Xenharmonic Wiki:Cross-platform dialogue: Difference between revisions

Line 166:

::: Thanks, will read when I get a second. It would be great to have all of these things, as I still am not sure if KE and POTE ever give significantly different results. Aren't you writing a Lua module that computes them all at once anyway? [[User:Mike Battaglia|Mike Battaglia]] ([[User talk:Mike Battaglia|talk]]) 18:46, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

:: I appreciate your in-depth response a lot. Sorry if I came across as hostile, it was not my intention. The thing about POTE being the tuning with a unique property is interesting; I hadn't heard it before. If I may offer my own thoughts: I agree that likely the reason POTE seems to be a good approximation is to do with [[delta-rational chord]]s (which from what I understand is the appropriate and nontrivial generalisation of isoharmonic chords, in that delta-rational chords sound like JI without being JI while isoharmonic chords are JI tunings of delta-rational chords); in my mind though it would make more sense to devise a different measure entirely if you wanted to optimise that sort of thing like how you noted that one could devise measures of triadic/tetradic/etc. chords. I have a hypothesis to do with the divide between POTE and CTE, or I think more aptly, between weighting p/q over pq and weighting them the same. It seems to me that the lower accuracy a temperament is, the more we prioritise p/q over pq, so that CTE becomes increasingly worse, while the higher accuracy a temperament is, the more it makes sense to also want to model pq with p/q; maybe this caused an impression here that CTE made more sense. For example, I myself wouldn't usually look at temperaments like tempering [[256/243]] (Blackwood) or [[128/125]] (Augmented) because if I wanted something like that, I would instead investigate a DR (Delta-Rational) chord phenomenon rather than using CTE. Kind regards, --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 20:51, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

[[Category:Xenharmonic Wiki]]

@@ Line 166: / Line 166: @@
 ::: Thanks, will read when I get a second. It would be great to have all of these things, as I still am not sure if KE and POTE ever give significantly different results. Aren't you writing a Lua module that computes them all at once anyway? [[User:Mike Battaglia|Mike Battaglia]] ([[User talk:Mike Battaglia|talk]]) 18:46, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
+:: I appreciate your in-depth response a lot. Sorry if I came across as hostile, it was not my intention. The thing about POTE being the tuning with a unique property is interesting; I hadn't heard it before. If I may offer my own thoughts: I agree that likely the reason POTE seems to be a good approximation is to do with [[delta-rational chord]]s (which from what I understand is the appropriate and nontrivial generalisation of isoharmonic chords, in that delta-rational chords sound like JI without being JI while isoharmonic chords are JI tunings of delta-rational chords); in my mind though it would make more sense to devise a different measure entirely if you wanted to optimise that sort of thing like how you noted that one could devise measures of triadic/tetradic/etc. chords. I have a hypothesis to do with the divide between POTE and CTE, or I think more aptly, between weighting p/q over pq and weighting them the same. It seems to me that the lower accuracy a temperament is, the more we prioritise p/q over pq, so that CTE becomes increasingly worse, while the higher accuracy a temperament is, the more it makes sense to also want to model pq with p/q; maybe this caused an impression here that CTE made more sense. For example, I myself wouldn't usually look at temperaments like tempering [[256/243]] (Blackwood) or [[128/125]] (Augmented) because if I wanted something like that, I would instead investigate a DR (Delta-Rational) chord phenomenon rather than using CTE. Kind regards, --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 20:51, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 [[Category:Xenharmonic Wiki]]