Talk:Porcupine family: Difference between revisions

(4 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)

Line 61:

::::::::::::: Yes we are. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 12:09, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::: Okay, if you agree with me, then why try to characterize porcupine chiefly as a tempering of JI rather than as a self-standing system with JI "labels" for intervals? -- [[User:VectorGraphics|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics|talk]]) 18:44, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::: Becuz temps are of JI by definition. They ''are'' coherent and self-standing systems. They're not just infinite scales with JI labels -- it's not a crime to think about them like that, but that's more of a scale-centric, JI-agnostic approach which isn't what we're doing in this ''middle path''. To put it simply, if you don't care about JI, don't come for RTT. Go edit the JI interpretations in the mos pages and you're welcome. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 09:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

== Rename of tridecimal porcupine ==

Line 85:

Line 89:

:: If we rename ''negri'' to ''negrifowl'', we could also have the current "Negroni" (the best 2.3.5.7.13 negri extension to the full 13-limit by Cangwu badness) becoming ''negrifish'' I suppose. Negrifish also has the property that its tuning accuracy greatly improves when prime 3 is removed. (I know it's a bit strange to talk about negri on the porcupine page, but this question is relevant to the naming of porcupine.) --[[User:Hkm|hkm]] ([[User talk:Hkm|talk]]) 15:57, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

::: Just to be clear, we're not renaming core negri itself to negrifowl, right? Only one of its extensions? --[[User:BudjarnLambeth|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth|talk]]) 08:42, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

== "Sharp of 8d-edo"? ==

While I get that the order of sharpness here refers to the 3/2, I don't get why. 3/2 isn't especially important to porcupine. I mean sure, it's a consonance, but it's -3 generators.

I think it makes more sense to talk about how sharp a tuning is based on the sharpness of the generator, rather than the sharpness of -3 of them, so I'd call opossum (generator around 160c) flatter than porky (generator around 164c), rather than sharper.

: Makes sense, tho I think it's best to follow ploidacot specs. Since porcupine is omega-tricot it's prolly best to base the sharpness of tunings on 4/3 (and thus the ~11/10 generator) rather than 3/2. In most cases however, 3/2 should be preferred over 4/3. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 10:22, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 61: / Line 61: @@
 ::::::::::::: Yes we are. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 12:09, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
+:::::::::::::: Okay, if you agree with me, then why try to characterize porcupine chiefly as a tempering of JI rather than as a self-standing system with JI "labels" for intervals? -- [[User:VectorGraphics|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics|talk]]) 18:44, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
+::::::::::::::: Becuz temps are of JI by definition. They ''are'' coherent and self-standing systems. They're not just infinite scales with JI labels -- it's not a crime to think about them like that, but that's more of a scale-centric, JI-agnostic approach which isn't what we're doing in this ''middle path''. To put it simply, if you don't care about JI, don't come for RTT. Go edit the JI interpretations in the mos pages and you're welcome. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 09:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
 == Rename of tridecimal porcupine ==
@@ Line 85: / Line 89: @@
 :: If we rename ''negri'' to ''negrifowl'', we could also have the current "Negroni" (the best 2.3.5.7.13 negri extension to the full 13-limit by Cangwu badness) becoming ''negrifish'' I suppose. Negrifish also has the property that its tuning accuracy greatly improves when prime 3 is removed. (I know it's a bit strange to talk about negri on the porcupine page, but this question is relevant to the naming of porcupine.) --[[User:Hkm|hkm]] ([[User talk:Hkm|talk]]) 15:57, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
+::: Just to be clear, we're not renaming core negri itself to negrifowl, right? Only one of its extensions? --[[User:BudjarnLambeth|BudjarnLambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth|talk]]) 08:42, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
+== "Sharp of 8d-edo"? ==
+While I get that the order of sharpness here refers to the 3/2, I don't get why. 3/2 isn't especially important to porcupine. I mean sure, it's a consonance, but it's -3 generators.
+I think it makes more sense to talk about how sharp a tuning is based on the sharpness of the generator, rather than the sharpness of -3 of them, so I'd call opossum (generator around 160c) flatter than porky (generator around 164c), rather than sharper.
+: Makes sense, tho I think it's best to follow ploidacot specs. Since porcupine is omega-tricot it's prolly best to base the sharpness of tunings on 4/3 (and thus the ~11/10 generator) rather than 3/2. In most cases however, 3/2 should be preferred over 4/3. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 10:22, 29 June 2025 (UTC)