Talk:19edo - Revision history

Overthink: /* 19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo */ re

2026-02-14T18:07:03Z

19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo: re

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:07, 14 February 2026
Line 30:		Line 30:

	::: That's why I included 31edo in the comparison — if it was just a matter of being used to 12edo, then 31edo's barbershop chord wouldn't sound good. The 12edo version is a fudge for 4:5:6:7, with substitution of a pretty good 16/9 for the 7/4 (it still fits in the general vicinity of a minor seventh), whereas 19edo doesn't offer a substitute that fits in the right interval zone (just intervals 26/15 and especially 19/11 are close to 15\19, but they sound more like slightly stretched major sixths). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 17:56, 14 February 2026 (UTC)		::: That's why I included 31edo in the comparison — if it was just a matter of being used to 12edo, then 31edo's barbershop chord wouldn't sound good. The 12edo version is a fudge for 4:5:6:7, with substitution of a pretty good 16/9 for the 7/4 (it still fits in the general vicinity of a minor seventh), whereas 19edo doesn't offer a substitute that fits in the right interval zone (just intervals 26/15 and especially 19/11 are close to 15\19, but they sound more like slightly stretched major sixths). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 17:56, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

			:::: In my opinion 7/4 sounds more like a seventh than a sixth, but still somewhat ambiguous. 19edo captures (and exaggerates) that ambiguous nature, but 12edo makes it clearly a minor seventh. The 19edo ~4:5:6:7 still sounds off, but still closer to 4:5:6:7 than the 12edo one, even if it doesn't sound as "good" as 12edo because the ~7/4 doesn't sound like as much of a seventh.--[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 18:07, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* 19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo */ Fudging the 7/4 to something serviceable

2026-02-14T17:56:32Z

19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo: Fudging the 7/4 to something serviceable

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:56, 14 February 2026
Line 28:		Line 28:

	:: I think that's just because you're used to 12edo. The 12edo "harmonic seventh chord" sounds better because it is the familiar dominant seventh chord, but IMO it doesn't really represent 4:5:6:7. Personally both the 12edo and 19edo versions sound quite different from 4:5:6:7, but the 19edo one is somewhat closer. --[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 07:55, 14 February 2026 (UTC)		:: I think that's just because you're used to 12edo. The 12edo "harmonic seventh chord" sounds better because it is the familiar dominant seventh chord, but IMO it doesn't really represent 4:5:6:7. Personally both the 12edo and 19edo versions sound quite different from 4:5:6:7, but the 19edo one is somewhat closer. --[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 07:55, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

			::: That's why I included 31edo in the comparison — if it was just a matter of being used to 12edo, then 31edo's barbershop chord wouldn't sound good. The 12edo version is a fudge for 4:5:6:7, with substitution of a pretty good 16/9 for the 7/4 (it still fits in the general vicinity of a minor seventh), whereas 19edo doesn't offer a substitute that fits in the right interval zone (just intervals 26/15 and especially 19/11 are close to 15\19, but they sound more like slightly stretched major sixths). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 17:56, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Overthink: /* 19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo */ explanation

2026-02-14T07:55:49Z

19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo: explanation

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:55, 14 February 2026
Line 26:		Line 26:

	: Also, playing around with [http://terpstrakeyboard.com/play-it-now/ the online Terpstra keyboard] to generate barbershop chords (4:5:6:7) in harpsichord timbre, the 12edo version definitely sounds better than the 19edo version, even though 19edo sounds better than 12edo when leaving off the A♯, and this matches my experience with other sound sources. Not only that, playing around with it some more, 19d (use B♭ instead of A♯) sounds better in 19edo than doing it according to the patent val, even though it is mathematically a lot further off. Just to prove I wasn't crazy or suddenly tone-deaf, doing the barbershop chord in 31edo sounds better than any of those, even though I don't like the fifth in 31edo (falls in that in-between zone of too flat for 3/2 and too sharp for 112/75). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 07:19, 14 February 2026 (UTC)		: Also, playing around with [http://terpstrakeyboard.com/play-it-now/ the online Terpstra keyboard] to generate barbershop chords (4:5:6:7) in harpsichord timbre, the 12edo version definitely sounds better than the 19edo version, even though 19edo sounds better than 12edo when leaving off the A♯, and this matches my experience with other sound sources. Not only that, playing around with it some more, 19d (use B♭ instead of A♯) sounds better in 19edo than doing it according to the patent val, even though it is mathematically a lot further off. Just to prove I wasn't crazy or suddenly tone-deaf, doing the barbershop chord in 31edo sounds better than any of those, even though I don't like the fifth in 31edo (falls in that in-between zone of too flat for 3/2 and too sharp for 112/75). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 07:19, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

			:: I think that's just because you're used to 12edo. The 12edo "harmonic seventh chord" sounds better because it is the familiar dominant seventh chord, but IMO it doesn't really represent 4:5:6:7. Personally both the 12edo and 19edo versions sound quite different from 4:5:6:7, but the 19edo one is somewhat closer. --[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 07:55, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* 19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo */ What it sounds like is important too

2026-02-14T07:19:25Z

19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo: What it sounds like is important too

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:19, 14 February 2026
Line 24:		Line 24:

	: I just went by the relative error listed in the table of harmonics. Let me know if you think of something better, or if you want me to just undo it. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 23:48, 13 February 2026 (UTC)		: I just went by the relative error listed in the table of harmonics. Let me know if you think of something better, or if you want me to just undo it. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 23:48, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

			: Also, playing around with [http://terpstrakeyboard.com/play-it-now/ the online Terpstra keyboard] to generate barbershop chords (4:5:6:7) in harpsichord timbre, the 12edo version definitely sounds better than the 19edo version, even though 19edo sounds better than 12edo when leaving off the A♯, and this matches my experience with other sound sources. Not only that, playing around with it some more, 19d (use B♭ instead of A♯) sounds better in 19edo than doing it according to the patent val, even though it is mathematically a lot further off. Just to prove I wasn't crazy or suddenly tone-deaf, doing the barbershop chord in 31edo sounds better than any of those, even though I don't like the fifth in 31edo (falls in that in-between zone of too flat for 3/2 and too sharp for 112/75). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 07:19, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* 19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo */ Reply

2026-02-13T23:48:02Z

19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo: Reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:48, 13 February 2026
Line 22:		Line 22:

	The latest revision says that 19edo is "slightly worse in terms of relative error" than 12edo. This is arguably untrue, as TE relative error and maximum 9-odd-limit relative error are both lower in 19edo than in 12edo. I think this is because the error of primes 3, 5, and 7 are in the same direction, resulting in some cancellations of error involving prime 3 where it would add up in 12edo. How would this sentence best be written?--[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 22:55, 13 February 2026 (UTC)		The latest revision says that 19edo is "slightly worse in terms of relative error" than 12edo. This is arguably untrue, as TE relative error and maximum 9-odd-limit relative error are both lower in 19edo than in 12edo. I think this is because the error of primes 3, 5, and 7 are in the same direction, resulting in some cancellations of error involving prime 3 where it would add up in 12edo. How would this sentence best be written?--[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 22:55, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

			: I just went by the relative error listed in the table of harmonics. Let me know if you think of something better, or if you want me to just undo it. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 23:48, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Overthink: /* 19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo */ new section

2026-02-13T22:55:01Z

19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:55, 13 February 2026
Line 18:		Line 18:

	: I haven't had time to review your 5- and 7edo edits, so I can't comment on that. But these edo pages aren't your playground. Pls respect existing materials and work from there instead of starting from the ground up. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 10:01, 8 June 2025 (UTC)		: I haven't had time to review your 5- and 7edo edits, so I can't comment on that. But these edo pages aren't your playground. Pls respect existing materials and work from there instead of starting from the ground up. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 10:01, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

			== 19edo's 7-limit vs. 12edo ==

			The latest revision says that 19edo is "slightly worse in terms of relative error" than 12edo. This is arguably untrue, as TE relative error and maximum 9-odd-limit relative error are both lower in 19edo than in 12edo. I think this is because the error of primes 3, 5, and 7 are in the same direction, resulting in some cancellations of error involving prime 3 where it would add up in 12edo. How would this sentence best be written?--[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 22:55, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

FloraC: /* "Bad-tasted edit" */ re

2025-06-08T10:01:02Z

"Bad-tasted edit": re

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:01, 8 June 2025
Line 16:		Line 16:

	???? How was rewriting the 19edo theory section "bad-tasted"? I just wanted to rewrite that section to be consistent with the way I explained tunings like 5edo and 7edo. -- [[User:VectorGraphics\|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics\|talk]]) 16:29, 7 June 2025 (UTC)		???? How was rewriting the 19edo theory section "bad-tasted"? I just wanted to rewrite that section to be consistent with the way I explained tunings like 5edo and 7edo. -- [[User:VectorGraphics\|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics\|talk]]) 16:29, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

			: I haven't had time to review your 5- and 7edo edits, so I can't comment on that. But these edo pages aren't your playground. Pls respect existing materials and work from there instead of starting from the ground up. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 10:01, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

VectorGraphics: /* "Bad-tasted edit" */ new section

2025-06-07T16:29:02Z

"Bad-tasted edit": new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:29, 7 June 2025
Line 12:		Line 12:

	: Working on this wiki for more than 10 years, I'm well aware that around 1000 pages follow the <code>''n''edo</code> pattern. What I'm trying to do is improve the accessibility to public readers (people that come from search engines or Wikipedia). What I think should be secondary is if it's comfortable for people who already know what this all is about. Please join the discussion under [[Xenharmonic Wiki talk:Conventions #EDO vs. edo (and MOS vs. mos)]]. (BTW maybe <code>''n''-edo</code> could be a solution that fits all?) --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:47, 18 July 2021 (UTC)		: Working on this wiki for more than 10 years, I'm well aware that around 1000 pages follow the <code>''n''edo</code> pattern. What I'm trying to do is improve the accessibility to public readers (people that come from search engines or Wikipedia). What I think should be secondary is if it's comfortable for people who already know what this all is about. Please join the discussion under [[Xenharmonic Wiki talk:Conventions #EDO vs. edo (and MOS vs. mos)]]. (BTW maybe <code>''n''-edo</code> could be a solution that fits all?) --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:47, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

			== "Bad-tasted edit" ==

			???? How was rewriting the 19edo theory section "bad-tasted"? I just wanted to rewrite that section to be consistent with the way I explained tunings like 5edo and 7edo. -- [[User:VectorGraphics\|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics\|talk]]) 16:29, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

ArrowHead294 at 20:37, 11 April 2025

2025-04-11T20:37:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:37, 11 April 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{High priority}}{{clear}}
	{{WSArchiveLink}}		{{WSArchiveLink}}
	~~{{High priority}}~~
	__TOC__		__TOC__
	== Percentage precision ==		== Percentage precision ==

ArrowHead294: Undid revision 190734 by ArrowHead294 (talk)—never mind

2025-04-10T22:03:44Z

Undid revision 190734 by ArrowHead294 (talk)—never mind

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:03, 10 April 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{WSArchiveLink}}		{{WSArchiveLink}}
			{{High priority}}
	__TOC__		__TOC__
	== Percentage precision ==		== Percentage precision ==
Line 8:		Line 9:

	== Page name change ==		== Page name change ==

	I see that [[User:Xenwolf]] has moved this article from "19edo" to "19-EDO". The same happened to the 12edo page, and possibly others. But this change is not consistent at all across pages. The justification for this change was that it's more common to write it this way, but in practice I've seen "Nedo" far more than "N-EDO". But my perspective as a Discord user could be limiting me there. "EDO is actually an abbreviation and the number in front of it can be grasped at a glance" is the other reason given, which I don't think is sound when the acronym is explained right in the header. I would like to hear more of a reason why Xenwolf did this, and whether any other people were involved. --[[User:SupahstarSaga]]		I see that [[User:Xenwolf]] has moved this article from "19edo" to "19-EDO". The same happened to the 12edo page, and possibly others. But this change is not consistent at all across pages. The justification for this change was that it's more common to write it this way, but in practice I've seen "Nedo" far more than "N-EDO". But my perspective as a Discord user could be limiting me there. "EDO is actually an abbreviation and the number in front of it can be grasped at a glance" is the other reason given, which I don't think is sound when the acronym is explained right in the header. I would like to hear more of a reason why Xenwolf did this, and whether any other people were involved. --[[User:SupahstarSaga]]

	: Working on this wiki for more than 10 years, I'm well aware that around 1000 pages follow the <code>''n''edo</code> pattern. What I'm trying to do is improve the accessibility to public readers (people that come from search engines or Wikipedia). What I think should be secondary is if it's comfortable for people who already know what this all is about. Please join the discussion under [[Xenharmonic Wiki talk:Conventions #EDO vs. edo (and MOS vs. mos)]]. (BTW maybe <code>''n''-edo</code> could be a solution that fits all?) --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:47, 18 July 2021 (UTC)		: Working on this wiki for more than 10 years, I'm well aware that around 1000 pages follow the <code>''n''edo</code> pattern. What I'm trying to do is improve the accessibility to public readers (people that come from search engines or Wikipedia). What I think should be secondary is if it's comfortable for people who already know what this all is about. Please join the discussion under [[Xenharmonic Wiki talk:Conventions #EDO vs. edo (and MOS vs. mos)]]. (BTW maybe <code>''n''-edo</code> could be a solution that fits all?) --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 12:47, 18 July 2021 (UTC)