Talk:Neutral second

Perfect?
Can this interval also be called a perfect second? It just seems logical to me. --Celtic Minstrel (talk &#x2022; contribs) 03:20, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I'm not an expert but I would say no. The term "perfect" is more a convention than anything else.  I have heard some people say that it refers to the fact that the intervals perfect fifth and perfect fourth are very consonant, but I think it also is an artifact of the way those intervals are very close to the just intonation intervals, in 12-tone equal temperament, whereas thirds are out-of-tune from the just intervals.  The neutral second if played in a chord is a fairly dissonant interval, so that explanation is out...and the neutral second doesn't even fit into 12-tone equal temperament, although 11:10 is very in-tune in certain weird ones, like 22 equal temperament, and 12:11 is very in-tune if you use quarter tones.  Cazort (talk) 00:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * AIUI the "perfect" intervals are the ones that are the same in both the major and minor diatonic scales, which is only true of the 3-limit (odd maximum) harmonies (ones with ratios of 3:2n or 2n:1, where n is a non-negative integer). This appears in neither scale, so it can't be called "perfect". &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 18:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Also, closeness to just intervals is not a reason to call a tempered interval "perfect". In meantone, perfect fifths are actually less pure than major thirds, but they're still called "perfect fifths". In well temperaments, the purity of approximations varies considerably even within a single tuning. The diatonic naming convention for intervals predates the common use of 12-tone equal temperament by a long period of time. &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 16:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Requested audio
I added two audio examples to the article. Hyacinth (talk) 20:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry! The sound example for 12/11 is wrong (seems to be (9/8)/(10/9) == 81/80), regards --Wolf Peuker (talk) 23:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It may be wrong, but its clearly not . Hyacinth (talk) 10:50, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It's definitely wrong. I don't know exactly where it is, but it should sound very similar to the other two, while this sounds closer to a quarter tone. I'm looking into ways to fix this. — trlkly 12:10, 16 June 2012 (UTC)