source file: mills2.txt
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 05:56:46 -0800

Subject: Re: Manuel Op de Coul's list

From: COUL@ezh.nl (Manuel Op de Coul)

Bruce R. Gilson writes:

> The notation seemed to imply it. When
> you give only a "number of steps in an
> octave" and the number of steps between
> consecutive notes in the scale [as
> 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 for a standard major
> scale] you have something well-defined
> only in ET.

I wasn't aiming at them to be watertight definitions of scales. 
Otherwise I could have listed them as such. To stay with your example,
you can have a major scale in many different tunings.
The utility of this notation is that it allows me to use it in
combination with a computer program and for instance 

- have a mode-fitting algorithm operate on a given scale and look
if it's similar to a mode (of equal temperament) in the list,
- create a new scale from a mode by entering a different interval for 
each amount of steps,
- select a subset from a given scale (not necessarily anyway near equal
temperament) using the mode name.

So rather than a set of exact scales it's meant to be an alternative
notation that can be employed for different purposes. I you have other 
ideas I would be very interested to hear them.

Manuel Op de Coul    coul@ezh.nl

Received: from eartha.mills.edu [144.91.3.20] by vbv40.ezh.nl
           with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Sun, 21 Jan 1996 23:51 +0100
Received: from  by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
	for <coul@ezh.nl> id OAA04266; Sun, 21 Jan 1996 14:51:23 -0800
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 14:51:23 -0800
Message-Id:  <9601211447.aa10246@cyber.cyber.net>
Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu