Talk:Meantone family: Difference between revisions

(19 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)

Line 68:

:: Okay, so it's specific to this particular higher-limit stuff not being useful, not that any higher-limit stuff should be cut out. Fair enough. And I didn't connect the name Vincenzo to the stuff that was deleted. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 06:49, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

::: Yeah. We're currently proposing a more extensive streamlining of the septimal meantone strong extensions as well because many extensions include mappings of different primes with incompatible tuning tendencies. I don't believe this would be applied more generally; meantone extensions are a somewhat extreme case in terms of clutter, and doing this would help illuminate what actually useful extensions are there in different tuning subranges of meantone. But these extensions will continue to reach the 19-limit. --[[User:Lériendil|Lériendil]] ([[User talk:Lériendil|talk]]) 13:38, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

:::: Fair enough. And while we're on the subject of streamlining, I would recommend a reorganization so that the main article starts with 5-limit Meantone (and its tuning spectrum table either reflects this or also includes the other major 7-limit extensions), and Septimal Meantone is moved to its own article like Flattone, Dominant, etc. (also getting its own tuning spectrum table if the tuning spectrum tables are not all merged). I can think of pros and cons for merged and separate tuning spectrum tables. But since past historical use of Meantone ''usually'' didn't pay much attention to septimal intervals, putting Septimal Meantone ahead of all of the others might not be the best way to organize things, given that modern use (which eventually will also be historical, and arguably already is for the early-to-mid 20th Century) has usage of Dominant being, um, dominant. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 17:15, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

== Replace 7-limit mohajira with 2.3.5.11 ==

The page states that mohajira makes more sense as an 11-limit temperament than 7-limit. I personally didn't even know that mohajira had a canonical mapping of 7 at all.

<s>Plus it would finally give 2.3.5.11 porcupine something to compare with!</s>

-- [[User:VectorGraphics|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics|talk]]) 09:52, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

: The 2.3.5.11-subgroup restriction of mahajira is mohaha, which has been covered in rastmic clan. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 09:57, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

== Sharptone "well-tuned" sharp of 5edo? ==

How is sharptone relatively well-tuned sharp of 5edo when the POTE generator is so close to 7\12?

[[User:Jerdle|Jerdle]] ([[User talk:Jerdle|talk]]) 09:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

: There are better extension options available when tuned flat of 5edo. -- [[User:VectorGraphics|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics|talk]]) 19:21, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

:: It wasn't originally my question, but let me try rephrasing it: Why is the POTE generator for it specified as being so close to 7\12 when 12edo is way out of the range for which Sharptone is optimal (unless you need it for pitch-bending the 7/4 up on a standard 12edo fretted instrument), and 5edo is the crossover point between Dominant and Sharptone, and Sharptone would give the most just 7/4 or 8/7 with a fifth somewhat sharp of the diatonic range of Meantone temperament? [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 22:49, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

::: Classical (5-limit) meantone clearly makes no sense beyond 3\5. Dominant doesn't make much sense beyond 10\17. I described the range of dominant as 7\12 to 10\17 in the Arhcytas clan page, which I hope you like. Unfortunately 10\17 isn't a natural boundary for meantone extensions, so maybe we'll keep 7\12 to 3\5 for dominant as we discuss it in this article. As for sharptone, the only 7-odd-limit monotone range of it is the singleton of 3\5, right? So that's the case for tuning it to 3\5. Our conventional optimization methods are least squares, which also make sense, but they obviously don't take those constraints into account. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 06:21, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

:::: . . . Which leaves me wishing that the name Sharptone hadn't been taken for what is really an exotemperament extension of Meantone, so that it could have been used for something more fitting as a counterpart to Flattone, like the strong extension that gives the patent 7th harmonic for 55edo, 67edo, and 122edo (to which I gave the placeholder name Mildtone inn [[Talk:Meantone]]). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 08:28, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

::::: I propose that the 7-limit temperament tempering out 21/20 and 28/27 be called ''trienmean'' in this case. I originally wanted to call it ''trientone'', but that conflicts with an already-existing term. [[User:2^67-1|2^67-1]] ([[User talk:2^67-1|talk]]) 09:00, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::: I agree that sharptone really should be renamed (I presume it mainly exists in order to be detempered into scales, so shouldn't just be deleted). But "trienmean" sounds too much like "trimean" or some other kind of extension that splits meantone into three (lithium, mothra, ...). -- [[User:Lériendil|Lériendil]] ([[User talk:Lériendil|talk]]) 13:17, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::: How about Oneirotone? Because once you get past 5edo, [[5L 3s]] (the Oneirotonic scale, of which 5edo has the collapsed version) becomes valid. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 15:16, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::::: I don't think sharptone should be renamed. There is not a strong reason to do so. Also, re-using old names isn't a great idea in the first place, so pls don't take this as a pathway to re-use the name ''sharptone'' for something else. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 20:38, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::::: I'll agree on not reusing the old name, but I believe Sharptone shouldn't have taken that name in the first place. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 05:08, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::: It may not be perfect but it's not inappropriate either, so we'll keep it unless there's a strong reason for renaming. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 13:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

: Put my vote in for that question as well. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 05:20, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

:: All I can think is that, sharp of 5edo, the M6 becomes sharp of the m7, and they cross over at 960 cents. [[User:Jerdle|Jerdle]] ([[User talk:Jerdle|talk]]) 09:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 :: Okay, so it's specific to this particular higher-limit stuff not being useful, not that any higher-limit stuff should be cut out.  Fair enough.  And I didn't connect the name Vincenzo to the stuff that was deleted.  [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 06:49, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
+::: Yeah. We're currently proposing a more extensive streamlining of the septimal meantone strong extensions as well because many extensions include mappings of different primes with incompatible tuning tendencies. I don't believe this would be applied more generally; meantone extensions are a somewhat extreme case in terms of clutter, and doing this would help illuminate what actually useful extensions are there in different tuning subranges of meantone. But these extensions will continue to reach the 19-limit. --[[User:Lériendil|Lériendil]] ([[User talk:Lériendil|talk]]) 13:38, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
+:::: Fair enough. And while we're on the subject of streamlining, I would recommend a reorganization so that the main article starts with 5-limit Meantone (and its tuning spectrum table either reflects this or also includes the other major 7-limit extensions), and Septimal Meantone is moved to its own article like Flattone, Dominant, etc. (also getting its own tuning spectrum table if the tuning spectrum tables are not all merged).  I can think of pros and cons for merged and separate tuning spectrum tables.  But since past historical use of Meantone ''usually'' didn't pay much attention to septimal intervals, putting Septimal Meantone ahead of all of the others might not be the best way to organize things, given that modern use (which eventually will also be historical, and arguably already is for the early-to-mid 20th Century) has usage of Dominant being, um, dominant.  [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 17:15, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
+== Replace 7-limit mohajira with 2.3.5.11 ==
+The page states that mohajira makes more sense as an 11-limit temperament than 7-limit. I personally didn't even know that mohajira had a canonical mapping of 7 at all.
+<s>Plus it would finally give 2.3.5.11 porcupine something to compare with!</s>
+-- [[User:VectorGraphics|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics|talk]]) 09:52, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
+: The 2.3.5.11-subgroup restriction of mahajira is mohaha, which has been covered in rastmic clan. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 09:57, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
+== Sharptone "well-tuned" sharp of 5edo? ==
+How is sharptone relatively well-tuned sharp of 5edo when the POTE generator is so close to 7\12?
+[[User:Jerdle|Jerdle]] ([[User talk:Jerdle|talk]]) 09:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
+: There are better extension options available when tuned flat of 5edo. -- [[User:VectorGraphics|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics|talk]]) 19:21, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
+:: It wasn't originally my question, but let me try rephrasing it:  Why is the POTE generator for it specified as being so close to 7\12 when 12edo is way out of the range for which Sharptone is optimal (unless you need it for pitch-bending the 7/4 up on a standard 12edo fretted instrument), and 5edo is the crossover point between Dominant and Sharptone, and Sharptone would give the most just 7/4 or 8/7 with a fifth somewhat sharp of the diatonic range of Meantone temperament?  [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 22:49, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
+::: Classical (5-limit) meantone clearly makes no sense beyond 3\5. Dominant doesn't make much sense beyond 10\17. I described the range of dominant as 7\12 to 10\17 in the Arhcytas clan page, which I hope you like. Unfortunately 10\17 isn't a natural boundary for meantone extensions, so maybe we'll keep 7\12 to 3\5 for dominant as we discuss it in this article. As for sharptone, the only 7-odd-limit monotone range of it is the singleton of 3\5, right? So that's the case for tuning it to 3\5. Our conventional optimization methods are least squares, which also make sense, but they obviously don't take those constraints into account. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 06:21, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
+:::: . . . Which leaves me wishing that the name Sharptone hadn't been taken for what is really an exotemperament extension of Meantone, so that it could have been used for something more fitting as a counterpart to Flattone, like the strong extension that gives the patent 7th harmonic for 55edo, 67edo, and 122edo (to which I gave the placeholder name Mildtone inn [[Talk:Meantone]]).  [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 08:28, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
+::::: I propose that the 7-limit temperament tempering out 21/20 and 28/27 be called ''trienmean'' in this case. I originally wanted to call it ''trientone'', but that conflicts with an already-existing term. [[User:2^67-1|2^67-1]] ([[User talk:2^67-1|talk]]) 09:00, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
+:::::: I agree that sharptone really should be renamed (I presume it mainly exists in order to be detempered into scales, so shouldn't just be deleted). But "trienmean" sounds too much like "trimean" or some other kind of extension that splits meantone into three (lithium, mothra, ...). -- [[User:Lériendil|Lériendil]] ([[User talk:Lériendil|talk]]) 13:17, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
+::::::: How about Oneirotone?  Because once you get past 5edo, [[5L&nbsp;3s]] (the Oneirotonic scale, of which 5edo has the collapsed version) becomes valid.  [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 15:16, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
+:::::::: I don't think sharptone should be renamed. There is not a strong reason to do so. Also, re-using old names isn't a great idea in the first place, so pls don't take this as a pathway to re-use the name ''sharptone'' for something else. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 20:38, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
+::::::::: I'll agree on not reusing the old name, but I believe Sharptone shouldn't have taken that name in the first place.  [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 05:08, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
+:::::::::: It may not be perfect but it's not inappropriate either, so we'll keep it unless there's a strong reason for renaming. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 13:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
+: Put my vote in for that question as well.  [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 05:20, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
+:: All I can think is that, sharp of 5edo, the M6 becomes sharp of the m7, and they cross over at 960 cents. [[User:Jerdle|Jerdle]] ([[User talk:Jerdle|talk]]) 09:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)