Talk:Major second

	Music portal 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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Dissonance

Removed:

The Mmjor second is considered the most dissonant interval outside of the minor second and major seventh.

...and minor 9th (IMO m9 is even more dissonant that m2). I think having 3 intervals that are much more dissonant takes it out of the running for "most dissonant" :) -- Merphant 11:47, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Oh, I see, all of these interval articles have a "dissonance-o-meter" on them. Well, I don't know how NPOV that is, but maybe I should think about this and comment over at Talk:interval (music) or Talk:dissonance. I'll put it back in this article for now. -- Merphant

Hey, what about the Augmented 4th??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.4.97.212 (talk) 00:57, August 16, 2004 (UTC)

Augmented second

A major second or whole tone is one of three commonly occurring musical intervals that span two diatonic scale degrees; the others being the minor second, which is one semitone smaller, and the augmented second, which is one semitone larger.

What intervals spanning two degrees of a diatonic scale are augmented seconds? The diatonic scale has just major and minor seconds, right? 141.156.217.167 03:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on whether you consider the harmonic minor scale to be diatonic or not, as it contains an augmented second between its 6th and 7th degrees. This is currently being discussed at talk:diatonic and chromatic - (Mark: 27 April 07) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.241.1.58 (talk) 13:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Way too much jargon

This article needs a clearer introduction that simply explains the concept without getting lost in similarly unclear terms to readers who are not musically literate. It's like a definition written for people who already know what the definition is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.217.79.176 (talk) 20:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed! - Headbeater (talk) 22:11, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are some examples of "unclear terms"? Hyacinth (talk) 23:13, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged "span two diatonic scale degrees" as unclear. The def here should be self-contained, without a reader having to guess what "span" and "degree" mean and without having to read diatonic scale, which does not use span and does not explain degree. Possibly simpler defs would be 2/12 of an octave or the interval between a pair of piano keys separated by a piano key. Idiot's defines it as "two half steps", which might be OK if half step were linked. The article text gives no examples in terms of notes in a scale, the caption to the audio example uses "cents" without explanation, and "Do-Re" is presumptuously asserted to "familiar". --Jtir (talk) 20:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dummies (Ch. 9: Half Steps, Whole Steps, Sharps, and Flats) explains half step and whole step in terms of piano keys and guitar frets, and it shows illustrations of both. The book starts at a key or fret and moves one key or fret away to move a half step in pitch, and it moves two keys or frets away to move a whole step in pitch (black and white keys are counted alike). The book also gives examples in musical notation.

--Jtir (talk) 22:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "do re mi" being presumed familiar: it is familiar to a Western audience with the basics of musical literacy. For others, the nearby associated link to solfege ought to help. __Just plain Bill (talk) 11:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was objecting to the use of the word "familiar" in that version of the article. I have moved it into a paragraph with examples. --Jtir (talk) 19:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lead had been conflating "major second", which is the topic of this article, with "second" generally. I have attempted to correct that but was unable to devise a succinct def for "major second" specifically.

Two possibilities are: "it is the interval between the first and second degrees of a major scale" and "it is 2/12 of an octave". --Jtir (talk) 19:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That makes a very respectable lead, IMO. --Jtir (talk) 19:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of historical interest … --Jtir (talk) 20:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saying "it is the interval between the first and second degrees of a major scale" is a bit ambiguous, allowing the newbie to misinterpret that it only occurs between those two degrees. That may be a good way to explain how it got its name though. Another Stickler (talk) 18:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why would a reader have to "guess" the nontechnical term "span" ("to extend across" as in "my normal step will span two stairs on the stairway in your house")? What is the standard we're using for "clarity" and jargon? If standard English terms aren't considered valid how else may we explain things? Hyacinth (talk) 10:43, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Clarity points to Wikipedia:Plain English. Hyacinth (talk) 10:50, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The current article uses, "occurs between," which vaguely implies that the major second magically exists in between two pitches and is no less technical than "span," which describes the actual inclusion of the two pitches and the space between them. As such it would be preferable according to Plain English. Hyacinth (talk) 10:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional citations

Why, what, where, and how does this article need additional citations for verification? Hyacinth (talk) 11:16, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: Epogdoon

Epogdoon should be merged into this article as it is a stub about a term for a major second. Hyacinth (talk) 23:00, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Thank you for proposing the merge. Please be sure not to lose the great historical context and images. It is probably useful to create a section in this article in which the content of Epogdoon can be entirely copied, including the images. Paolo.dL (talk) 08:15, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed! --disdero (talk) 20:19, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please convert .mid files into .ogg files

It's way too much hassle to download every clip individually. After doing some testing it appears that Internet Explorer is only good at doing one thing, and that's playing these .mid files within the browser.

JsKingBoo (talk) 01:06, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@JsKingBoo: There are other alternatives. For example, see Template:Listen#Support for MIDI. Are you able to convert the midi files to ogg yourself and upload those files? Hyacinth (talk) 08:21, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is not necessary. The MIDI-to-Ogg/MP3 conversion will soon be done automatically by MediaWiki (meta:Tech/News/2019/25). I plan to remove the ad hoc feature from the Listen template as soon as the auto-conversion becomes available. Nardog (talk) 16:32, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]