<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=User%3AOverthink%2FConsistency_for_MOS_scales</id>
	<title>User:Overthink/Consistency for MOS scales - Revision history</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=User%3AOverthink%2FConsistency_for_MOS_scales"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?title=User:Overthink/Consistency_for_MOS_scales&amp;action=history"/>
	<updated>2026-06-26T03:10:55Z</updated>
	<subtitle>Revision history for this page on the wiki</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.43.6</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?title=User:Overthink/Consistency_for_MOS_scales&amp;diff=226146&amp;oldid=prev</id>
		<title>Overthink: + content (not cleaned up)</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?title=User:Overthink/Consistency_for_MOS_scales&amp;diff=226146&amp;oldid=prev"/>
		<updated>2026-03-16T04:25:03Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;+ content (not cleaned up)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;New page&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div&gt;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Todo:Cleanup&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
so anyways about 54edo pajara&lt;br /&gt;
Even in the 7-odd-limit 6/5 is very sharp&lt;br /&gt;
almost 18 cents (slightly over the error of 7/5 and 10/7)&lt;br /&gt;
and in the 9-odd-limit 9/5 is just off&lt;br /&gt;
sharp by 26.8 cents&lt;br /&gt;
and as [HIDDEN] said there&amp;#039;s no way to tune 11-odd-limit monotonically&lt;br /&gt;
since 10/9 is tuned less than 1/3 of 4/3&lt;br /&gt;
even if we don&amp;#039;t consider the 11-limit that&amp;#039;s still probably unreasonable&lt;br /&gt;
and if we only consider the 7-odd-limit...&lt;br /&gt;
well 7/4 is about as sharp in 22edo as 5/4 in 12edo&lt;br /&gt;
but 6/5 is almost as sharp&lt;br /&gt;
and one can argue that keen is the correct extension for tunings flat of 22edo&lt;br /&gt;
but no 7-, 9-, and 11-odd-limit intervals of 7 appear in the 10- or 12-note keen MOSes&lt;br /&gt;
though the 22-note mos causes issues&lt;br /&gt;
There should probably be a consistency metric for mos scales, to determine if it unambiguously uses a single mapping in an odd limit&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It would depend on the tuning of the mos, not just the pattern&lt;br /&gt;
A good definition would be that the temperament maps every interval in the odd limit to the nearest interval in that MOS&lt;br /&gt;
note that if two intervals in the MOS (e.g. A4 and d5 in 12edo diatonic) and an interval is closest to that step (in this case 6\12) it&amp;#039;s acceptable to map it to either A4 or d5&lt;br /&gt;
There should probably be a term for if a MOS of a rank-2 temperament contain every interval in an odd limit&lt;br /&gt;
how about encapsulates&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
So pajara[10] and pajara[12] are consistent in the 7- and 9-odd-limit in 22edo&lt;br /&gt;
in general if an edo is consistent in an odd limit a tuning of any mos of a temperament in that edo supported by its patent val is consistent in that odd limit&lt;br /&gt;
if it&amp;#039;s the nearest edo step, it must be the nearest mos step&lt;br /&gt;
weirdly 54edo pajarous[10] and pajarous[12] seem to be consistent in the 11-odd-limit even though the patent val isn&amp;#039;t even monotone&lt;br /&gt;
10/9 is very flat but still mapped to the closest mos step, and 11/10 doesn&amp;#039;t even appear&lt;br /&gt;
though if a tuning fails monotonicity it&amp;#039;s arguably too inaccurate to use&lt;br /&gt;
the smallest pajara or pajarous MOS that encapsulates the 11-odd-limit is 22 notes&lt;br /&gt;
though for both the only consistent tuning is 22edo&lt;br /&gt;
which adds quite a bit of further damage on top of the canonical pajara mapping (6/5~11/9, 10/9~11/10~12/11)&lt;br /&gt;
cuz porcupine&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
where the 22-note mos is equalized and IMO isn&amp;#039;t a legitimate mos (it&amp;#039;s just the edo)&lt;br /&gt;
And there should also be a term for if a rank-2 tempermant contains any mos scales that encapsulates and is consistent in an odd limit&lt;br /&gt;
how about encapsulable&lt;br /&gt;
I define encapsulable to include if that mos is equalized (but not collapsed or with negative steps)&lt;br /&gt;
and strictly encapsulable to exclude equalized moses&lt;br /&gt;
Unfortunately pajara is not strictly encapsulable in the 11-odd-limit&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Overthink</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>