
From:  Hans Aberg 
Subject:  Re: Lilypond's internal pitch representation and microtonal notation 
Date:  Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:18:15 +0200 
On 22 Sep 2010, at 08:18, Benkő Pál wrote:
I didn't mean to replace the whole of your system by d and a, only M and m. similarly to your P5P8 example, (1 0)(d) = (M) (1 1)(a) (m)But it becomes complicated when adding pitches. If one has seconds s_1, ..., s_k, then there is an accidental for each difference s_j  s_i and each s_i  s_j. With just m, M and n, one gets besides sharp Mm, flat mM, also nm, nM, mn, Mn. All four are used in Turkish music, but this system canhandle it algebraically by adding just one second n.well, the two systems are equivalent, as M and m can be expressed by d and a: M = d, m = da (and n is common to both). I just think that d and a suitsbetter to classical music than M and n.
Your system uses M and the sharp instead of m. Then the octave will be represented by 7Mbb, a doubleflat of seven M, instead of 2m+5M. Perhaps you are used thinking in terms of E12 equivalence? Because there are no values assigned to these intervals, such simplifications are not done in the first stage finding the accidentals. One will have to apply enharmonic equivalences after by adding/subtracting M  2m. But this also gives more control over it.
[Prev in Thread]  Current Thread  [Next in Thread] 