Talk:IFDO: Difference between revisions

Line 8:

In my opinion, originally, Flora's idea of using mathematical means to describe these popular equal-step tunings was unnecessarily obscure, in comparison with the system I helped design a couple years ago which is much more directly accessible to practicing musicians, through its use of the three actual physical/psychoacoustic resources of frequency, pitch, and length. However, this new idea which leverages mathematical power means to explore new tunings, and describe this family of tunings along a smooth continuum — e.g. there's potential for tunings defined somewhere between equal divisions of frequency and pitch like 1/2MD, or between pitch and length e.g. (-1/2)MD — finally justifies Flora's concept. And so, if mathematical means are to be used in this way, then I would strongly prefer use of the power mean's power in the name, rather than "arithmetic" and the new coinage "inverse-arithmetic" (which is a bit strained anyway) as in AD and ID. I hope that in consideration of all of this, Flora and CompactStar will consider switching to refer to AD's as 1MD's and ID's as (-1)MD's. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

: A few points to add:

:# I disagree I used the term ''arithmetic'' differently from the sense of Shaahin Mohajeri (2006), altho I admit it differs from Billy Stiltner et al (2021). As one way to see it, frequency is implied as the default measurement – but more appropriately the measurement is determined by the specific word in the place. Using ''arithmetic'' for anything other than frequency would bug me, just as ''harmonic mean'' bugs us since its defined in terms of length.

:# I suppose the letter M stands for ''mean'', such that the full name is ''m-mean division''? Not that I disapprove of a change of the page title, at this point I hesitate to say it's the right word choice. Specifically, whenever there's a mean there's also a sequence, including the fractional-order ones, since the mean is really an element of a special case of a sequence. So this concept is based on not exactly means but sequences. I'd consider the full name is ''order-m division'' or ''order-m sequence division''.

:# I believe ''m'' = 1 and ''m'' = -1 deserve verbal names (even tho they're disputed) in addition to the formal one, just as ''m'' = 0 does.

: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 10:40, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 In my opinion, originally, Flora's idea of using mathematical means to describe these popular equal-step tunings was unnecessarily obscure, in comparison with the system I helped design a couple years ago which is much more directly accessible to practicing musicians, through its use of the three actual physical/psychoacoustic resources of frequency, pitch, and length. However, this new idea which leverages mathematical power means to explore new tunings, and describe this family of tunings along a smooth continuum — e.g. there's potential for tunings defined somewhere between equal divisions of frequency and pitch like 1/2MD, or between pitch and length e.g. (-1/2)MD — finally justifies Flora's concept. And so, if mathematical means are to be used in this way, then I would strongly prefer use of the power mean's power in the name, rather than "arithmetic" and the new coinage "inverse-arithmetic" (which is a bit strained anyway) as in AD and ID. I hope that in consideration of all of this, Flora and CompactStar will consider switching to refer to AD's as 1MD's and ID's as (-1)MD's. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
+: A few points to add:
+:# I disagree I used the term ''arithmetic'' differently from the sense of Shaahin Mohajeri (2006), altho I admit it differs from Billy Stiltner et al (2021). As one way to see it, frequency is implied as the default measurement – but more appropriately the measurement is determined by the specific word in the place. Using ''arithmetic'' for anything other than frequency would bug me, just as ''harmonic mean'' bugs us since its defined in terms of length.
+:# I suppose the letter M stands for ''mean'', such that the full name is ''m-mean division''? Not that I disapprove of a change of the page title, at this point I hesitate to say it's the right word choice. Specifically, whenever there's a mean there's also a sequence, including the fractional-order ones, since the mean is really an element of a special case of a sequence. So this concept is based on not exactly means but sequences. I'd consider the full name is ''order-m division'' or ''order-m sequence division''.
+:# I believe ''m'' = 1 and ''m'' = -1 deserve verbal names (even tho they're disputed) in addition to the formal one, just as ''m'' = 0 does.
+: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 10:40, 28 March 2023 (UTC)