Talk:List of octave-reduced harmonics: Difference between revisions

From Xenharmonic Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Wikispaces>FREEZE
No edit summary
 
TallKite (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
= ARCHIVED WIKISPACES DISCUSSION BELOW =
{{WSArchiveLink}}
'''All discussion below is archived from the Wikispaces export in its original unaltered form.'''
----


== octave reduces octave ==
== Remove 2? ==
I'm not sure what is better to understand in a table that is based on octave reduction: summing up all octaves within the unison or add an own entry for the octave.


- '''xenwolf''' October 05, 2015, 12:41:29 AM UTC-0700
If we octave reduce the octave we get the unison. After making the first two columns sortable, having 2 in a list of entirely odd numbers seems wrong to me. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 21:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
----
 
: I think it's good to have the octave there for reference and explicitly indicate fact that it's there for reference. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 22:52, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 
== Missing Harmonics ==
83 and 107 are missing --[[User:TallKite|TallKite]] ([[User talk:TallKite|talk]]) 23:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 23:19, 21 October 2024

This page also contains archived Wikispaces discussion.

Remove 2?

If we octave reduce the octave we get the unison. After making the first two columns sortable, having 2 in a list of entirely odd numbers seems wrong to me. --Xenwolf (talk) 21:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I think it's good to have the octave there for reference and explicitly indicate fact that it's there for reference. --Aura (talk) 22:52, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Missing Harmonics

83 and 107 are missing --TallKite (talk) 23:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)