Talk:Tour of regular temperaments: Difference between revisions

From Xenharmonic Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Wikispaces>FREEZE
No edit summary
 
m Re: done
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 7 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.'''
----


== Kuato Family ==
== Family vs. clan? ==
Why does Laconic Family link to Kuato Family?
If family means a set of rank-2 temperaments defined by a 2.3.5 comma specifically, and a clan means the same thing but for another (rank-3) JI subgroup, I think it's a bit arbitrary to have separate words for that particular distinction. [[User:IlL|IlL]] ([[User talk:IlL|talk]]) 07:46, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


- '''genewardsmith''' October 17, 2011, 11:20:34 AM UTC-0700
: Seconded. Imo keep clan and refer to everything else as families. No need for extra terminology. - [[User:Sintel|Sintel]] ([[User talk:Sintel|talk]]) 02:24, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
----
My bad, I fixed it now.


- '''mbattaglia1''' October 17, 2011, 12:37:03 PM UTC-0700
== Red links ==
----
I'm not sure if it does more good to have the numerous red links. What do we expect a visitor to learn when all they see is a ratio without a page or any further explanations? I think the latest addition of 128/121 is fine since there is some information at least on how the temperaments are like. The others I can't see much. No doubt, one is free to add entries. Problem is a lot of the entries lack substance. I reckon they'd better be removed for now since the substance is not immediately available. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 14:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)


== perhaps should be split into two pages ==
== Color names ==
I was considering throwing this into the General Theory mix as well, but I think the opening paragraph is a bit too technical for the average reader to understand (folks in XA chat seem to be in agreement). But given a bit more thought, this seems to be the very thing that we were trying to avoid by doing the General/Mathematical theory split in the first place: it has a precisely worded but rather technical mathematical introduction, but then contains several "tutorial paragraphs" on things like "Why should I care about Regular Temperament?" and so the whole thing is rather bloated.
Our compromise in the past has been to avoid placing color names at the top of descriptions (for example in porcupine where it was moved to the infobox). Someone with more time on their hands than me needs to move all the color names here to the body text of each entry, like "In color notation, this temperament is called *****ti."
--[[User:VectorGraphics|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics|talk]]) 02:28, 14 May 2025 (UTC)


I need to throw something into the General Theory queue for regular temperaments, and except for the first paragraph this would be great. I suggest one of the following approaches could improve things
: Done. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 16:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
 
- We write a more general-style introduction to match the "tutorial"-ish nature of the rest of the page, and split the mathematical one off into its own page
 
- We write a more general-style intro and then create a "Mathematical Definition" subheading, and keep it in one page
 
- I write a general-style intro and keep it on its own page
 
I think that #1 is ideal because I think that #2 will get bloated, and it doesn't make sense to have a dedicated tutorial page plus a mixed tutorial/math page. What are your thoughts?
 
- '''mbattaglia1''' September 18, 2011, 10:12:14 PM UTC-0700
----
Bumping this again for feedback, will otherwise attempt a split sometime later
 
- '''mbattaglia1''' September 19, 2011, 10:51:16 AM UTC-0700
----
#1 sounds good
 
- '''genewardsmith''' September 19, 2011, 11:50:28 AM UTC-0700
----
 
== sensipent ==
The sensipent comma is listed on scala as the medium semicomma, I edited the page to represent this. This comma is also missing a monzo.
 
- '''Natebedell''' September 04, 2011, 11:39:04 AM UTC-0700
----
 
== List of Temperaments ==
Do we really need to list a bunch of 5-limit rank-2 temperaments on this very page?  Can't we just link to a catalog of them?
 
If we must list them, I think shortening the list might be a good idea.
 
- '''igliashon''' July 16, 2011, 01:31:04 PM UTC-0700
----
 
== Golden Meantone ==
Where should Kornerup's golden meantone go? Regards ---  peu <small>Jun 1, 2010</small>
 
- '''xenwolf''' June 01, 2010, 02:54:46 AM UTC-0700
----
It's a tuning choice and could be mentioned as such on meantone or meantone family, but the whole metallic tuning business really rates its own page.
 
- '''genewardsmith''' June 01, 2010, 04:48:30 AM UTC-0700
----
Oh, I started the Discussion on the wrong page, Meantone family was it meant for. Excuse my green question, what is the meaning of <em>metallic tuning business</em>? ---  peu <small>Jun 1, 2010</small>
 
- '''xenwolf''' June 01, 2010, 05:21:47 AM UTC-0700
----

Latest revision as of 16:16, 11 June 2025

This page also contains archived Wikispaces discussion.

Family vs. clan?

If family means a set of rank-2 temperaments defined by a 2.3.5 comma specifically, and a clan means the same thing but for another (rank-3) JI subgroup, I think it's a bit arbitrary to have separate words for that particular distinction. IlL (talk) 07:46, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Seconded. Imo keep clan and refer to everything else as families. No need for extra terminology. - Sintel (talk) 02:24, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Red links

I'm not sure if it does more good to have the numerous red links. What do we expect a visitor to learn when all they see is a ratio without a page or any further explanations? I think the latest addition of 128/121 is fine since there is some information at least on how the temperaments are like. The others I can't see much. No doubt, one is free to add entries. Problem is a lot of the entries lack substance. I reckon they'd better be removed for now since the substance is not immediately available. FloraC (talk) 14:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Color names

Our compromise in the past has been to avoid placing color names at the top of descriptions (for example in porcupine where it was moved to the infobox). Someone with more time on their hands than me needs to move all the color names here to the body text of each entry, like "In color notation, this temperament is called *****ti." --VectorGraphics (talk) 02:28, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Done. FloraC (talk) 16:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)