Talk:In scale

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Japan: Music Mid‑importance Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Music task force. WikiProject Japan to do list: edit history watch purge Peer review: Kako River (Japan) A-class review: None Featured content candidates –  Articles: None Pictures: None Lists: None Good article nominations: Pure Japanese, Vinland Saga (TV series), Japanese destroyer Ume (1944), Mai Fujisawa, Godzilla Minus One Add requested images to articles that need them. Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions. Improve and expand Japan-related stubs. Create some requested articles. Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English. Assess unassessed articles Music theory Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music theory, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of music theory, theory terminology, music theorists, and musical analysis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Music theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Music theoryTemplate:WikiProject Music theoryMusic theory articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

How would you write this scale in western terms?

Please sign your posts on talk pages per

Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages

. Thanks!

Regarding writing the scale in "western terms", look at the images in the current article. Hyacinth (talk) 10:51, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe 112.204.116.248 (talk) 00:47, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Matma 112.204.116.248 (talk) 00:48, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From my reading here, the scales don't look particularly similar, while the In and the Gunkali are indeed near-synonyms. I'll dig a bit more in case I'm missing something about modes, but I might remove this half of the claim unless someone tells me otherwise. Dhalamh (talk) 09:12, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was wrong. Seems I confused to scales with similar names, or that website has an error. Intervals described elsewhere show they're identical. Dhalamh (talk) 09:42, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the first sentence, the definition of the in scale is qualified with "in a traditional theory". It seems like someone put it there intentionally, but as a nonexpert I don't know what it's trying to convey. Is there a modern theory in which the in scale is something different? Or does modern theory call into question whether the in scale exists? Either way it should be stated in the text. In the absence of clarification I think it's better to remove that phrase, but I figured I would see if anyone here knows what's up before doing so. Justin Kunimune (talk) 16:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]