source file: mills2.txt Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 06:24:56 -0800 Subject: Re: Manuel Op de Coul's List From: brg@netcom.com (Bruce R. Gilson) COUL@ezh.nl (Manuel Op de Coul) wrote: > >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. Sorry. I took them as such, as that was what I really wanted. >Otherwise I could have listed them as such. To stay with your example, >you can have a major scale in many different tunings. Certainly. In fact, I suppose, what I'm looking for, which might be too much for a post on a list such as this, is an "ency- clopedia of scales," that I could pick from, program my computer to play (or set any sufficiently variable- pitch instrument to play), and thus hear it. >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, This is a nice idea. I'd be interested in the sort of algorithm you use. It will somewhat depend on how similar "similar" is, of course. Bruce R. Gilson brg@netcom.com Received: from eartha.mills.edu [144.91.3.20] by vbv40.ezh.nl with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Wed, 24 Jan 1996 16:56 +0100 Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI) for id HAA14624; Wed, 24 Jan 1996 07:56:34 -0800 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 07:56:34 -0800 Message-Id: <0099CE052D632154.85A3@ezh.nl> Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu