For instance
Major third 5:4
Minor sixth 8:5
but it doesn't appear to explain HOW it came about these values nor what they really mean.

Would someone please share what these mean and in simple, non-music degree seeking terms.

VitaminD wrote:I am reading Music Theory for Computer Musicians and it gets to a point where it begins discussing chords (still mentioning intervals). In such it has a chart of ratios for Major and Minor thirds and sixths.
For instance
Major third 5:4
Minor sixth 8:5
but it doesn't appear to explain HOW it came about these values nor what they really mean.![]()
Would someone please share what these mean and in simple, non-music degree seeking terms.
VitaminD wrote:Would someone please share what these mean and in simple, non-music degree seeking terms.
VitaminD wrote:but it doesn't appear to explain HOW it came about these values nor what they really mean.![]()
Would someone please share what these mean and in simple, non-music degree seeking terms.
who knewtapper mike wrote:And it falls to what purpose unless you are learning to pull off harmonics on a stringed instrument like guitar harmonics.
Yes it's lovely scientific data but it's not something that one references in songwriting which is the ultimate goal of music theory.
Most people don't mind? what people? a lot of musicians notice it and ARE INTERESTED IN IT. it's available in virtual instrument design, the ability to have non-ET intonations, as there is a demand for it. eg., VI Pro lets you set an intonation for every matrix so you can eat your cake and have it too, eg., just intonation at every new key level. and the turkish musicians et al frequently made the feature requests and got a number of their maqams included in the design. but 'most people'... sure, you know, so let's just act like this is 'irrelevant information'. christ.Gamma-UT wrote:
The ratios in the book apply to 'pure' methods of tuning, such as just intonation. The reason people use those ratios is because of the way that the scale is constructed: by successively taking pure fifths (a ratio of 3:2) on a monochord - basically a resonator box with a couple of strings on it. You use a moveable bridge to divide the string into sections so you can construct frequency ratios easily. If you find one fifth and then the fifth of that then divide by two to bring the note into the same octave, you get 9:8 - the major second (and the next fifth along in the circle of fifths). Keep on doing it and you get all the notes of the 12-tone scale and, in theory, get back to the beginning.
Except you don't. Because, after all those divisions, the A you derive from those 12 steps comes out slightly too low. This needs to be fixed up in some way and each of the intonation or tuning systems has a way round it. Just intonation keeps the purity of the key ratios such as fifths and thirds but other, more dissonant intervals come out really dissonant. Equal temperament, which almost all western music uses today, evens up the difference between each of the notes so that the ratios are not pure - but most people don't tend to mind.
well, it's interesting as a practical matter. I'm not sure why it's in that text, made as though for the apparently very special subgroup 'computer' musicians, but it is a matter of the reality of intervals and since melody and harmony are comprised of intervals I would say it's interesting qua music knowledge interest.JumpingJackFlash wrote:Although this is interesting from a historical perspective, like the others said, it's more important that you get on with the actual music and worry about the mathematics later (if at all).
NO. Just intonations reflects the more simpler bases of intervals. if you have just intonation based on eg., tonic = C and you find yourself in a key distant to C, the more complex interval you have the more out-of-intonation it will be according to how distant (and to what interval). asserting the intervals themselves are 'more dissonant' is not a true statement.Gamma-UT wrote: Just intonation keeps the purity of the key ratios such as fifths and thirds but other, more dissonant intervals come out really dissonant. Equal temperament, which almost all western music uses today, evens up the difference between each of the notes so that the ratios are not pure - but most people don't tend to mind.
jancivil wrote:I'm not sure how 'music theory', ie., some information in such a text gets to be central to 'getting on with the actual music' really. these opinions kind of amount to an anti-knowledge thrust for this thread, which is just daft.
So. you think following your articles of information - with no particular context - as far as roman numbers and scale degrees etc is more valuable for a noob than other information. As though it will get one on one's feet in some way through itself. I guess because it's more along your frame of reference? You know, Paul McCartney drove his music perfectly well without it.JumpingJackFlash wrote:
Most people drive cars perfectly well without understanding how they are manufactured.
It's a question of priorities. All knowledge is good, but one should not run before they can walk.
jancivil wrote:You know, Paul McCartney drove his music perfectly well without it.
jancivil wrote:do you mean eg., 15/8 vs 1100¢? to whose ears? 16/15 vs 100¢? how? the thing is, the concordances are natural and not compromised. this is a physical matter which can be demonstrated! Do you believe that the difference of a whopping 13.69¢ [just M3rd vs ET's, sharper to that degree] is negligible?
© KVR Audio, Inc. 2000-2018
Submit: News, Plug-ins, Hosts & Apps | Advertise @ KVR | About KVR / Contact Us | Privacy Statement