|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| <h2>IMPORTED REVISION FROM WIKISPACES</h2>
| | The 8269 division divides the octave into 8269 equal parts of 0.14512 cents each. It is both a [[The_Riemann_Zeta_Function_and_Tuning#Zeta EDO lists|zeta peak and zeta integral edo]], which has to do with the fact that it is a very strong 19- and 23-limit division. It has a lower 19-limit and a lower 23-limit [[Tenney-Euclidean_temperament_measures#TE simple badness|relative error]] than any smaller division, a lower 19-limit [[Tenney-Euclidean_metrics#Logflat TE badness| TE loglfat badness]] than any smaller division, and a lower 23-limit logflat badness than any excepting 311, 581, 1578 and 2460. While [[8539edo|8539]] has received most of the attention in this size range, 8269 is actually a bit better in the 23-limit and nearly as good in the 19-limit. They are rather like twins, including the fact both are primes. |
| This is an imported revision from Wikispaces. The revision metadata is included below for reference:<br>
| |
| : This revision was by author [[User:genewardsmith|genewardsmith]] and made on <tt>2015-08-22 12:46:09 UTC</tt>.<br>
| |
| : The original revision id was <tt>557168695</tt>.<br>
| |
| : The revision comment was: <tt></tt><br>
| |
| The revision contents are below, presented both in the original Wikispaces Wikitext format, and in HTML exactly as Wikispaces rendered it.<br>
| |
| <h4>Original Wikitext content:</h4>
| |
| <div style="width:100%; max-height:400pt; overflow:auto; background-color:#f8f9fa; border: 1px solid #eaecf0; padding:0em"><pre style="margin:0px;border:none;background:none;word-wrap:break-word;white-space: pre-wrap ! important" class="old-revision-html">The 8269 division divides the octave into 8269 equal parts of 0.14512 cents each. It is both a [[The Riemann Zeta Function and Tuning#Zeta EDO lists|zeta peak and zeta integral edo]], which has to do with the fact that it is a very strong 19- and 23-limit division. It has a lower 19-limit and a lower 23-limit [[Tenney-Euclidean temperament measures#TE simple badness|relative error]] than any smaller division, a lower 19-limit [[Tenney-Euclidean metrics#Logflat TE badness| TE loglfat badness]] than any smaller division, and a lower 23-limit logflat badness than any excepting 311, 581, 1578 and 2460. While [[8539edo|8539]] has received most of the attention in this size range, 8269 is actually a bit better in the 23-limit and nearly as good in the 19-limit. They are rather like twins, including the fact both are primes.</pre></div>
| |
| <h4>Original HTML content:</h4>
| |
| <div style="width:100%; max-height:400pt; overflow:auto; background-color:#f8f9fa; border: 1px solid #eaecf0; padding:0em"><pre style="margin:0px;border:none;background:none;word-wrap:break-word;width:200%;white-space: pre-wrap ! important" class="old-revision-html"><html><head><title>8269edo</title></head><body>The 8269 division divides the octave into 8269 equal parts of 0.14512 cents each. It is both a <a class="wiki_link" href="/The%20Riemann%20Zeta%20Function%20and%20Tuning#Zeta EDO lists">zeta peak and zeta integral edo</a>, which has to do with the fact that it is a very strong 19- and 23-limit division. It has a lower 19-limit and a lower 23-limit <a class="wiki_link" href="/Tenney-Euclidean%20temperament%20measures#TE simple badness">relative error</a> than any smaller division, a lower 19-limit <a class="wiki_link" href="/Tenney-Euclidean%20metrics#Logflat TE badness"> TE loglfat badness</a> than any smaller division, and a lower 23-limit logflat badness than any excepting 311, 581, 1578 and 2460. While <a class="wiki_link" href="/8539edo">8539</a> has received most of the attention in this size range, 8269 is actually a bit better in the 23-limit and nearly as good in the 19-limit. They are rather like twins, including the fact both are primes.</body></html></pre></div>
| |
Revision as of 00:00, 17 July 2018
The 8269 division divides the octave into 8269 equal parts of 0.14512 cents each. It is both a zeta peak and zeta integral edo, which has to do with the fact that it is a very strong 19- and 23-limit division. It has a lower 19-limit and a lower 23-limit relative error than any smaller division, a lower 19-limit TE loglfat badness than any smaller division, and a lower 23-limit logflat badness than any excepting 311, 581, 1578 and 2460. While 8539 has received most of the attention in this size range, 8269 is actually a bit better in the 23-limit and nearly as good in the 19-limit. They are rather like twins, including the fact both are primes.