Talk:Octave reduction: Difference between revisions

(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)

Line 11:

: Second this. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:58, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

: Thank you both for the advice. I took a chance to organize it this way to see how it would go, but I agree now that moving the generalization later on makes more sense. I also planned to mention balanced reduction, so that would be another kind of generalization as well. I'll be working on this today. Thanks again! [[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 12:30, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

:: Thank you both for the advice. I took a chance to organize it this way to see how it would go, but I agree now that moving the generalization later on makes more sense. I also planned to mention balanced reduction, so that would be another kind of generalization as well. I'll be working on this today. Thanks again! [[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 12:30, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

::: This is great news! I also don't have anything against reorganizing stuff. As long as we provide an easy way to approach concepts. In this special case, octave reduction will be quite understandable, because of the very broad acceptance of the ''octave equivalence'' concept (in western music). Good luck for further reorganization! --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 13:10, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

:::: I reorganized the page as discussed and added the other elements that I had in mind. If there is anything else to mention, please let me know. [[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 17:09, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 : Second this. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:58, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
-: Thank you both for the advice. I took a chance to organize it this way to see how it would go, but I agree now that moving the generalization later on makes more sense. I also planned to mention balanced reduction, so that would be another kind of generalization as well. I'll be working on this today. Thanks again! [[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 12:30, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
+:: Thank you both for the advice. I took a chance to organize it this way to see how it would go, but I agree now that moving the generalization later on makes more sense. I also planned to mention balanced reduction, so that would be another kind of generalization as well. I'll be working on this today. Thanks again! [[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 12:30, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
+::: This is great news! I also don't have anything against reorganizing stuff. As long as we provide an easy way to approach concepts. In this special case, octave reduction will be quite understandable, because of the very broad acceptance of the ''octave equivalence'' concept (in western music). Good luck for further reorganization! --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 13:10, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
+:::: I reorganized the page as discussed and added the other elements that I had in mind. If there is anything else to mention, please let me know. [[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 17:09, 18 July 2021 (UTC)