Talk:Gamelismic clan: Difference between revisions
Re |
|||
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Also, just thinking about good wiki practice: Although it says "once again", implying that this has been explained elsewhere, there is no citation or reference made, and I cannot find another place in the article that makes or elaborates on this point. I suggest / request that someone who knows what this is about either elaborate on the point in this paragraph, or link to an article or subarticle explains this. | Also, just thinking about good wiki practice: Although it says "once again", implying that this has been explained elsewhere, there is no citation or reference made, and I cannot find another place in the article that makes or elaborates on this point. I suggest / request that someone who knows what this is about either elaborate on the point in this paragraph, or link to an article or subarticle explains this. | ||
Thanks in advance for any insight you can share! | |||
: An example of not using mos is the diatonic–inflection approach in which we simply take the diatonic scale and apply comma-level inflections to reach the ratios we want, while using comma pumps to lock into the temperament. It's also possible to replace diatonic with whatever scales you like. If you're using a tuning of mothra and if the commas of mothra are required to be tempered out in the piece, then you're undoubtedly using mothra. | |||
: On this wiki mothra used to be listed under the meantone family, but even there I can't find a previous temperament entry where non-mos approaches are/were ever suggested. I think the author simply assumed the readers should be familiar with all the approaches. The truth is these approaches are basically never documented on this wiki. | |||
: <small>Please remember to sign your comments using four tildes <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>.</small> | |||
: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 08:12, 19 May 2024 (UTC) |