Ok, I've been thinking a lot about your method over the past couple of days, and I think I've finally got a grasp on what you're outlining with it. I was wrong about it being guitar based; it really is centered around the structure of scales. But I'm still unconvinced that it's a useful tool. Sorry if what follows seems harsh.
I'll do the pages in order, with my understanding of what you're saying, what isn't clear, and what should be fixed.
Home page: "Have you ever wondered how a major pentatonic scale block can turn into a minor pentatonic scale block by just moving it 4 frets up the fretboard?". That should be 3 frets - that's the distance between a minor keynote (like A) and its relative major (C)
p. 1-6 are all introductory - no comments.
p. 7: you are trying to do too much with a single diagram, and there's no explanation. The innermost ring represents the seven modes of the major scale, with the modes numbered from 0 (Ionian) to 6 (Locrian). It would be nice to have that key displayed on the same page as the diagram, rather than having to refer to addendum Y.
The second ring represents which scale holds C as the second
scale degree. Although it's very useful to know which scale degree you happen to be on, there is no ready way to tie this to the tonic of the key: if C is the 2nd, the 1st may be B (for Phrygian or Locrian) or Bb (for all the others). But there's no way to see that from the diagram. And since scales - and hence, scale degrees - are measured from the tonic, this is critical information. "C is the third degree of what scale?" may be a question on an exam, but it's only useful to a player if you know what the FIRST degree is. So to me, this diagram puts the cart before the horse.
There's also the "key", which shows that 8=1, 9=2, 4=11, etc. While this is accurate, it has no bearing on the diagram - which doesn't show an 11 anywhere. Compound intervals (those with numbers of 8 or greater) are of use in extended chords and interval analysis, but no mention of either use.
p. 8: Now we have letter names, but no scale names. You ask us to think of a number, but when I think of a number, I tend to think of "5", not "3+2". But having come up with 5 through 3+2, you have me count the total - five slices clockwise - to find F. And F never comes up again on this page - why is F important?. I find the geometry intriguing... because in your diagram, I will ONLY come up with a total of 5 for labels in the "F slice" (I assume because C is the fifth in F, and in no other key), but this isn't explored.
At any rate, I now need two diagrams (p. 7 &
to learn that 3+2 = A. Now you're explaining that C is the 3rd note of A Phrygian. A key showing that the "2" means Phrygian would be helpful. And I'm wondering how I'll know that C is ALSO they third note of A Dorian, A Aeolian, and A Locrian from this process.
p. 9: Now you're telling me that the key of C adds up to 1, and the key of B adds up to 2 "and so on". You seem to be going backwards through the chromatic scale. So I guess that the key of Bb adds up to 3. Now I have to go to p.7 to see what adds up to 3...it's the third slice clockwise. Next I have to go back to p.8 to see if that's Bb. And it's not. It's Ab (and because I've spent a couple of days thinking through your method, I do understand that it's "3" because C is the 3rd note of the key of Ab). But the "and so on" isn't clear; in fact, it's so confusing that I nearly gave up at this point. I'm also mystified by the patterns - #1 is identical to #4, and with no text, I can't see what difference there might be.
p. 10: A summary. You say I'd know that 3+2 starting from C would be the 3rd of Phrygian without looking at Skelcore. Since I've never thought of C as 3+2, no... I wouldn't know that. I also happen to know that C is the 3rd of Aeolian (ABCDEFG) and Dorian (ABCDEF#G) and Locrian (ABbCDEbFG). So I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me. Then you tell me that since it adds up to 5, I should play from diagram 5 above - which gives me C-D-E. Which is not Phrygian, Dorian, or Locrian. You refer me back to Skelcore, which tells me that C is the third of A Phrygian. But diagram 5 takes me to C-D-E, diagram 6 takes me to C-D-Eb, and diagram 7 takes to me C-Db-Eb. There is no connection of the diagrams to the text. You then tell me that all the notes are in the key of F - but diagrams 6 & 7 include notes that are not in the key of F. Finally, you tell me that if I land on F (which does not appear in any of the diagrams), I play "1" from the above charts - none of which have a "1" marked in any fashion.
At this point you have completely lost me. I do not comprehend page 10.
p. 11: just a cartoon. no comment.
p. 12 - 18: circles with pie slices, and different center notes. Absolutely no explanation. I'm guessing these are p. 8 done on different centers. I'm wondering why no sharp or flat notes are used as the center of the chart, or what I'm supposed to do with these.
p. 19: tells me the harmonic minor is hardcore.
p. 20: tells me to alter the patterns as shown. What's the difference between pattern 1 (C-D-Eb) and pattern 4 (also C-D-Eb)? What am I to make of the fact that pattern 1 is the same as pattern 2 on p.9, and pattern 3 is the same as pattern 2? Is it worth the effort to learn your numbering system if it's going to change every time it's shown?
p. 21: 3 more patterns, no text.
p. 22 - 28: more pie slices, this time with the harmonic minor modes. Still no sharps or flats as the center note.
p. 29: you tell me Skelcore will force me to play differently. But at this point I have no idea how.
p. 30: addendum Y, a list of the scales relating to p. 8
p. 31: addendum Z... I have no idea what this is about. You ask me to write out a C scale, then a B scale and ask if it has a C note (no), then a Bb scale - does it have a C note (yes). C will also be found in the scales of Db, Eb, F, G, Ab. I'm not sure what the significance of this is.
My overall problems with your method:
1. I have no idea what problem it addresses. It could only be useful if you ALREADY know the spellings of the scales. If you have that knowledge, p.7 (if presented more clearly) might be a useful reference. But it seems to me you've designed a rather convoluted method of identifying note x as the y degree of scale z, and I can't see any practical use for that.
2. There are lots of graphics without explanation
3. If you do the work required to understand the graphics, you're still addressing only 7/12ths of the notes (there are no charts for Bb, F#, etc)
4. For what limited utility it might have as a reference, it's hard to use - you need a minimum of two charts (p. 7 plus one other) to locate anything.
5. The fretboard diagrams seem to have little or nothing to do with the text
6. There are redundant illustrations without explanation