Re: More questions on scales

"Pete" <neverland@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:fq2g1n$gjp$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Another thing that offends my sense of rightness (:-) is that to get the
> scale from fifths, you have to start on the subdominant.  I realize that
> this is how the math works, to get those 'low ratios', but naively it's
> odd.  I suppose it's logical that the tonic should be the one that
> shares the two fifths, though.

The reason for this Pete is, that scales weren't actually derived from 
"stacking 5ths" as many people have allowed themselves to believe. You're 
not naive, and it is odd - doing so produces a Lydian mode, at best. 
Arguments that scales were (or "the scale" was) created from stacking 5ths

are full of holes just like your logic tells you - that's right, you have
to 
start from a note that's not the Tonic, which is completely arbitrary and 
evidence of inaccurate logic.

"Tonic" has do to with "elevating" a tone to a more im****tant position 
amongst the other tones. As Joey said, really, any of the 7 (or 6) tones
in 
the diatonic collection can be the Tonic. It depends on what a composer
does 
musically to promote one tone or another.

Best,
Steve