Talk:Arithmetic tuning: Difference between revisions

(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)

Line 3:

* ''Arithmetic tuning'' to ''arithmetic-like tuning'';

* ''AFS'' to ''EFS'' (''equal frequency sequence''), and alternatively as I much prefer, ''arithmetic sequence'', in which case ''arithmetic'' means equal frequency;

* ''APS'' to ''EPS'' (''equal pitch sequence''), and alternative as I much prefer, ''equal sequence'', in which case pitch is assumed;

* ''ALS'' to ''ELS'' (''equal length sequence''), and alternatively as I much prefer, ''inverse-arithmetic sequence'', in which case ''inverse-arithmetic'' means equal length.

Line 30:

Line 31:

::: Sorry I didn't ask for clarity on this earlier, but I still don't understand what you mean by "orthogonality" here. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:06, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

:::: Yes, applying arithmetic sequences on the different scales of measurement is one possible logic. The approach I much prefer is to think of a kind of sequence as ''indicating'' the scale of measurement.

:::: I explained the lack of orthogonality as "one specification is often encompassed by another", and so by having orthogonality our specifications would be minimal and disjoint from each other. Note that this is not abouting deprecating the concepts and the names, only how we specify individual tuning systems.

:::: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 19:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

::::: I have made the change re: rational vs. irrational that you explain here.

::::: I note that you posted on Facebook about this idea to change ''AFS'' to ''EFS'' here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/xenwiki/permalink/3341743592758288 As I expected, Paul (with whom I co-designed the naming system which includes AFS) reiterated the same point I made above, which is that "equal sequence" is insufficient to convey the idea of a sequence which iterates by an equal amount, while "arithmetic" captures that idea exactly and succinctly. Mike Battaglia (who was not involved in the creation of this system, by the way) also noted that "EPS" would suggest a sequence of all the same pitch, not a sequence of changing pitches. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 23:55, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

::::: The conversation about "orthogonal" moved to [[Talk:IDO]]. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:58, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 * ''Arithmetic tuning'' to ''arithmetic-like tuning'';
 * ''AFS'' to ''EFS'' (''equal frequency sequence''), and alternatively as I much prefer, ''arithmetic sequence'', in which case ''arithmetic'' means equal frequency;
+* ''APS'' to ''EPS'' (''equal pitch sequence''), and alternative as I much prefer, ''equal sequence'', in which case pitch is assumed;
 * ''ALS'' to ''ELS'' (''equal length sequence''), and alternatively as I much prefer, ''inverse-arithmetic sequence'', in which case ''inverse-arithmetic'' means equal length.
@@ Line 30: / Line 31: @@
 ::: Sorry I didn't ask for clarity on this earlier, but I still don't understand what you mean by "orthogonality" here. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:06, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
+:::: Yes, applying arithmetic sequences on the different scales of measurement is one possible logic. The approach I much prefer is to think of a kind of sequence as ''indicating'' the scale of measurement.
+:::: I explained the lack of orthogonality as "one specification is often encompassed by another", and so by having orthogonality our specifications would be minimal and disjoint from each other. Note that this is not abouting deprecating the concepts and the names, only how we specify individual tuning systems.
+:::: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 19:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
+::::: I have made the change re: rational vs. irrational that you explain here.
+::::: I note that you posted on Facebook about this idea to change ''AFS'' to ''EFS'' here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/xenwiki/permalink/3341743592758288 As I expected, Paul (with whom I co-designed the naming system which includes AFS) reiterated the same point I made above, which is that "equal sequence" is insufficient to convey the idea of a sequence which iterates by an equal amount, while "arithmetic" captures that idea exactly and succinctly. Mike Battaglia (who was not involved in the creation of this system, by the way) also noted that "EPS" would suggest a sequence of all the same pitch, not a sequence of changing pitches. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 23:55, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
+::::: The conversation about "orthogonal" moved to [[Talk:IDO]]. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:58, 1 April 2023 (UTC)