'''All discussion below is archived from the Wikispaces export in its original unaltered form.'''
{{High priority}}
----
== Abstract regular temperament vs Abstract temperament ==
== Basic explanation of the concept ==
When you guys first came up with this stuff, the only thing you all cared about were regular temperaments.
But, since people are now really into the idea of designing circulating temperaments around vals, and it's clear that circulating temperaments really kick quite a hefty amount of ass, it's pretty clear that the theory is way more useful and broad than that.
It might be nice if this page at least basically explained the concept that an abstract regular temperament means that no generator has a specific value yet but is still a range of values. At least that's my understanding after discussions with several folks on Facebook and Discord today. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Since Keenan's been known to say things like "I love <15 24 35 42 52|" - not 15-EDO, but rather his 15-note well-tuning, which is still represented by that val - should we perhaps consider just calling these objects "abstract temperaments" instead of abstract "regular" temperaments, specifically?
: Does the new intro ([https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?title=Regular_temperament&type=revision&diff=67285&oldid=61053 as added by Keenan Pepper]) resolve this issue? --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 09:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I've been happy to leave names alone for a while now, but I think this is a good idea because to insist on everything being regular and not circulating really sells us short. Vals are more general than even regular temperaments.
:: Yes, thank you very much. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 14:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- '''mbattaglia1''' January 18, 2013, 12:29:37 AM UTC-0800
== Papers ==
----
Bump.
- '''mbattaglia1''' January 20, 2013, 03:57:32 PM UTC-0800
We should probably include links to important external docs at the bottom, like Middle Path, Graham's "new paradigm" paper, maybe Tonalsoft pages, etc. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 15:26, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
----
Must we worry about this? I think "consistently mapped" might make sense, in case it is, which is not always true for a circulating temperament.
- '''genewardsmith''' January 20, 2013, 04:48:52 PM UTC-0800
----
It's worth worrying about just for the sake of communicating. For instance, I was telling Jason Leith about "regular temperament theory" yesterday and he was like, "well, what about irregular temperament theory?" Then I had to explain that regular temperament theory really can handle "irregular" temperaments too, like with Keenan's marimba, and that the "regular" was a hangover from the old days, and so on. But it was confusing.
The theory right now can handle
1) ordinary regular temperaments
2) circulating temperaments
3) "inconsistent" temperaments
By the latter I mean something like a temperament with the existence of a 9 which is 3 * 3, and a separate 9' which is more accurate but not 3 * 3. The latter happens in 59-EDO, for instance, if you choose to work in the 2.3.5.9' subgroup. So as far as your "consistently mapped" thing goes, this would be a "consistently mapped" inconsistent temperament.
So yeah, I do think it's important.
- '''mbattaglia1''' January 20, 2013, 05:11:03 PM UTC-0800
----
bump
- '''mbattaglia1''' January 22, 2013, 08:56:41 PM UTC-0800
----
== what is going on here? ==
Why is this page now called "abstract regular temperament"?
- '''clumma''' September 18, 2011, 01:36:20 PM UTC-0700
----
It's always been called that.
- '''genewardsmith''' September 18, 2011, 02:33:00 PM UTC-0700
----
Yeah, since you created it six months ago, apparently by pasting in what used to be on the "regular temperament" page. :(
- '''clumma''' September 18, 2011, 03:06:32 PM UTC-0700
----
We needed an article on that topic, and it wasn't a cut and paste job.
- '''genewardsmith''' September 18, 2011, 05:32:07 PM UTC-0700
----
I support this and like the distinction; I've linked Margo Schulter to this page to explain how what I called "maqamic" is still a temperament despite that the choice of intonation is adaptive. It's a useful concept.
- '''mbattaglia1''' September 18, 2011, 06:39:24 PM UTC-0700
This article is deemed to be of high priority for the Xenharmonic Wiki, as it is often seen by new users or easily accessed from the main page or sidebar. Edits made to this article will have a significantly larger impact than on others, and poorly-written content will stand out more. As a result, it has been semi-protected to prevent disruptive editing and vandalism.
Please be mindful of this when making edits to the article.
Basic explanation of the concept
It might be nice if this page at least basically explained the concept that an abstract regular temperament means that no generator has a specific value yet but is still a range of values. At least that's my understanding after discussions with several folks on Facebook and Discord today. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 19:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes, thank you very much. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 14:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Papers
We should probably include links to important external docs at the bottom, like Middle Path, Graham's "new paradigm" paper, maybe Tonalsoft pages, etc. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 15:26, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
