Talk:33/32: Difference between revisions
m →undecimal subminor second: added author |
→Comma: re |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
: So I'm in a program to add FJS names for intervals. I see [[11/10]] and [[20/11]] have inconsistent names. Currently I've added both to make them match, which may also need further discussion. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 07:21, 20 September 2020 (UTC) | : So I'm in a program to add FJS names for intervals. I see [[11/10]] and [[20/11]] have inconsistent names. Currently I've added both to make them match, which may also need further discussion. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 07:21, 20 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
== Comma == | |||
So if this is a formal comma in every major JI notation system, why is x31eq telling me it's so terrible to temper out? Why is it saying 729/704 is better? [[User:Bootmii|Bootmii]] ([[User talk:Bootmii|talk]]) 02:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC) | |||
: Not sure about ''better'' but it's not surprising that the error of {729/704} is lower than {33/32}. 729/704 is much more complex and only a little bit larger than 33/32, so the corresponding temperaments introduce about the same magnitude of displacement in the lattice, but {729/704} has a longer path to evenly distribute it out, which implies less error for each step. | |||
: If you enjoy more of this kind of convo plz consider joining our Dicord or FB group. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:58, 21 April 2022 (UTC) | |||