Cardinality of well-formed scales
Let’s apply Andy's next-highest-cardinality-MOS-scale-calculating algorithm, starting with the pentatonic scale.
First, here's an animation of the pentatonic scale on a Wicki note-layout (source code here):
As you can see, the pentatonic scale has two large steps (m3’s) and three small steps (M2's).
Name L S Cardinality
Pentatonic 2 3 5
So far, so good.
Remember, a well-formed scale is drawn from a stack of tempered perfect fifths; the stack has the same number of notes in it as the scale does: the cardinality of the scale. The pentatonic scale's stack of P5's (laid on its side) looks like this:
-2 -1 0 1 2
Do-So-Re-La-Mi
Now, let’s apply Andy's algorithm to these values of L and S to get the L and S of the next-higher-cardinality MOS scale, i.e., L’ and S’ respectively.
Cardinality’ = 2L + S = (2 * 2) + 3 = 4 + 3 = 7, which agrees with our expectations for the diatonic scale, which is a god sign. ;-)
X = L + S = 2 + 3 = 5
Y = L = 2
Therefore, the next-higher-cardinality-than-pentatonic MOS scale will have either 5 large steps and 2 small steps, or vice versa.
The diatonic scale has five large steps and two small steps, with cardinality 7, so that seems to be the “right choice.”
However, I am confused. Does this mean that there ALSO exists some “Bizarro-Diatonic” scale of cardinality 7 which has five small steps and two large ones? If so, what is that scale? If not, why not?
This process gives us the following result:
Name L S Cardinality
Diatonic 5 2 7
Bizarro-Diatonic 2 5 7
Hmmmm, it’s a little weird to have the Bizarro-Diatonic scale as a result of this algorithm, but what the heck, let’s press on.
[Edit: Andy Milne was kind enough to point out that the Bizarro-Diatonic scale is more properly named the Mavila scale, following Erv Wilson. I haven't been able to find out much about it on the web. When I understand it better, I'll put up an appropriate animation of its interval pattern.]
The diatonic scale described above looks like this (source code here):
The diatonic scale's stack of tempered P5's is just like the pentatonic's, but it has one additional note at each end (Fa and Ti):
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
Fa-Do-So-Re-La-Mi-Ti
Now, let’s apply the stated algorithm to the diatonic scale’s L and S values, to find the next-higher-cardinality MOS scale (which OUGHT to be the chromatic scale, if all goes well).
Taking the values L' = 2 and S' = 5 from the diatonic scale...
Cardinality’’ = 2L’ + S’ = (2 * 5) + 2 = 10 + 2 = 12, which is the cardinality of the chromatic scale, which is encouraging.
X’ = L’ + S’ = 5 + 2 = 7
Y’ = L = 5
Therefore, the next-higher-than-diatonic MOS scale will have either 7 large steps and 5 small steps, or vice versa.
Hmmmm, that's odd. Can there be two different versions of the chromatic scale?
Yes, it turns out that there can, and the existence of the two different versions answers a question that's been puzzling me for the last couple of weeks.
Here's an animation of the first version of the chromatic scale (source here):
There are 12 intervals in the chromatic scale, so any drawing of them is going to look complicated, and this animation's drawing is no exception. But if you look closely, you can see a lot of structure in its pattern of intervals.
Firstly, the scale has only two interval sizes, as predicted: minor seconds (m2's, in red) and augmented unisons (A1's, in pink).
Second, there are five A1's (smaller intervals) and seven m2's (larger intervals). In 12-tone equal temperament ("12-tet"), the A1 and m2 happen to be equally wide (at 100 cents), but they are still different intervals, so they have different shapes on the Wicki note-layout.
Third, all the interval lines are parallel to each other. Among them, they outline a chromatic staff (well, kinda sorta).
One of the note-buttons, Le, isn't used in the animation above, however -- none of the interval-arrows ever reach it. You might well ask, "why did Jim include Le in the animation, then?"
To answer this leading question, let's look at an animation of the other version of the chromatic scale (source here):
It looks very much the same, as you would expect. The only difference is that, after the scale goes up an m2 from Fi to So, it goes up another m2 from So to Le, rather than turning back towards Si with an A1 as the previous version of the chromatic scale did.
We can call the first version "Chromatic Si," and the second version "Chromatic Le." In 12-tone equal temperament, there is no difference between them, but there would be a difference in (say) 1/4-comma meantone tuning, which had a leading role in Western music for many centuries (and which appears to have been used in the tuning of ancient Chinese bells).
In the stack of tempered perfect fifths that forms the chromatic scale, Le and Si are on opposite ends:
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Le-Me-Te-Fa-Do-So-Re-La-Mi-Ti-Fi-Di-Si
...which is the same as the diatonic stack, but with extra notes added at the ends (in boldface).
This chromatic stack has 13 notes, but only 12 can be included in the chromatic scale. One must choose whether to include Le or Si; you can't have both, because then you'd have a scale of cardinality 13, not 12.
As further evidence of the decline in my late-night counting abilities, I also declared the down-and-right-pointing intervals (e.g., from Do to Di) to be "diminished seconds," when they were clearly augmented unisons (how "clearly"? In both chromatic animations, the A1 arrows ALWAYS connect notes that begin with the same initial consonant -- that is, chromatically-altered versions of the same note. Hence, the interval MUST be a variation on unison. What an idjit I am!). I have relabeled them accordingly, and updated this blog post's text accordingly. Thanks to Andy Milne for giving me the heads-up on these errors; see his comment below.
I realy should have changed the color of the A1 arrows to be cyan, while I was relabelling them, to follow my convention that all augmented intervals are colored cyan...but I forgot, and now I'm too tired again. Later, perhaps.]
I've been up all night working on this blog posting (and its animations), so now, at 6am, I'm off to bed. Soon, I'll put up another post that continues walking up the cardinality chain to 17-tone scales, 19-tone scales, and beyond.
First, here's an animation of the pentatonic scale on a Wicki note-layout (source code here):
As you can see, the pentatonic scale has two large steps (m3’s) and three small steps (M2's).
Name L S Cardinality
Pentatonic 2 3 5
So far, so good.
Remember, a well-formed scale is drawn from a stack of tempered perfect fifths; the stack has the same number of notes in it as the scale does: the cardinality of the scale. The pentatonic scale's stack of P5's (laid on its side) looks like this:
-2 -1 0 1 2
Do-So-Re-La-Mi
Now, let’s apply Andy's algorithm to these values of L and S to get the L and S of the next-higher-cardinality MOS scale, i.e., L’ and S’ respectively.
Cardinality’ = 2L + S = (2 * 2) + 3 = 4 + 3 = 7, which agrees with our expectations for the diatonic scale, which is a god sign. ;-)
X = L + S = 2 + 3 = 5
Y = L = 2
Therefore, the next-higher-cardinality-than-pentatonic MOS scale will have either 5 large steps and 2 small steps, or vice versa.
The diatonic scale has five large steps and two small steps, with cardinality 7, so that seems to be the “right choice.”
However, I am confused. Does this mean that there ALSO exists some “Bizarro-Diatonic” scale of cardinality 7 which has five small steps and two large ones? If so, what is that scale? If not, why not?
This process gives us the following result:
Name L S Cardinality
Diatonic 5 2 7
Bizarro-Diatonic 2 5 7
Hmmmm, it’s a little weird to have the Bizarro-Diatonic scale as a result of this algorithm, but what the heck, let’s press on.
[Edit: Andy Milne was kind enough to point out that the Bizarro-Diatonic scale is more properly named the Mavila scale, following Erv Wilson. I haven't been able to find out much about it on the web. When I understand it better, I'll put up an appropriate animation of its interval pattern.]
The diatonic scale described above looks like this (source code here):
The diatonic scale's stack of tempered P5's is just like the pentatonic's, but it has one additional note at each end (Fa and Ti):
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
Fa-Do-So-Re-La-Mi-Ti
Now, let’s apply the stated algorithm to the diatonic scale’s L and S values, to find the next-higher-cardinality MOS scale (which OUGHT to be the chromatic scale, if all goes well).
Taking the values L' = 2 and S' = 5 from the diatonic scale...
Cardinality’’ = 2L’ + S’ = (2 * 5) + 2 = 10 + 2 = 12, which is the cardinality of the chromatic scale, which is encouraging.
X’ = L’ + S’ = 5 + 2 = 7
Y’ = L = 5
Therefore, the next-higher-than-diatonic MOS scale will have either 7 large steps and 5 small steps, or vice versa.
Hmmmm, that's odd. Can there be two different versions of the chromatic scale?
Yes, it turns out that there can, and the existence of the two different versions answers a question that's been puzzling me for the last couple of weeks.
Here's an animation of the first version of the chromatic scale (source here):
There are 12 intervals in the chromatic scale, so any drawing of them is going to look complicated, and this animation's drawing is no exception. But if you look closely, you can see a lot of structure in its pattern of intervals.
Firstly, the scale has only two interval sizes, as predicted: minor seconds (m2's, in red) and augmented unisons (A1's, in pink).
Second, there are five A1's (smaller intervals) and seven m2's (larger intervals). In 12-tone equal temperament ("12-tet"), the A1 and m2 happen to be equally wide (at 100 cents), but they are still different intervals, so they have different shapes on the Wicki note-layout.
Third, all the interval lines are parallel to each other. Among them, they outline a chromatic staff (well, kinda sorta).
One of the note-buttons, Le, isn't used in the animation above, however -- none of the interval-arrows ever reach it. You might well ask, "why did Jim include Le in the animation, then?"
To answer this leading question, let's look at an animation of the other version of the chromatic scale (source here):
It looks very much the same, as you would expect. The only difference is that, after the scale goes up an m2 from Fi to So, it goes up another m2 from So to Le, rather than turning back towards Si with an A1 as the previous version of the chromatic scale did.
We can call the first version "Chromatic Si," and the second version "Chromatic Le." In 12-tone equal temperament, there is no difference between them, but there would be a difference in (say) 1/4-comma meantone tuning, which had a leading role in Western music for many centuries (and which appears to have been used in the tuning of ancient Chinese bells).
In the stack of tempered perfect fifths that forms the chromatic scale, Le and Si are on opposite ends:
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Le-Me-Te-Fa-Do-So-Re-La-Mi-Ti-Fi-Di-Si
...which is the same as the diatonic stack, but with extra notes added at the ends (in boldface).
This chromatic stack has 13 notes, but only 12 can be included in the chromatic scale. One must choose whether to include Le or Si; you can't have both, because then you'd have a scale of cardinality 13, not 12.
- If you choose to include Le, you get the Chromatic_Le scale.
- If you choose to include Si, you get the Chromatic_Si scale.
As further evidence of the decline in my late-night counting abilities, I also declared the down-and-right-pointing intervals (e.g., from Do to Di) to be "diminished seconds," when they were clearly augmented unisons (how "clearly"? In both chromatic animations, the A1 arrows ALWAYS connect notes that begin with the same initial consonant -- that is, chromatically-altered versions of the same note. Hence, the interval MUST be a variation on unison. What an idjit I am!). I have relabeled them accordingly, and updated this blog post's text accordingly. Thanks to Andy Milne for giving me the heads-up on these errors; see his comment below.
I realy should have changed the color of the A1 arrows to be cyan, while I was relabelling them, to follow my convention that all augmented intervals are colored cyan...but I forgot, and now I'm too tired again. Later, perhaps.]
I've been up all night working on this blog posting (and its animations), so now, at 6am, I'm off to bed. Soon, I'll put up another post that continues walking up the cardinality chain to 17-tone scales, 19-tone scales, and beyond.
Labels: cardinality, MOS scales, music theory, well-formed scales

