Talk:List of pitch intervals

message: Generally, something should only be linked if it makes sense to write an article about it. What material could be used in an article on the septimal minor third? It's a good interval, even one of my favorites, but that doesn't mean it's worthy of its own article. —Keenan Pepper 05:06, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many redlinks 

message: As suggested, indeed we should flip all ratios. See for example in the article Interval (music). The ratios should have values over 1. For example a fifth is 3:2. It is more common to think in frequencies than in string or tube length. −Woodstone 21:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes sense to me, especially for the sake of consistency with the other article. Rigadoun  (talk) 16:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes this is all backwards, if I am not mistaken. An octave being "twice" the pitch should be 2:1, and intervals between unison and octave should be between 1:1 and 2:1, no?  Also, the interval 4:7 (apparently 7:4) is listed as the "seventh harmonic" -- but strictly speaking, isn't the seventh harmonic 7:1? I'm also wondering if 7:4 is also called the "harmonic seventh" (perhaps the words got reversed?), the "blues seventh", and/or the "barbershop seventh"? Pfly 06:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it wasn't exactly wrong, as getting the intervals backwards just makes them descending instead of ascending, or in terms of string lengths and so forth, but having them greater than one is more common. Anyway, I've flipped them all for the sake of famiiliarity and consistency with most description. Yes, strictly speaking I suppose the seventh harmonic is 7:1, but it's more often thought of as being in the same octave as the nearby minor seventh (dividing by four just moves the pitch down two octaves). I'm not really sure abut the nomenclature, though. Rigadoun  (talk) 18:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: True, it wasn't wrong, although the cents would be negative :)  ...thanks for flipping.  As for 7:4, the Scala's list of pitches (which seems to be a widely used standard) calls it "harmonic seventh",, as does Mathieu's book "Harmonic Experience", as I read last night.  So I think I'll flip the words.  It appears that Harmonic seventh was once a page here, or at least there are some redlinks to it.  A quick google seems to imply that there is some mild controversy about 7:4, but the sources I am most familiar with seem comfortable enough calling it "blue seventh" as well as "harmonic seventh".  But perhaps "blue notes" are inherently not well defined. Thanks for the response! Pfly 18:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The reciprocal ratios are essentially the same in concert practice. If you hit two notes that are a fifth apart, then one of them is ten, and the other is fifteen. Making the ratio higher than one is nothing but a tradition. That is why colons are used instead of slashes, because the division is not done. So, do not edit war over this one. 216.234.170.74 (talk) 19:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flip the ratios 

message: I think it might be much more usefull if at least the musical intervals in the equal temperament would also include their width in semitones. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.121.142.63 (talk) 13:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already there. The first column states the interval in cents. One hundred cent is a semitone. So where it says 500 cents, you can read 5 semitones. −Woodstone 15:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distance in semitones 

message: In the table of intervals may be column named Factorization to indicate intervals of Just Intonations and its limit for them. If somebody have another opinion, please discuss. Commator (talk) 18:31, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When writing tunes into synthesizers written for this stuff, factoring is very useful. If that is your work, then thanks. 216.234.170.74 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 19:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factorization column 

message: Intervals such as "ragisma" and "breedsma" need to referenced (dictionaries, texts, peer-reviewed
journals). Frank Zamjatin (talk) 12:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreferenced material 

message: The "audio files" being added are actually ".mid" files, or "midi" files. In that case, in order to have any intervals other than equal temperament these files need to employ microtuning. How certain are you that most computer's midi player support this not too common feature? −Woodstone (talk) 22:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Media help. Hyacinth (talk) 00:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That really didn't answer the question. Not all PC MIDI synths support the MIDI microtonal tuning standard. The TiMIDIty softsynth does, but consumer-grade PC soundcards are anyone's guess. — Gwalla | Talk 01:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Test your midi pitchbend range. Hyacinth (talk) 01:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So everybody who wants to use your MIDI samples needs to test their software first? I'm not sure I get your point. A response with your own words in actual sentences might help, because right now it looks like you're trying to dodge. Plus, are you using pitchbend or the microtuning standard? They're different things! — Gwalla | Talk 05:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and did the test and it worked. I have one of the most generic Realtek integrated soundboards. SharkD (talk) 01:09, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

text: It's not a question of what to label the MIDI files. It's a question of whether MIDI files are appropriate for this use, or if Ogg should be used instead. But if you're using pitch bend messages, those should be supported by pretty much everything, so there shouldn't be a problem, I think. — Gwalla | Talk 03:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Midi microtuning 

message: I noticed that one of the Pythagorean intervals is missing from this list. Specifically, the interval(s) near 600 cents from the table found in Pythagorean tuning. However, there are two values listed there: 588.27 cents and 611.73 cents. Which of the two should we use? SharkD (talk) 21:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been reading Just Intonation Explained, and it says, "The smaller the numbers in an interval's ratio, the more consonant (sweet-sounding) it is, and the more useful it is for purposes of musical intelligibility." Does this imply that sticking unison smack-dab in the middle is the optimal solution? SharkD (talk) 00:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Intervals

message: Should the equal tempered quarter tone, neutral second, neutral third, neutral sixth and neutral seventh be re-labeled as belonging to 24-TET? We could label the column "Q", for "quarter tone". SharkD (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, don't see why not. Hyacinth (talk) 08:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. SharkD (talk) 10:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 24-equal temperment

message: Is there an article or article section that specifically defines the term, "frequency/pitch ratio"? I couldn't find it in Frequency or Pitch (music). I would like to link to it in the column header like "Cents" is. SharkD (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That term doesn't currently appear in the article. A "frequency ratio" is a ratio ("a comparison of two numbers by division") where the two numbers are the frequencies of musical sounds or pitches. Hyacinth (talk) 08:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I know what it is. I just thought it weird that it's not defined in an article. SharkD (talk) 08:21, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Frequency" and "ratio" are both defined in articles. Hyacinth (talk) 08:36, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Frequency ratio

message: I've been looking at other equal temperaments, such as 19-TET. Should they also be listed here, or should they be restricted to List of meantone intervals? I don't want to duplicate content, but I also want the list to be comprehensive. SharkD (talk) 00:28, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding more equal temperaments

message: I'm trying to add links to audio files on list of meantone intervals just like this page. Am I doing it correctly? I need help to add the others.--206.248.172.247 (talk) 22:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, no. What you did doesn't really make sense. You added links to some audio files of intervals in equal temperament, but the whole point of that article is that these interval names can refer to different exact intervals in different temperaments. For example, the phrase "minor second" can refer to a 100-cent interval in 12-EDO, or a 126-cent interval in 19-EDO. So should the audio example be a 100-cent interval or a 126-cent interval? It's not really clear which one you should use. —Keenan Pepper 02:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding audio files?

message: You use prime limit and ignore odd limit, yet you say "The lower the number, the more consonant the interval is considered to be".  This is not correct for prime limit.  See http://organicdesign.org/peterson/tuning/consonance.html for example.  243:128 has a prime limit of 3, but is not consonant at all.  (243:128 = 3^5:2^7)  It has an odd limit of 243, though, which indicates its dissonance.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.65.203 (talk) 22:09, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prime vs odd limit 

message: I found the ratio for the Secor, (18/5)^(1/19), at http://tonalsoft.com/enc/s/secor.aspx. --Glenn L (talk) 00:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secor 

message: Some information on meantone temperament was added. I have some doubts about how that fits in this table. The values in the column "ratio" so far have all been exact values. The ones now added for meantone are approximations. The definition of the equal and "limit" tunings are very clear and so can easily be marked in their own trailing columns, but there are many meantone systems and the correponding marking column gives a very hazy and incomplete view on that collection. −Woodstone (talk) 08:56, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The values for meantone intervals in the ratio column may simply be removed if they bother you, but I'm not sure why they do. They definitions may be clear, though that may depend on one's level of knowledge. I assume you mean that since you find the definitions clear you find just and 12-TET intervals easy to mark (rather than definitions). Did you notice that there are many systems of equal temperament, besides 12, and that we include those in the table? We simple don't mark them. Hyacinth (talk) 11:30, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I did notice the other equal temperaments and agree that they should not be marked in a separate column, since they are not prevalent enough to merit that. I understand that each of the meantone systems has well determined intervals, but it goes above my knowledge to calculate these exact values. If you are able to work out the exact value of the meantone intervals that would be great. Having approximate values sort of negates the underlying exact nature of the definitions. −Woodstone (talk) 11:48, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Definition and "exact" values added. Hyacinth (talk) 13:38, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think where you "add" fractions like (81:80)(1/4), you actually mean multiplying the ratio by that amount. I checked some with the given cents and it matches. −Woodstone (talk) 14:53, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mean tone 

message: How should this list treat inversions? Should the inversion of any interval present be included, or should only integer classes be included? In the second case there would be no intervals above 600 cents, in the latter case there may be many unnamed intervals. For example, should both 3/2 and 4/3 be included, and would that require that both 531441/524288 and 1048576/531441? Should we have only 4/3 and 531441/524288? Hyacinth (talk) 10:10, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Musically, inversions are just as important. There are not really non-inverted ratios. Intervals come in pairs. In my opinion they should all be included. Limiting to one octave would be fine. −Woodstone (talk) 07:50, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Inversion

message: Why is this list at "List of pitch intervals"? According to the edit summary when it was moved: "In ordinary terminology (e.g., in Grove), these are pitch intervals; 'musical intervals' are 'Major third' and the like". Major third is included in this list. According to its article, a pitch interval is, "the number of semitones that separates one pitch from another, upward or downward". This doesn't seem to describe this list. Hyacinth (talk) 00:52, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Pitch interval is not the right name, since pitch is a physio-psychological measure. The entries in the table are frequency ratios. What is intended to be described here are intervals relevant in music theory. Musical intervals would be a suitable name. −Woodstone (talk) 07:55, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't agree; the vast majority of these intervals have no relevance at all in music theory, except insofar as theory of tuning is considered part of theory of music. The functional musical intervals that are fundamental to music theory are listed at List of musical intervals. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:50, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That still means the article title should not contain "pitch intervals". Hyacinth (talk) 00:48, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: All these intervals, the harmonics excepted, are only relevant in musical context. The terminology is never used in any other field. Therefore I still propose to include the word music in the title. Perhaps "Intervals in music" is better than the old "Musical intervals" to which objections exist. −Woodstone (talk) 04:59, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Title: pitch interval

message: I propose the color coding below. Right now the colors are less obtrusive, but more indistinguishable. Hyacinth (talk) 12:04, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: One problem is that the text becomes hard to read if the background colors are not soft enough. Especially for people who are color blind. SharkD  Talk  06:14, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What should soft color and hard color link to? Hyacinth (talk) 23:56, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

text: Made a guess. Hyacinth (talk) 00:32, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Color codes II

message: Is there any interest in me creating more of images like this, but with different tunings? SharkD  Talk  01:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: See: WP:BOLD and WP:CAREFUL. Hyacinth (talk) 01:10, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other tuning images 

message: There is a column in the table to mark superparticular ratios. The corresponding WP page states they are of importance in music theory, but that page does not mention them. I cannot possibly see any musical relevance of these ratios, except the small ones that naturally occur in limit-tunings. Therefore I propose to eliminate this column. −Woodstone (talk) 14:14, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superparticular ratio 

message: Unisons and octaves should be 2-limit, not 3-limit, according to http://www.tonalsoft.com/enc/l/limit.aspx — Omegatron (talk) 01:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  2-limit