the word "Ennealimmal" is derived again?? Initially, I thought it was something vaguely off color... JP
From: genewardsmith (2001-12-09) Subject: Re: Ennealimmal 45 vs Miracle 41 --- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote: > Gene... would you mind please running by me how the > word "Ennealimmal" is derived again?? Initially, I thought it was > something vaguely off color... The large limma is 27/25; if you take nine of them you get (27/25)^9 = 7625597484987 / 3814697265625 = 1.9990046. This tells us that 2*(25/27)^9 is very close to 1; and it has been given the name "ennealimma" because nine limmas down and an octave up make an ennealimma (ennea = nine in ancient Greek.) The 5-limit tuning system based on the ennealimma, and the 7-limit extension of that, have thereby been given the name "ennealimmal". The 7-limit ennealimmal system has generators of a ninth of an octave, which is almost exactly a limma, and something very close to 36/35.
From: jpehrson2 (2001-12-09) Subject: Re: Ennealimmal 45 vs Miracle 41 --- In tuning@y..., "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tuning/message/31168 > --- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote: > > > Gene... would you mind please running by me how the > > word "Ennealimmal" is derived again?? Initially, I thought it was something vaguely off color... > > The large limma is 27/25; if you take nine of them you get > (27/25)^9 = 7625597484987 / 3814697265625 = 1.9990046. This tells us that 2*(25/27)^9 is very close to 1; and it has been given the name > "ennealimma" because nine limmas down and an octave up make an > ennealimma (ennea = nine in ancient Greek.) The 5-limit tuning system based on the ennealimma, and the 7-limit extension of that, have thereby been given the name "ennealimmal". The 7-limit ennealimmal > system has generators of a ninth of an octave, which is almost > exactly a limma, and something very close to 36/35. Hi Gene! Thanks for the update. This "limma" then, at 27/25 must be different from the "limma" that Joe Monzo refers to in his dictionary of 256/243 or the "diatonic semitone" of Pythagorean tuning at 90 cents. When I was reading Paul's _Introduction to Periodicity Blocks_ again, I had a question about that, since I wondered if the transposition of 90 cents he refers to when creating a "Periodicity Block" of a pentatonic scale could be termed a "semitone." I soon dismissed that idea, since I thought a "semitone" was only a legitimate reference to something connected with 12-tET, but now I see that the 90 cent interval can, indeed, be called a "diatonic semitone..." That seems a little peculiar to me. If that's the "semitone" then what is the "whole tone?" I must be missing something... In any case, it looks as though your "limma" has nothing to do with this Pythagorean limma... ?? Thanks! Joseph