Browse Groups

• ## Corrected version of preferred.... Re: absoute-pitch.. on the violin & piano

(63)
• NextPrevious
• ... 11-limit septenarian comma versus the SC ... 3^4/5/16 = (11*3^2/7^2/2)*(7^2*3^2/11/5/2^3) i do call the ratio: 441/440
Message 1 of 63 , May 2, 2008
View Source
--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "George D. Secor" <gdsecor@...> wrote:

> from Werckmeister's
11-limit septenarian comma versus the SC
> >
> > 81/80 = (99/98)*(441/440)
3^4/5/16 = (11*3^2/7^2/2)*(7^2*3^2/11/5/2^3)

i do call the ratio:
441/440
http://www.petersontuners.com/index.cfm?category=85&sub=89
as "Werckmeister's 11-limit septenarian schisma"
Scheibler later in the early 19.th century used that interval
for defineing our todays still actual 440cps standard:
http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Musical_Pitch
> >
Werckmeister's 11-limit-septenarian-comma becomes when
> > divided into 3 epimoric subparts:
> >
> > 99/98 = (297/296)*(296/295)*(295/294)
> >
That 3-fold decompostion of W's-comma can be used for
> > tempering the 5ths G-D-A-E flattend by the corresponding amounts:
> >
> > G 296/297 D 295/296 A 294/295 E
> >
> > yielding on the violin empty stings the absolute pitches:
>
G2=99Hz lowest violin__G3=198__string
G3=148 __G4=296__(<297=3*G2)
A3=221.25 __A4=442.5__ (<444=3*G3)
highest violin__E5=661.5__string (<663.75=3*A3)

> > g3: 198 cps = 99*2 := 220*(9/10) a minor-tone below a3=440Hz/2
> > d4: 296
> > a4: 442.5 := 885/2
> > e5: 661.5 := 1323/2
> >
or
When generalized to a dozen 5ths-cirlce on my own old piano:
> >
> > C_5: 523Hz (>522 264 132 66 33) 'tenor-C'
> > G_2: 99 (((> 98 49=7*7 taken from Werckmeister's "septenarius")))
> > D_4: (297>) 296 (>295 (>294 147=49*3)
> > A_5: 885 (>882 441=49*9)
> > E_6: 1323 = 49*27
> > B_0: (49*81 = 3969>) 3968 ... 496...31 use all 7 'B's on the keys
> > F#_2: 93
> > C#_4: 279 a semitone above 'middle-C'
> > G#_5: 837
> > Eb_7: 2511
> > Bb_6: (7533>) 7532 3716 1883
> > F_4: (5649>) 5648 2824 1412 706 353
> > C_5: (1059>) 1058 529 = 23^2 cycle returned back to 'tenor-C'
> >

Sorry, the old previous meassge contains here some typo-errors:
I had confused that due to a mistake in all to much hurry.
Simply forget about the wrong numbers:

again the now corrected version:

!well_Violin2Piano.scl
!by A.Sparschuh
temper from violin empty strings G 296/297 D 295/296 A 294/295 E
12
! middle_C 264.5Hz = 529cps/2
!
558/529 ! C#
598/529 ! D
2511/2116 ! Eb = 627.75/529
1323/1058 ! E = 661.5/529
706/529 ! F
724/529 ! F#
792/529 ! G
837/529 ! G#
885/523 ! A = 442.5Hz*2 absolute a4
1883/1058 ! Bb = 941.5/529
992/529 ! B
2/1
!
!
the relative deviation of the
5ths corresponds to the following epimoric decomposition

F 1058:1059 C 528:529 G 296/297 D 295/296 A 294/295 E 3968:3969 B
B F# C# G# Eb 7532:7533 Bb 5648:5649 F

into the 8 superparticular subfactorization of the PC=3^12/2^19.

> Either I don't understand this,
or if you prefer the same distribution of the PC=~23.46cents
in logarithmically values as Cents approximation,

F~ -1.635 ~C~ -3.275 ~G~ -5.839 ~D~ -5.859 ~A~ -5.879 ~E~ -0.436 ~B
B F# C# G# Eb~ -0.2298 ~Bb~ -0.306 ~F

correspodning to the above 8 epimoric ratios.

> or something is very wrong with the
> numbers.
In deed -i have to agree-
my first data were somewhat out of control.

Many thanks for making me aware of my blunder,
that had urgently demanded some bug-fixing.

> The fifths D-A and A-E are tempered >23 cents,
not anymore , but now
all that both 5ths are less tempered than PC^1/4 =~ 5.865 Cents
compareable to G-A in Werckmeister's#3.

> and D-F# is
> tempered by >55 cents.
that 3rd: D-F# is barely 186/185 ~9.33Cents wide
but attend the 3rd C-E with barely 2646/2645 ~0.654Cents wider
than 5/4, hence almost nearly to pure JI.
>
> Or is this a joke (since you said, "have a lot of fun")? :-)
That was never intened as hoax, even in its faulty version.
so,
that patched revision is really meant seriously adjusted
for properly usage.

Yours Sincerely
A.S.
• ... Hi George, ... in deed, even that *.scl-file contained some unfixed bug. ... Many thanks again for that repair. ... when considering more evaluated digits,
Message 63 of 63 , May 8, 2008
View Source
--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "George D. Secor" <gdsecor@...> wrote:

Hi George,
> > epimoric decomposition
> >
> > F 1058:1059 C 528:529 G 296/297 D 295/296 A 294/295 E 3968:3969 B
> > B F# C# G# Eb 7532:7533 Bb 5648:5649 F
> >
> >Cents approximation,
>
> >F~ -1.635 ~C~ -3.275 ~G~ -5.839 ~D~ -5.859 ~A~ -5.879 ~E~ -0.436 ~B
> > B F# C# G# Eb~ -0.2298 ~Bb~ -0.306 ~F
> >
>
> I believe there are still a few mistakes.
in deed, even that *.scl-file contained some unfixed bug.

> From the sizes of the
> fifths you give, I think that perhaps you meant this:
>
Now -as far as i can see- those ratios appearto be correct:
> 558/529 ! C#
> 592/529 ! D
> 2511/2116 ! Eb = 627.75/529
> 1323/1058 ! E = 661.5/529
> 706/529 ! F
> 744/529 ! F#
> 792/529 ! G
> 837/529 ! G#
> 875/523 ! A = 442.5Hz*2 absolute a4
> 1883/1058 ! Bb = 941.5/529
> 992/529 ! B
>
Many thanks again for that repair.

> This will result in:
when considering more evaluated digits,
as calculated by "Google"s arithmetics, which yields:

> F~ -1.636 ~C
(1 200 * ln(1 058 / 1 059)) / ln(2) = ~-1.63555425...

> ~C~ -3.276 ~G
(1 200 * ln(528 / 529)) / ln(2) = ~-3.27575131...

>~G~ -5.839 ~D
(1 200 * ln(296 / 297)) / ln(2) = ~-5.83890621...
arises that deviation here due to your's rounding procedere?

~D~ -5.784 ~A
1 200 * ln(295 / 296)) / ln(2) = ~-5.85866566...
arises that deviation here due to your's rounding procedere?

~A~ -5.953 ~E
(1 200 * ln(294 / 295)) / ln(2) = ~-5.8785593...

same question as for D~A?
Or what else could be the reason for the tiny
discrepancy amounting about tiny 1/10 Cents
inbetween ours calculations of the relative deviations
in the tempered 5ths flatnesses?

~E~ -0.436 ~B
(1 200 * ln(3 968 / 3 969)) / ln(2) = ~-0.436243936...

> B F# C# G# all just pure 5ths

Eb~ -0.2298 ~Bb
(1 200 * ln(7 532 / 7 533)) / ln(2) = ~-0.229835254...

Bb~ -0.306 ~F
(1 200 * ln(5 648 / 5 649)) / ln(2) = ~-0.306494477...

at least we both do agree now in all others 5ths except D~A~E.

What do you think about that well-temperement,
with an almost JI the C-major chord:

C:E:G = 4 : 5*(2646/2645) : 6*(529/528)

?

Yours Sincerely
Andreas
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
• Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
• Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer. We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.