Talk:Meantone family: Difference between revisions

(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 92:

:: 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)

::: ~~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)

::: 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 92: / Line 92: @@
 :: 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)
-::: 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)
+::: 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)