Talk:EDT: Difference between revisions

From Xenharmonic Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
VisualWikitext
Wikispaces>FREEZE
No edit summary
 
Keenan Pepper (talk | contribs)
autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, confirmaccount-notify, Interface administrators, Sysops
968 edits
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 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.'''
----


== It's a start ==
== "Technically does not miss"... what? ==
Okay, well it's rather jumbled, so feel free to improve it however you like, but it's a start. 


Ideally there would be something on MOSes in tritaves, or in non octaves, because they're completely different. But I've only scratched the iceberg on that.
I don't understand this phrase that appears 41 times in the EDT-EDO correspondence table: "technically does not entirely miss 2/1 due to having a step of...". What does "technically missing 2/1" mean? If no one can explain it I'm going to delete this wording, since it makes no sense to me. —[[User:Keenan Pepper|Keenan Pepper]] ([[User talk:Keenan Pepper|talk]]) 23:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 
- '''Kosmorsky''' August 26, 2011, 08:26:16 PM UTC-0700
----
Hey, I just noticed this page and its satellite pages.  I'm glad to see a systematic approach to equal divisions of the tritave. A nice start indeed!
 
- '''Andrew_Heathwaite''' September 03, 2011, 03:34:48 PM UTC-0700
----
Added a lot of info, cleaned up some technical things, tried to make it more concise. If you think I removed too much feel free to put it back.
 
- '''mbattaglia1''' September 07, 2011, 12:09:13 AM UTC-0700
----
Same as Mike.
 
- '''Sarzadoce''' September 07, 2011, 01:16:58 PM UTC-0700
----
Hope you don't mind that I removed about 2 of your sentences Mike.  I did attempt to transplant them in another relevant location.
 
- '''Sarzadoce''' September 07, 2011, 01:19:10 PM UTC-0700
----

Latest revision as of 23:17, 30 May 2021

This page also contains archived Wikispaces discussion.

"Technically does not miss"... what?

I don't understand this phrase that appears 41 times in the EDT-EDO correspondence table: "technically does not entirely miss 2/1 due to having a step of...". What does "technically missing 2/1" mean? If no one can explain it I'm going to delete this wording, since it makes no sense to me. —Keenan Pepper (talk) 23:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?title=Talk:EDT&oldid=71145"