Talk:Superpyth - Revision history

Overthink: /* Chromatic alterations */ new section

2026-01-03T03:28:04Z

Chromatic alterations: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:28, 3 January 2026
Line 51:		Line 51:

	Many temperaments like [[meantone]], [[orwell]], and [[miracle]] have pages listing all of their chords, most often in the [[11-limit]]. This temperament is important and needs to have its own chords page as well. As of now, I have made a draft at [[User:Overthink/Chords of superpyth]].--[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 17:05, 10 November 2025 (UTC)		Many temperaments like [[meantone]], [[orwell]], and [[miracle]] have pages listing all of their chords, most often in the [[11-limit]]. This temperament is important and needs to have its own chords page as well. As of now, I have made a draft at [[User:Overthink/Chords of superpyth]].--[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 17:05, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

			== Chromatic alterations ==

			In the chords section, it says:<blockquote>1–9/8–9/7–3/2 chord may be altered to 1–9/8–11/8–3/2 (8:9:11:12), which is impressive-sounding, resembling a sus4 but with even more tension; it resolves quite nicely to 1–9/8–9/7–3/2.</blockquote>
			The alteration from 9/7 to 11/8 is +16 - (+4) = +12 [[generator]]s. The page should clarify what it means by a "chromatic" alteration. This was copied from the page for [[17edo]], where the chromatic semitone is 2 steps. The chromatic semitone is +7 generators, which would alter the chord to 1–9/8–7/5–3/2. In superpyth the most important interval for alterations is actually the limma, representing [[256/243]], [[28/27]], [[36/35]], and [[81/80]]. Here, 1–9/8–9/7–3/2 still can't be altered to 1–9/8–11/8–3/2, but can instead be altered to 1–9/8–5/4–3/2 or 1–10/9–9/7–3/2. The info about chromatic alterations should make sense in superpyth, not 17edo.

			Also, the 6:7:8 paragraph should be expanded to include larger chords like [[28:36:42:49]].

			--[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 03:28, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Overthink: /* Chords page */ new section

2025-11-10T17:05:49Z

Chords page: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:05, 10 November 2025
Line 47:		Line 47:

	: You're right. Fixed. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 11:38, 7 October 2025 (UTC)		: You're right. Fixed. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 11:38, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

			== Chords page ==

			Many temperaments like [[meantone]], [[orwell]], and [[miracle]] have pages listing all of their chords, most often in the [[11-limit]]. This temperament is important and needs to have its own chords page as well. As of now, I have made a draft at [[User:Overthink/Chords of superpyth]].--[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 17:05, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

FloraC: /* Tuning spectrum error */

2025-10-07T11:38:44Z

Tuning spectrum error

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:38, 7 October 2025
Line 44:		Line 44:

	== Tuning spectrum error ==		== Tuning spectrum error ==
			I get why FloraC reverted the tuning spectrum changes, but isn't the diamond monotone still wrong? Tunings flatter than 22edo swap 7/5 and 10/7.--[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 22:02, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

	~~I get why FloraC reverted the tuning spectrum changes, but isn~~'~~t the diamond monotone still wrong? Tunings flatter than 22edo swap 7/5 and 10/7~~.--[[User:~~Overthink~~\|~~Overthink~~]] ([[User talk:~~Overthink~~\|talk]]) 22:02, 6 October 2025 (UTC)		: You're right. Fixed. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 11:38, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Overthink: /* Tuning spectrum error */ new section

2025-10-06T22:02:56Z

Tuning spectrum error: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:02, 6 October 2025
Line 42:		Line 42:

	:: I don't know. I guess it's because my basic conception of the temperament was in the 2.3.7 limit, and the full 7-limit extension was just an... extra thing defined for the purpose of having a full 7-limit version, basically, since you're probably not interested in the 5-limit in the first place if you're using (a strong extension of) archy.		:: I don't know. I guess it's because my basic conception of the temperament was in the 2.3.7 limit, and the full 7-limit extension was just an... extra thing defined for the purpose of having a full 7-limit version, basically, since you're probably not interested in the 5-limit in the first place if you're using (a strong extension of) archy.

			== Tuning spectrum error ==

			I get why FloraC reverted the tuning spectrum changes, but isn't the diamond monotone still wrong? Tunings flatter than 22edo swap 7/5 and 10/7.--[[User:Overthink\|Overthink]] ([[User talk:Overthink\|talk]]) 22:02, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

VectorGraphics at 21:08, 26 April 2025

2025-04-26T21:08:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:08, 26 April 2025
Line 40:		Line 40:

	: That's interesting. I had the opposite experience. Where did you learn about the name? – [[User:Sintel\|Sintel🎏]] ([[User_talk:Sintel\|talk]]) 20:11, 26 April 2025 (UTC)		: That's interesting. I had the opposite experience. Where did you learn about the name? – [[User:Sintel\|Sintel🎏]] ([[User_talk:Sintel\|talk]]) 20:11, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

			:: I don't know. I guess it's because my basic conception of the temperament was in the 2.3.7 limit, and the full 7-limit extension was just an... extra thing defined for the purpose of having a full 7-limit version, basically, since you're probably not interested in the 5-limit in the first place if you're using (a strong extension of) archy.

Sintel: /* Naming, the eternal question */

2025-04-26T20:11:20Z

Naming, the eternal question

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:11, 26 April 2025
Line 38:		Line 38:

	Thanks for the context! I personally use "archy", and basically only a couple days ago I learned that "superpyth" IS actually the more common name. And personally, I agree: any piece in a temperament can just as much be said to be in that temperament's restriction, so there is no need to distinguish 2.3.5, 2.3.7, and 2.3.5.7 versions of a temperament if a canonical mapping exists for the full subgroup. --[[User:VectorGraphics\|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics\|talk]]) 18:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)		Thanks for the context! I personally use "archy", and basically only a couple days ago I learned that "superpyth" IS actually the more common name. And personally, I agree: any piece in a temperament can just as much be said to be in that temperament's restriction, so there is no need to distinguish 2.3.5, 2.3.7, and 2.3.5.7 versions of a temperament if a canonical mapping exists for the full subgroup. --[[User:VectorGraphics\|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics\|talk]]) 18:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

			: That's interesting. I had the opposite experience. Where did you learn about the name? – [[User:Sintel\|Sintel🎏]] ([[User_talk:Sintel\|talk]]) 20:11, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

VectorGraphics at 18:06, 26 April 2025

2025-04-26T18:06:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:06, 26 April 2025
Line 36:		Line 36:

	– [[User:Sintel\|Sintel🎏]] ([[User_talk:Sintel\|talk]]) 17:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)		– [[User:Sintel\|Sintel🎏]] ([[User_talk:Sintel\|talk]]) 17:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

			Thanks for the context! I personally use "archy", and basically only a couple days ago I learned that "superpyth" IS actually the more common name. And personally, I agree: any piece in a temperament can just as much be said to be in that temperament's restriction, so there is no need to distinguish 2.3.5, 2.3.7, and 2.3.5.7 versions of a temperament if a canonical mapping exists for the full subgroup. --[[User:VectorGraphics\|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics\|talk]]) 18:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Sintel: naming

2025-04-26T17:10:51Z

naming

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:10, 26 April 2025
Line 26:		Line 26:

	:::: Thanks for making the changes, FloraC. And thanks for expanding on FloraC's explanation, Keenan; I wasn't totally sure what was meant and I was afraid for a moment that my understandings were destabilized again, but now I see exactly what's happening and why. That's pretty cool work y'all're doing! --[[User:Cmloegcmluin\|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin\|talk]]) 15:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)		:::: Thanks for making the changes, FloraC. And thanks for expanding on FloraC's explanation, Keenan; I wasn't totally sure what was meant and I was afraid for a moment that my understandings were destabilized again, but now I see exactly what's happening and why. That's pretty cool work y'all're doing! --[[User:Cmloegcmluin\|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin\|talk]]) 15:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

			== Naming, the eternal question ==

			Once again, 'archy' was basically forced upon us by Gene, and the discussion goes back all the way to 2012, where there is a clear consensus that it is fine to call the 2.3.7 temperament "superpyth".

			This also matches how people ''actually use the term'', which is what we should be documenting! I'm tired of the idea that something is somehow 'canonical' just because it's how it was written on the wiki and nobody dared to change it before.

			For reference: https://yahootuninggroupsultimatebackup.github.io/tuning/topicId_104738.html

			– [[User:Sintel\|Sintel🎏]] ([[User_talk:Sintel\|talk]]) 17:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

FloraC: FloraC moved page Talk:Archy and superpyth to Talk:Superpyth over redirect: Unhighlight the name archy since superpyth is superior and virtually canonical

2025-04-26T12:23:26Z

FloraC moved page Talk:Archy and superpyth to Talk:Superpyth over redirect: Unhighlight the name *archy* since *superpyth* is superior and virtually canonical

← Older revision	Revision as of 12:23, 26 April 2025
(No difference)

VectorGraphics: VectorGraphics moved page Talk:Superpyth to Talk:Archy and superpyth: Consistency with "Hanson and cata"

2025-04-24T21:12:10Z

VectorGraphics moved page Talk:Superpyth to Talk:Archy and superpyth: Consistency with "Hanson and cata"

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:12, 24 April 2025
(No difference)