Oooooow...... So I had not added that "lateral" word for nothing in my writings... I had really read it and it did not come out from anywhere.
Making JH' SCT and all his material alive
- Thread starter WchPl
- Start date
Oooooow...... So I had not added that "lateral" word for nothing in my writings... I had really read it and it did not come out from anywhere.
Just reread thos posts, ang beginning to study your post.
If you make your T2P transparent, you can create the zones for the A-Band EE’s. You’ll also have to superimpose a P2>P1 in order to place some that require that precondition. That or have two snippets, one for P2<P1 and the other with P1<P2.
Simples good catch on the ‘lateral’ precondition for Aa refinement.
Last edited:
All the following is at first sight, whithout further reasoning.
First : here, we are to be sure about the text. We've clearly exposed some texts talk about " a four bar" and others "a four bar LATERAL". The second way of saying the thing makes thing more than anything to Lat1 until Lat4. A four bars lateral..
Up to recently, I was on alert for Aa as soon as there was a LAT built with Lat4 present. If not in a LAT, I thought Aa could not happen.
We are saying now it's not a four bar LAT, but a four bar context made up of P1 progressing until T2P included AND even though T2P is not there, once p2 is there then the context for T2P is established pragmatically.
We must be clear about what the text says. Four bars (P1,T1,P2,T2P) or 4 bars LAT.
First : here, we are to be sure about the text. We've clearly exposed some texts talk about " a four bar" and others "a four bar LATERAL". The second way of saying the thing makes thing more than anything to Lat1 until Lat4. A four bars lateral..
Up to recently, I was on alert for Aa as soon as there was a LAT built with Lat4 present. If not in a LAT, I thought Aa could not happen.
We are saying now it's not a four bar LAT, but a four bar context made up of P1 progressing until T2P included AND even though T2P is not there, once p2 is there then the context for T2P is established pragmatically.
We must be clear about what the text says. Four bars (P1,T1,P2,T2P) or 4 bars LAT.
I'm not sure why Aa should require Lat, although in that one doc it is mentioned this way. Otherwise, it is mentioned an "internal (wait)", which could both be any of: 2-bar INT PC, Lat 2 or Lat3, AND DV NOT Retro.
If the whole 4-bar is Lat, I believe this is already covered by Af.
It's good to have differences and different viewpoints, in order to DD.
Last edited:
Yes, but to get Af we need P2<P1 AND the HVBO must occur in the Lat AND the trend must have progressed only until P2 included.
When I began to work deep into the A-band EE's, I thought Aa needed a Lat to be there AND T2P to be there and a non retro keeping one INT PC = wait intact, to have its scene set.
Anyway, there is something here that echoes to something that has always disturbed me : Aa need the four bar context. So until T2P. If T2P is there, B-band is active. So A-band is killed.
From memory : the major clue to getting it with EEs is to know which band is in effect to know wich EE can surge.
If B-band is active, how can one ID any A"x" EE ?
A thought :
As states one of the text we have about Aa, we need a four bar containing an internal.
Back in time, I had understood this as possible being as if there's a wait, we can have 4 bars AND an absence of T2P. 4 bars would mean here 4 bars, but just 3 measured AND P1, T1 , P2 all present. The wait would prevent T2P from surging. Then I had thought in this scenario that the 5th bar coming after that could be above P1 or P2 (the highest) and this would be the Aa.
At the moment, I'm working on a bit too many things at the same time to produce something clear about this.
I'll take the time to do the "transparent T2P" mentionned by Sprout to make appear the A's EE's zones, filll it, and then I'll be back on this Aa and @Sprout's last DD's. He clearly says it's great and he needs to refine some sheets, so there must be something crucial that has been found here. Need to work
From memory : the major clue to getting it with EEs is to know which band is in effect to know wich EE can surge.
If B-band is active, how can one ID any A"x" EE ?
A thought :
As states one of the text we have about Aa, we need a four bar containing an internal.
Back in time, I had understood this as possible being as if there's a wait, we can have 4 bars AND an absence of T2P. 4 bars would mean here 4 bars, but just 3 measured AND P1, T1 , P2 all present. The wait would prevent T2P from surging. Then I had thought in this scenario that the 5th bar coming after that could be above P1 or P2 (the highest) and this would be the Aa.
At the moment, I'm working on a bit too many things at the same time to produce something clear about this.
I'll take the time to do the "transparent T2P" mentionned by Sprout to make appear the A's EE's zones, filll it, and then I'll be back on this Aa and @Sprout's last DD's. He clearly says it's great and he needs to refine some sheets, so there must be something crucial that has been found here. Need to work
Last edited:
+
Thre is ambiguity here. It reminds me when I was working through the PP1 EE. I had said being as we're in an acceleration concept AND we have 3 P1's, the acceleration could only appear by comparing (P1.1-P1.2) and (P1.0-P1.1). So the acceleration would be that the difference between last two P1's would be greater than the difference between the first two P1's. And I had called the first difference "move 1" and the second difference "move 2". I was directly warned that it was not a good thing to describe it this way, being as move 1 and move to reminded too much the M1 and M2 concepts, which are for the dependant variable.
Here, with the " an inside bar has a larger volume than the outside bar". Inside bar, from what I know, has always been an internal. So either a wait or a UL.
And outside bar has always been an OB, so a PC with second bar having higher H and lower L.
In his writings, @Sprout converts/traduces the "an inside bar has a larger volume than the outside bar" into : "int UL".
Why to talk about outside bar then ? what's the link between outside bar and UL ?
I see this fuzzy, ambiguous and unnecessaryly tricky.