5 ms·
> There is really virtually no cognitive load required to hear "major tenth" and realize that it's a major 3rd plus an octave. Maybe not for you, but it certai
by Leszek 12y ago
> There is really virtually no cognitive load required to hear "major tenth" and realize that it's a major 3rd plus an octave.
Maybe not for you, but it certainly took me a moment to convince myself that that is true.
- hamiltonkibbe 12y agoJust use modulo-seven arithmetic...
- Leszek 12y agoEr, yes, I believe that's the point the grandparent was making (and the parent was disagreeing with)
- hamiltonkibbe 12y agoI was just trying to show that changing the indexing from zero- to one-based makes no difference in this case. The same-octave interval will always be the multi-octave interval mod 7, regardless of whether you call the tonic 0 or 1.
- Leszek 12y agoGranted, but I was replying to a post stating that "it" is not better in practice, where "it" is using 0 base, mod 7 arithmetic. Anyway, yes, you've shown correctly that mod 7 arithmetic is useful, proving half the great-great-somethingth-parent's point. Now, the remaining interesting cases are the inversion case and the multiplication case, where 0 based is simpler (for me) than 1 based. Also, the idea of using the word "octave" for "mod 7" is already pretty broken, and is what caused me my initial hesitation.