Talk:IFDO: Difference between revisions

:::: I don't see how ''inverse-arithmetic division'' could be described as more "colloquial" than ''equal division of length''. To me it seems impossible to argue that this is more of an "everyday term for musicians", since ID references a recently made-up variation on a mathematical mean which most musicians do not know in the first place, while ELD references the physical property of string or resonating chamber length that practicing musicians actually physically deal with. The EFD/E(P)D/ELD system is both the unambiguous and comprehensive system for theorists as well as the more accessible system for music makers, and it has slight (2 years) historical precedence. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 02:17, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

::::: In case I wasn't clear, I wasn't stating that IDO is more colloquial than EDL/ELD, but rather that IDO seems derived and inspired by EDO, which is more colloquial than its systematic counterpart EPDO. I agree that "equal length division" and "equal frequency division" are clear enough to be used directly by musicians, especially when using irrational numbers. As for (sub)harmonic series segment, now that I think about it, I believe they cover only a subset of otonal/utonal divisions/sequences (e.g. 4:7:10:...:25:28 is not a harmonic series segment, but it is an OD/OS), so unless I'm mistaken, it might be good to keep both terms around to describe the different concepts. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 03:01, 29 March 2023 (UTC)