Re: Microtonal accidentals

[Keith OHara]

On Thu, 07 Nov 2013 13:26:04 -0800, Hans Aberg <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 7 Nov 2013, at 21:47, Keith OHara <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Hans, I am late, but can I persuade you to try this with sharp and flat
> > representing 4 tone-steps rather than 5 ?
>
> No, since in regular E53, the minor second m = 4, and the major second M = 9, 
> so sharps and flats alter with M - m = 5 E53 tonesteps.

But you also have arrow alterations, so you can distinguish more than two types 
of second.

You have the diatonic scale of the bare note-names
 C  -9-  D  -9-  E  -4-  F  -9-  G  -9-  A  -9-  B  -4- C
but the major scale build on the major triads is closer to
 C  -9-  D  -8-  E, -5-  F  -9-  G  -8-  A, -9-  B, -5- C
(with , lowering one step)

You might choose seconds from the set m=4 n=5 N=8 M=9 and have alterations
 M - n = N - m = 4  close to a traditional sharp
 M - N = n - m = 1  close to an 81/80 comma
then the D major scale, for example, looks more simple
 D -9- E -8- F# -5- G -9- A -8- B, -9- C# -5- D

M-m = 5 steps is another choice for an alteration, but if I write that with a 
sharp I find it harder to understand because I have learned that a sharp is a 
tiny bit less than half a whole tone.