Re: Melodies move by step in any form of music?

On Jun 1, 6:09 pm, Danny Schorr <.@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 00:09:17 +0200, "Alain Naigeon" <anaig...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
> >"Danny Schorr" <.@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> a =E9crit dans le message de news:
> >2rs344lmahloah49rssplrecpha3sf7...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 01:45:22 +0200, "Alain Naigeon" <anaig...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>>"Danny Schorr" <.@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> a =E9crit dans le message de news:
> >>>pqm344pek263jl60pnan8kvr81k8vbm...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>> If you build a scale C-G-C, can you honestly say to yourself that
whe=
n
> >>>> you
> >>>> move from C to G that nothing has been skipped?
>
> >>>That's because we've heard so many things using the steps which are
> >>>missing in this scale.
> >>>But, forget it, and then it becomes clear : how could I skip an
object
> >>>which isn't included in the set I'm moving in ?
>
> >> That type of thinking may work for mathematical and algebraic proofs
( =
I'm
> >> guessing - I'm not a math guy:-)) ,but for musical tone, the OTS of
the=
 C
> >> note would have an E present fairly early; the G would have a D even
> >> earlier. Thus the perception that "something" is missing.
>
> >Ok, the fifth and the third are missing ; then this would be an
argument
> >in favor of the theory of "harmonics".
> >I've tried to explain my problem, which is linguistic : leap =3D jump
=3D=
 skip
> >and then I have to skip *something*.
> >Our disagreement probably comes from the first '=3D' sign ; for some
pers=
ons
> >it seems that leap means "large interval" - whatever large means.
>
> Well, it has got to do with how you define the parameters of the
problem.
>
> If I decide that the only crossttown streets in Manhattan that matter
are
> bi-directional and below Central Park, my set would only include
Houston,
> 14th, 23rd, 34th, 42nd, 57th, and 60th streets.
>
> But all the other streets between Houston and 60th surely exist outside
of=

> my chosen "set". I'm just "skipping" them.
>
> Danny

No, you are ignoring them because in the CONTEXT of your set, they are
not really there at all. Think of it as if you take the subway from
one station to another. If you walk from that same point to the next
station, you are making all the streets, but if you are on the train,
you are not skipping anything. You are going directly to the next
stop. The other streets do not exist in the world of the underground
trains! If you go one station you have a very small scale set. If you
go from Houston to 34th you have a larger set of stops and if you go
all the way to the Bronx. you are not on the A train, and you will not
get to Harlem unless you Jump over to another train! lol

LJS