Talk:Monad (music)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh my, this is absolutely un-understandable!

Please state specifically what it is you don't understand. Thank you. TheScotch 02:40, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

"Just as...just as...just as...just as...just as..." - With all due respect to the writer, has s/he heard of a full stop? Or, at the very least, a change of wording every now and then? Also, those of us who haven't done in-depth study into music theory - myself included - are going to be completely lost after the introductory sentence. Can someone tell me at least what it is trying to say? I'd happily sort it myself but, frankly, I can't make head nor tail of it. Kenifh 10:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: " 'Just as...just as...just as...just as...just as...' - With all due respect to the writer, has s/he heard of a full stop?":

Since the "just as" series is obviously a list, a "full-stop" would not be appropriate here.

Re: "Or, at the very least, a change of wording every now and then?":

You seem to be recommending what Fowler derides as "elegant variation". In this case strict parallelism is critical.

Re: "Also, those of us who haven't done in-depth study into music theory - myself included - are going to be completely lost after the introductory sentence.":

Those of us with no more than a superficial interest in music theory don't need to know anything about the monad other than what the first sentence says, that the monad is simply a single note. Beyond that, the monad's significance is necessarily a "depth" significance.

Re: "Can someone tell me at least what it is 'trying' to say?":

It's trying to say what it does say. If you have a question about its content you sincerely want answered, you have to ask it. For now I can only suggest that you click on the links. I'm adding a link to "transposition" in case the term transposed is throwing you. TheScotch 23:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, don't be sarcastic. Secondly, wikipedia articles are meant to be written in such a way that a layperson can understand them, this article is not. I understand what transposing is, but the language selected for this article seems to be chosen to show one's own knowledge rather than impart it onto others. For the purpose of clarity, I feel the second paragraph should be amended to use less unnecesary technical language and wording chosen seemingly to display vocabulary, and link to other articles wherever possible, thus:

Just as a tempered tritone bisects the octave such that it has only six non-enharmonically equivalent positions (can be transposed five times, that is), just as the augmented triad trisects the octave and has four positions, just as the diminished seventh chord divides the octave in four and has three positions, just as the whole-tone scale divides the octave in six and has two positions, just as the chromatic scale divides the octave in twelve and has one position, the monad makes of the octave a single sector and has twelve positions. This seemingly trivial property of the monad is in fact an essential part of the arithmetical partitioning of the power set (set of all subsets) of the equally tempered chromatic scale.

Of course, this is just a suggestion and I would want the opinions and response of someone such as yourself who knows the subject better, but I do find that more readable. Perhaps a sentence on the logicality of the number of sections times the number of positions always coming to twelve, if you think it would suit? Kenifh 01:00, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

If I hear no objection by midnight my time (2 hours time), I'll go ahead and make the change Kenifh 21:04, 26 August 2007 (UTC)