Xenharmonic Wiki:Cross-platform dialogue: Difference between revisions
→TE vs POTE vs CTE: initiate discussion of cases of suboptimal tuning |
|||
Line 103: | Line 103: | ||
6/5 is an interval that, due to its extreme simplicity, has a lot of give when tempering (''at least'' 6{{cent}}), so on principle I don't buy the argument that it is being underprioritised without seeing an example. Hence, a few examples of POTE having better tuning than CTE would be appreciated so we can go through what we think is going on. Kind regards, --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 22:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC) | 6/5 is an interval that, due to its extreme simplicity, has a lot of give when tempering (''at least'' 6{{cent}}), so on principle I don't buy the argument that it is being underprioritised without seeing an example. Hence, a few examples of POTE having better tuning than CTE would be appreciated so we can go through what we think is going on. Kind regards, --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 22:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC) | ||
: I also want to note that often I have had the reverse impression about CTE: that more complex intervals - especially primes - were being ''under''prioritised. The more complex an interval is, the less error it can tolerate when tempering, therefore I am also not sure I fully buy the reasoning that TE uses for weighting based on the inverse of logarithmic size; if anything weighting based on logarithmic size or just unweighted seems more favourable. However, this discussion isn't about whether or not TE is a flawed metric; rather it's about whether POTE or CTE is the appropriate way to get pure octave tunings out of it. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 22:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
[[Category:Xenharmonic Wiki]] | [[Category:Xenharmonic Wiki]] |