User talk:BudjarnLambeth - Revision history

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* Xenharmonic Wiki feedback questions Facebook post of 2025-10-06 */ Insert need for temperament writeup instructional guide (just before need for way to contribute money)

2025-10-07T20:10:12Z

Xenharmonic Wiki feedback questions Facebook post of 2025-10-06: Insert need for temperament writeup instructional guide (just before need for way to contribute money)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:10, 7 October 2025
Line 44:		Line 44:
	• {What is the biggest problem with the wiki?} See above for areas that need to be ironed out.<br>		• {What is the biggest problem with the wiki?} See above for areas that need to be ironed out.<br>
	• {What is the biggest strength/positive of the wiki?}. Accessible (except for the above-noted bad spots), with a large breadth of information (although the parts about the music of other cultures badly need expansion).<br>		• {What is the biggest strength/positive of the wiki?}. Accessible (except for the above-noted bad spots), with a large breadth of information (although the parts about the music of other cultures badly need expansion).<br>
			Another thing I would like to see would be a guide for writing up temperaments (linear, planar, and otherwise). Not just a summary of what is on existing temperament pages (which I can look at to get an idea, although I still can't figure out how to compute things like Badness), but for the future.<br>
	Additional note: This site needs a way for people to contribute money to the running of the site. I put this question up in a couple of the Talk pages, but never got an answer.		Additional note: This site needs a way for people to contribute money to the running of the site. I put this question up in a couple of the Talk pages, but never got an answer.

	Added: [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 04:44, 7 October 2025 (UTC)<br>		Added: [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 04:44, 7 October 2025 (UTC)<br>
	Last modified: [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 04:46, 7 October 2025 (UTC)		Last modified: [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 20:10, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* Xenharmonic Wiki feedback questions Facebook post of 2025-10-06 */ Fix line breaks

2025-10-07T04:46:57Z

Xenharmonic Wiki feedback questions Facebook post of 2025-10-06: Fix line breaks

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:46, 7 October 2025
Line 37:		Line 37:
	Here are my answers to your questions:		Here are my answers to your questions:

	• {What parts/aspects of the wiki are most in need of improvement?)} and		• {What parts/aspects of the wiki are most in need of improvement?)} and<br>
	• "What improvements do they need? How would you like the see them improved?}. The parts of the Xenharmonic Wiki about other cultures need major improvement. In some cases, the first improvement they need is to exist at all, such as the music of Janap, China, and surrounding nations. Some of the sections about non-Western music do exist, but are pretty minimal and/or lump together different traditions within the same region (for instance, Africa). Even the Middle-Eastern music page could use a good deal of expansion.		• "What improvements do they need? How would you like the see them improved?}. The parts of the Xenharmonic Wiki about other cultures need major improvement. In some cases, the first improvement they need is to exist at all, such as the music of Janap, China, and surrounding nations. Some of the sections about non-Western music do exist, but are pretty minimal and/or lump together different traditions within the same region (for instance, Africa). Even the Middle-Eastern music page could use a good deal of expansion.<br>
	• {What parts/aspects of the Xenharmonic Wiki do you find the most useful?} The Xenharmonic Wiki excels at presentation of equal divisions of the octave (and to a lesser extent, equal divisions of other intervals) and a fair subset of the linear and planartemperaments, although the linear and planar temperament and ESPECIALLY the well-temperament and scale pages could stand to have more usage examples and other explanation, and could stand to have their format made to present the same information in more compact form (a LOT of the space is devoted to repeats of the same information for incremental extensions, which can make it hard to find what you are looking for). The focus is overly on equal temperaments and not enough on other temperaments, with even coverage of historical Western non-equal/non-linear temperaments being fairly minimal.		• {What parts/aspects of the Xenharmonic Wiki do you find the most useful?} The Xenharmonic Wiki excels at presentation of equal divisions of the octave (and to a lesser extent, equal divisions of other intervals) and a fair subset of the linear and planartemperaments, although the linear and planar temperament and ESPECIALLY the well-temperament and scale pages could stand to have more usage examples and other explanation, and could stand to have their format made to present the same information in more compact form (a LOT of the space is devoted to repeats of the same information for incremental extensions, which can make it hard to find what you are looking for). The focus is overly on equal temperaments and not enough on other temperaments, with even coverage of historical Western non-equal/non-linear temperaments being fairly minimal.<br>
	• {What parts/aspects of the Xenharmonic Wiki do you think are the best or worst? Examples of good or bad articles?} If you want a prize-winner among the bad articles, that has got to be the article on Wedgies -- I never could figure that one out, and I don't think most other people could either. The article on computing Badness is somewhat better but unfortunately points to things that are hard to pick up, like the article on Wedgies, which despite being deprecated is apparently still a core dependency for such articles.		• {What parts/aspects of the Xenharmonic Wiki do you think are the best or worst? Examples of good or bad articles?} If you want a prize-winner among the bad articles, that has got to be the article on Wedgies -- I never could figure that one out, and I don't think most other people could either. The article on computing Badness is somewhat better but unfortunately points to things that are hard to pick up, like the article on Wedgies, which despite being deprecated is apparently still a core dependency for such articles.<br>
	• {What do you usually use the wiki for (if anything)?} This is a great reference site (although with some frustrating obtuse regions like the article on Wedgies and things like Badness that depend on Wedgies). Great for looking up tuning systems and temperaments, and the Lumatone mappings would be a treasure trove for people who have that or another large hexagonal generalized keyboard (but putting too much dependence upon one vendor is risky -- need to branch out to support layouts for other microtonal-capable keyboards, for which support is currently extremely spotty).		• {What do you usually use the wiki for (if anything)?} This is a great reference site (although with some frustrating obtuse regions like the article on Wedgies and things like Badness that depend on Wedgies). Great for looking up tuning systems and temperaments, and the Lumatone mappings would be a treasure trove for people who have that or another large hexagonal generalized keyboard (but putting too much dependence upon one vendor is risky -- need to branch out to support layouts for other microtonal-capable keyboards, for which support is currently extremely spotty).<br>
	• {What is the biggest problem with the wiki?} See above for areas that need to be ironed out.		• {What is the biggest problem with the wiki?} See above for areas that need to be ironed out.<br>
	• {What is the biggest strength/positive of the wiki?}. Accessible (except for the above-noted bad spots), with a large breadth of information (although the parts about the music of other cultures badly need expansion).		• {What is the biggest strength/positive of the wiki?}. Accessible (except for the above-noted bad spots), with a large breadth of information (although the parts about the music of other cultures badly need expansion).<br>
	Additional note: This site needs a way for people to contribute money to the running of the site. I put this question up in a couple of the Talk pages, but never got an answer.		Additional note: This site needs a way for people to contribute money to the running of the site. I put this question up in a couple of the Talk pages, but never got an answer.

	Added: [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 04:44, 7 October 2025 (UTC)		Added: [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 04:44, 7 October 2025 (UTC)<br>
			Last modified: [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 04:46, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* Xenharmonic Wiki feedback questions Facebook post of 2025-10-06 */ new section

2025-10-07T04:44:52Z

Xenharmonic Wiki feedback questions Facebook post of 2025-10-06: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:44, 7 October 2025
Line 31:		Line 31:

	:: I agree. That part of the text was actually not added by me, it was added on 08:41, 10 February 2020 by the page’s original author. Nonetheless I will correct it now. Thank you for pointing it out :) Kind regards, --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 01:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)		:: I agree. That part of the text was actually not added by me, it was added on 08:41, 10 February 2020 by the page’s original author. Nonetheless I will correct it now. Thank you for pointing it out :) Kind regards, --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 01:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

			== Xenharmonic Wiki feedback questions Facebook post of 2025-10-06 ==

			(Copying and pasting what I put in my answer to your post of 2025-10-06 on the Xenharmonic Alliance Facebook page.)
			Here are my answers to your questions:

			• {What parts/aspects of the wiki are most in need of improvement?)} and
			• "What improvements do they need? How would you like the see them improved?}. The parts of the Xenharmonic Wiki about other cultures need major improvement. In some cases, the first improvement they need is to exist at all, such as the music of Janap, China, and surrounding nations. Some of the sections about non-Western music do exist, but are pretty minimal and/or lump together different traditions within the same region (for instance, Africa). Even the Middle-Eastern music page could use a good deal of expansion.
			• {What parts/aspects of the Xenharmonic Wiki do you find the most useful?} The Xenharmonic Wiki excels at presentation of equal divisions of the octave (and to a lesser extent, equal divisions of other intervals) and a fair subset of the linear and planartemperaments, although the linear and planar temperament and ESPECIALLY the well-temperament and scale pages could stand to have more usage examples and other explanation, and could stand to have their format made to present the same information in more compact form (a LOT of the space is devoted to repeats of the same information for incremental extensions, which can make it hard to find what you are looking for). The focus is overly on equal temperaments and not enough on other temperaments, with even coverage of historical Western non-equal/non-linear temperaments being fairly minimal.
			• {What parts/aspects of the Xenharmonic Wiki do you think are the best or worst? Examples of good or bad articles?} If you want a prize-winner among the bad articles, that has got to be the article on Wedgies -- I never could figure that one out, and I don't think most other people could either. The article on computing Badness is somewhat better but unfortunately points to things that are hard to pick up, like the article on Wedgies, which despite being deprecated is apparently still a core dependency for such articles.
			• {What do you usually use the wiki for (if anything)?} This is a great reference site (although with some frustrating obtuse regions like the article on Wedgies and things like Badness that depend on Wedgies). Great for looking up tuning systems and temperaments, and the Lumatone mappings would be a treasure trove for people who have that or another large hexagonal generalized keyboard (but putting too much dependence upon one vendor is risky -- need to branch out to support layouts for other microtonal-capable keyboards, for which support is currently extremely spotty).
			• {What is the biggest problem with the wiki?} See above for areas that need to be ironed out.
			• {What is the biggest strength/positive of the wiki?}. Accessible (except for the above-noted bad spots), with a large breadth of information (although the parts about the music of other cultures badly need expansion).
			Additional note: This site needs a way for people to contribute money to the running of the site. I put this question up in a couple of the Talk pages, but never got an answer.

			Added: [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 04:44, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

BudjarnLambeth: /* Octave numbering and exponents */ reply

2025-01-16T01:59:07Z

Octave numbering and exponents: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:59, 16 January 2025
Line 29:		Line 29:
	The octave number 8 is fine, but the exponent in ''(2<sup>8</sup>, hence 8<sup>th</sup> octave)'' should be (8-1) = 7 instead of 8 – do you agree? <br>(The Infobox AFDO calculates correctly.)<br>		The octave number 8 is fine, but the exponent in ''(2<sup>8</sup>, hence 8<sup>th</sup> octave)'' should be (8-1) = 7 instead of 8 – do you agree? <br>(The Infobox AFDO calculates correctly.)<br>
	All the best - Holger ([[User:Holger Stoltenberg\|Holger Stoltenberg]] ([[User talk:Holger Stoltenberg\|talk]]) 16:50, 15 January 2025 (UTC))		All the best - Holger ([[User:Holger Stoltenberg\|Holger Stoltenberg]] ([[User talk:Holger Stoltenberg\|talk]]) 16:50, 15 January 2025 (UTC))

			:: I agree. That part of the text was actually not added by me, it was added on 08:41, 10 February 2020 by the page’s original author. Nonetheless I will correct it now. Thank you for pointing it out :) Kind regards, --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 01:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Holger Stoltenberg: Octave numbering and exponent review

2025-01-15T16:50:44Z

Octave numbering and exponent review

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:50, 15 January 2025
Line 22:		Line 22:

	: Before I touched the 91edo article, it had lalagu (12 & 97) and didn't have meantone. I figured there was probably some special reason why that was the case and didn't want to mess it up so that's why I left lalagu in place. Feel free to change whatever needs to be changed to make the articles accurate. --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 09:43, 25 November 2023 (UTC)		: Before I touched the 91edo article, it had lalagu (12 & 97) and didn't have meantone. I figured there was probably some special reason why that was the case and didn't want to mess it up so that's why I left lalagu in place. Feel free to change whatever needs to be changed to make the articles accurate. --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 09:43, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

			== Octave numbering and exponents ==

			Budjarn, I just came across your latest edits to the 128afdo page, where we read that the 8th Octave Overtone Tuning
			''"…consists of harmonics of the harmonic series, numbers 128 (2<sup>8</sup>, hence 8<sup>th</sup> octave) through 255."''<br>
			The octave number 8 is fine, but the exponent in ''(2<sup>8</sup>, hence 8<sup>th</sup> octave)'' should be (8-1) = 7 instead of 8 – do you agree? <br>(The Infobox AFDO calculates correctly.)<br>
			All the best - Holger ([[User:Holger Stoltenberg\|Holger Stoltenberg]] ([[User talk:Holger Stoltenberg\|talk]]) 16:50, 15 January 2025 (UTC))

BudjarnLambeth at 09:43, 25 November 2023

2023-11-25T09:43:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:43, 25 November 2023
Line 20:		Line 20:

	Please note that while lalagu (12 & 79) sounds indistinguishable from 1/7-comma meantone, it's far from being "extremely close" to it as they use a drastically different mapping for 5. Besides, it is fundamentally a different comma to 81/80. [[User:Eliora\|Eliora]] ([[User talk:Eliora\|talk]]) 18:24, 23 November 2023 (UTC)		Please note that while lalagu (12 & 79) sounds indistinguishable from 1/7-comma meantone, it's far from being "extremely close" to it as they use a drastically different mapping for 5. Besides, it is fundamentally a different comma to 81/80. [[User:Eliora\|Eliora]] ([[User talk:Eliora\|talk]]) 18:24, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

			: Before I touched the 91edo article, it had lalagu (12 & 97) and didn't have meantone. I figured there was probably some special reason why that was the case and didn't want to mess it up so that's why I left lalagu in place. Feel free to change whatever needs to be changed to make the articles accurate. --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 09:43, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Eliora: /* Lalagu and 1/7 comma */ new section

2023-11-23T18:24:10Z

Lalagu and 1/7 comma: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:24, 23 November 2023
Line 16:		Line 16:

	: Alright, I will do that from now on. Thanks for letting me know :) --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 06:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)		: Alright, I will do that from now on. Thanks for letting me know :) --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 06:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

			== Lalagu and 1/7 comma ==

			Please note that while lalagu (12 & 79) sounds indistinguishable from 1/7-comma meantone, it's far from being "extremely close" to it as they use a drastically different mapping for 5. Besides, it is fundamentally a different comma to 81/80. [[User:Eliora\|Eliora]] ([[User talk:Eliora\|talk]]) 18:24, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

BudjarnLambeth: /* Category of individual temperaments */

2023-04-26T06:19:49Z

Category of individual temperaments

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:19, 26 April 2023
Line 15:		Line 15:
	Plz note that ''Category:Temperaments'' is used for main namespace individual temperament pages. Category pages of these individual temperaments such as ''Category:Superpyth'' should be under ''Category:Category by temperaments''. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)		Plz note that ''Category:Temperaments'' is used for main namespace individual temperament pages. Category pages of these individual temperaments such as ''Category:Superpyth'' should be under ''Category:Category by temperaments''. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

	: Alright, I will do that from now on. Thanks for letting me know. --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 06:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)		: Alright, I will do that from now on. Thanks for letting me know :) --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 06:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

BudjarnLambeth: /* Category of individual temperaments */

2023-04-26T06:03:30Z

Category of individual temperaments

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:03, 26 April 2023
Line 14:		Line 14:

	Plz note that ''Category:Temperaments'' is used for main namespace individual temperament pages. Category pages of these individual temperaments such as ''Category:Superpyth'' should be under ''Category:Category by temperaments''. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)		Plz note that ''Category:Temperaments'' is used for main namespace individual temperament pages. Category pages of these individual temperaments such as ''Category:Superpyth'' should be under ''Category:Category by temperaments''. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

			: Alright, I will do that from now on. Thanks for letting me know. --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 06:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

FloraC: /* Category of individual temperaments */ new section

2023-04-26T06:02:26Z

Category of individual temperaments: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:02, 26 April 2023
Line 10:		Line 10:

	:Thank you for letting me know that :) I will change my user preferences accordingly. --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 22:30, 18 April 2023 (UTC)		:Thank you for letting me know that :) I will change my user preferences accordingly. --[[User:BudjarnLambeth\|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth\|talk]]) 22:30, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

			== Category of individual temperaments ==

			Plz note that ''Category:Temperaments'' is used for main namespace individual temperament pages. Category pages of these individual temperaments such as ''Category:Superpyth'' should be under ''Category:Category by temperaments''. [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 06:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)