Talk:Incomposite interval

Clarification

User:Hyacinth has flagged a quotation from Aristoxenus with {{clarification|date=December 2012|reason=Why not? Should we add something like "...cannot divide it into intervals [without going outside the scale/without introducing notes foreign to the scale]."}} I agree that something like this might be helpful, (1) if it is true and (2 and most importantly), if it can be verified in a reliable source. From my own reading of Ancient Greek theory, I suspect it has nothing to do with "introducing notes foreign to the scale", but rather with "interpolating an extra string on the lyre". Unfortunately, I don't think I can come up with a reliable source to support this opinion, either, and perhaps it amounts to the same thing, only seen from a different perspective. In any case, we are second-guessing a writer from the distant past, who was speaking within a context we can only partially understand. Thomas Mathiesen would be the best source (in either Apollo's Lyre or his several articles in New Grove), but I don't believe that he risks such an interpretation.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:42, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

If one needed to add an extra string on the lyre, it would be because all the existing strings are tuned to one scale. Hyacinth (talk) 20:28, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Or conversely, a scale is defined by the number of strings on your lyre and the way in which they are tuned. That is what I am saying, yes.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 01:26, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

So what is the problem with "without going outside the scale/without introducing notes foreign to the scale"? Hyacinth (talk) 04:48, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

It matters, of course, only if you consider the difference between the way the Ancient Greeks construed the concept of "scale", and the way we do today. On the other hand, have you checked the changes I have made to the article in the last 24 hours?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 05:16, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

It appears this article does not consider "the difference between the way the Ancient Greeks construed the concept of 'scale', and the way we do today." The article quotes Aristoxenus (335 BCE), Gaudentius (<500 CE), and Chalmers (1993) without distinguishing between their conceptions of "scale". Hyacinth (talk) 08:43, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, all of the authors cited (and I include Vicentino as well as the three you name) are speaking with reference to the Ancient Greek conception of scale, and both Aristoxenus and Gaudentius are sources from within the Ancient Greek tradition itself. Some of these authors do of course understand it (or misunderstand it), in different ways, and Vicentino (alone among the sources cited, I think) attempts to extrapolate the conception to fit the contrapuntal music of his own time. Chalmers qualifies as a reliable source but reliable sources are sometimes wrong, and I humbly submit that this is one of those sometimeses.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 16:32, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Original research

How and why is the following paragraph original research and how should it be cleaned up?

• Thus whether an interval is composite or incomposite is a matter of context, or rather opinion, which may vary with time and musical or technological ability. A semitone may be considered an incomposite interval, as quarter tone intervals may be difficult to sing in tune and is not contained in the diatonic scale, or it may be considered a composite interval, as quarter tones may easily be produced on a synthesizer or appropriately tuned piano and are contained in scales such maqamat.

Hyacinth (talk) 11:41, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't see any cited sources. As far as I am aware, the concept of "incomposite interval" is exclusive to Ancient Greek theory, and has no application in Arabic music theory. Furthermore, since a ditone (major third) is an incomposite interval in the enharmonic genus, and a semiditone (minor third) is incomposite in the chromartic genus, how can it be said that opinion, time, or technological ability can have anything to do with it, and why is this fact not included in the discussion? In other contexts, larger intervals still may be considered as incomposite (as for example the perfect fourth in Vicentino's discussion, but Aristoxenus also considers this conundrum, I think). This therefore not only looks like "original research", but also appears not to be very well-researched original research.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 16:46, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Further clarifications have now been added, with quotations from Aristides Quintilianus and Nichomachus, which should make clear the original-research problems.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I have now also added further clarification from Aristoxenos about how δυνάμεις is more important than the actual distance from one pitch to another, in determining why a singer is "incapable" of singing an intervening note in an incomposite interval.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 03:11, 30 December 2012 (UTC)