Xenharmonic Wiki:Cross-platform dialogue: Difference between revisions
| Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
: 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) | : 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) | ||
:: I also recognise/am aware that weighting in the way I suggested would lead to less mathematically elegant properties, if I recall discussions on the relationship between TE, complexity and rank correctly. I just wish to offer an alternate perspective to support the structure of my argument. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 22:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
[[Category:Xenharmonic Wiki]] | [[Category:Xenharmonic Wiki]] | ||