The 88th Door

seraph

Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.

Listen to The 88th Door

Read my blog for details

xjscott · Joined: Apr 25, 2007 Posts: 232 Location: Appalachia

I enjoyed listening to this, thanks!

seraph · Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2020 12:38 pm Post subject:

blue hell · Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2020 6:19 pm Post subject:

I've 'fixed' [*] the listening link .. it was pointing to the image and not to the mp3.

Nice track it is! Bit short ... will have to try that tuning too now ... 13.6364 edo .. another magic number to try to remember .. after 18.809 and 9.999996.

[*] assuming you had intended the mp3 to be in it Confused

seraph · Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2020 1:49 pm Post subject:

blue hell · Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2020 3:40 pm Post subject:

xjscott · Joined: Apr 25, 2007 Posts: 232 Location: Appalachia

Yikes and holy cow, the table on that page tries to make 88cET an octave tuning and even has a big table showing what "octave" (multiple of 1200 cents) each interval is in, and even 1200-cent reduces them once they spill over.

Really the worst possible way to present it and highly misleading. But par for the course for octave zealots whose obsession is cramming octaves into everything, even nonoctave tunings when it makes absolutely no sense to do so. Kind of like the obsession of the Pythagorean cult about ratios to the extent of executing those who insisted there are irrational numbers.

Anyway that sort of nonsense is why xenwiki should not be considered authoritative or even safe. So much nonsense there. I applied to join after they closed open membership and was denied. Asked one of the founders (JB) who was involved in the decision to ban me from there and he wouldn't tell me. It's just as well! I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member! Smile

blue hell · Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2020 7:36 pm Post subject:

13.6364 notes per octave is not equal to a stacking of 88 cET intervals then I guess, can you show the proper math for it?

xjscott · Joined: Apr 25, 2007 Posts: 232 Location: Appalachia

It's the same answer as how many marmosets can you fit into a giraffe.

The chart has 32 cents and 120 cents as intervals in 88cET, because 14*88-1200=32 and 15*88-1200=120.

Once someone goes so far off the rails to be posting that as correct or even reasonable math to consider, there's nothing that could be said to guide them to anything resembling reality.

Remember folks, a giraffe divided by a marmoset gives a remainder of 56. This is useful to remember in tuning theory studies because it lets us know that for every 13 marmosets we use, we will need an additional 7/11 of a marmoset.

blue hell · Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2020 4:24 am Post subject:

Yeah ok you do not like that page for reasons that are a bit over my head (as most music theory is) but that was not . erm .. let me just say what I am doing ...

In my program I can set a factor for an 'octave' span, which is set to 2 for this example .. next I can set a number of notes to go into that span .. ... the span equals 1200 ct so I'll have to set 1200 / 88 for the notes per span .. which is about 13.6364.

What am I doing wrong there (except mentioning that page)?

Anyway, likewise I'm using 18.809 notes / octave as an approximation for the Carlos Beta scale (for 63.8 ct intervals).

xjscott · Joined: Apr 25, 2007 Posts: 232 Location: Appalachia

Sorry for the misunderstanding. To clarify my criticism is of that page's perspective. It used to be a good page but at a certain point a vandal came in and damaged it with that chart which shows 88cET to include steps of 32 and 120 cents and even show what nearby just ratios are to 32 and 120 cents as if that has anything to do with 88cET. The chart is beyond highly misleading, it's wrong as well, and it comes from a deep seated obsession with octaves.

As far as your specifying to your program how you want to enter things you can and should do whatever works for you, I didn't mean to be commenting on that.

But I do think I will start talking about the rather fascinating and versatile scale of 17.82512 steps per 14/5 and describing it that way to people, that should be some fun. Another one that is really interesting is 14.66781 steps per 7/3.

seraph · Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:40 am Post subject:

xjscott · Joined: Apr 25, 2007 Posts: 232 Location: Appalachia

Great! Well it turns out that 14.66781 steps per 7/3 has a number of incredible harmonic resources and excellent support for modulation. It's decent but not ideal for baroque styles, and where it really shines is in jazz and classical. A great versatile tuning and one people should give a shot to at least once.

Similar qualities apply to 17.82512 steps per 14/5. In a way they can be thought of as sister tunings.

A closely held secret in the industry that not a lot of people know about is that for many years now there's been a lot of soundtrack composers as well as producers in genres from hip hop to ambient and trance have been using one or both of these tunings as a kind of "secret weapon" that gives their sound an edge. This has included the scores to several of the biggest blockbuster movies in recent years.

seraph · Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 3:28 pm Post subject:

xjscott · Joined: Apr 25, 2007 Posts: 232 Location: Appalachia