|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1816
|
1254
|
|
|
|
Bbb
|
4L+4s
|
1254
|
less than one cent
|
bbIX
|
|
|
314
|
L+s
|
bIII
|
|
|
314
|
less than
one cent
|
|
1515
|
940
|
|
|
|
Gb
|
3L+3s
|
941
|
less than
one cent
|
bbVII
|
|
|
235
|
2s
|
bbIII
|
|
|
245
|
+10 cents
|
|
1323
|
706
|
|
|
|
E
|
3L+s
|
695
|
-11 cents
|
V
|
|
|
207
|
L
|
II
|
|
|
191
|
-16 cents
|
|
1174
|
499
|
|
|
|
D
|
2L+s
|
505
|
+6 cents
|
IV
|
|
|
341
|
2L
|
III
|
|
|
381
|
+40 cents
|
|
964
|
158
|
|
|
|
Bb
|
s
|
123
|
-35 cents
|
bII
|
|
|
158
|
s
|
bII
|
|
|
123
|
-35 cents
|
|
880
|
0
|
|
|
|
A
|
|
0
|
|
I
|
This could give us an alternative perspective on the "stretched"
octave.
It looks like pure co-incidence that the higher values
come out within one cent of the values; yet the IV and V seem to be very
near to integer ratios.
I included the bII as although the difference of 35 cents
is very large, this choice produces a "consonant (in my harmonic terms)"
scale.
LucyTuning Homepage