Talk:Unison
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Wikimedia link
[edit]Broken. Not sure if it's disappeared from wikimedia or just never worked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.6.229.189 (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Removed
[edit]- The unison can be abbreviated as P1.
- The unison represents wholeness, totality. It is to harmony what the whole note is to rhythm, or what the whole tone is to melody..
I don't think any of this is true. In musical set theory a unison would be 0 and in just intonation a 1 or 1/1, but not P1. I can't recall an incidence where unison is used metaphorically for wholeness. I also do not see how it a unison is a whole note. Hyacinth 00:23, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Perhaps referring to unison as wholeness was something of a stretch. I am putting back P1, though. Unison is one of the four "perfect intervals", the others being the octave (
P2P8), perfect fifth (P5), and perfect fourth (P4). (I have actually seen these labels being used.) --AugPi 01:25, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- P.S. Unison is not a whole-note. What I meant is that
Unison : harmony :: Whole-note : melody .
But this analogy is also something of a stretch.
- I get the P2 now, thanks for clarifying. A perfect octave is P8, a unison would be P0, but is usually just called unison. I'll check at my library, I think I find a quote regarding the unison and its symbolisim by Robin McConie. Hyacinth 01:43, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Regarding P1: You are correct! [1]. Hyacinth 02:14, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Disambiguation
[edit]I think 'Unison' should be a disambiguation page, listing the four things that are here:
- music term
- UK trade union
- short-lived UK political organisation (incidentally, UK isn't specified and should be)
- Celine Dion album (shudder)
The music term would become Unison (music). Rd232 17:13, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- How about "Unison (disambiguation)" for the disambig and "Unison" for the music article, as it is "clearly predominant" (Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Types of disambiguation). Hyacinth 19:10, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I suppose so, though I'm not keen on that style; but the dominance is pretty strong. The current sit is messy. Rd232 00:50, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what I meant by this...! Anyway, we now have Unison (disambiguation). Rd232 21:29, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I suppose so, though I'm not keen on that style; but the dominance is pretty strong. The current sit is messy. Rd232 00:50, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Unison an interval?
[edit]Why is unison an interval when there is zero interval between unison notes?--Light current 01:15, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
-Indeed! That is what I have been discussing with my colleagues in the tuning list sometime ago. A search on `unison` in the search engine of that yahoogroups will bring up my reasoning and responses. Oz.
second diminished
[edit]Hi there, I'm kinda new to this level of accurateness on intervals and the such, but I was told that (on non-tempered instruments) a B flat is not the same as an A sharp.
Of course, on a piano, or any fretted string instrument this can't be taken into account, but as I said, on any non-tempered instrument like strings on an orchestra or the human voice, there might actually be such a difference. I'm not sure how the intervals on the diatonic scale were created, but I know it has something to do with the harmonic scale... well...
The point to which I'm trying to get is that I believe the diminished second is not the same as an unison. And instead of having any information reflecting this fact(?), all I see is a link on diminished second to this page, isn't this somewhat misleading?
VdSV9•♫ 15:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Requested audio
[edit]I have added two audio examples to the article. Hyacinth (talk) 05:45, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Additional citations: "In unison"
[edit]Why and where does this section need additional citations for verification? What references does it need and how should they be added? Hyacinth (talk) 10:23, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Zalino Quote: argumentation outdated
[edit]"But a line is not composed of points, since a point has no length, width, or depth that can be extended, or joined to another point."
This argumentation seems outdated. A line can in fact be seen as being composed of infinitely many points. At the time this quote was made, mathematics was not quite comfortable with infinities yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.70.199.195 (talk) 09:51, 13 October 2018 (UTC)