Xenharmonic Wiki:Cross-platform dialogue: Difference between revisions

Line 180:

: FWIW, that's essentially what I was trying to say in my comment starting with "KE tuning seems acceptable to me" (although I don't understand the specifics enough to argue it more strongly). I don't mind the other solution of listing CTE, POTE and TE together though if that will cause less friction going forwards, although I still think that due to POTE's trivial derivability from TE it seems redundant/unnecessary to list, but I guess dividing the cent values by the ratio between the tempered octave and pure octave (even though trivially easy) is enough of a hassle for anyone who really wants POTE specifically to justify listing it. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 00:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

:: So far, my suggestion is to have a single standard optimal tuning displayed in any given temperament data block, and optionally append a collapsible box containing more "optimal tunings" for various optimization methods. These would serve as quick references for people who do not wish to use a calculator, namely if one wants to compare similar temperaments at a glance. These tunings can most likely be computed dynamically if we have the right modules, but they could also just be manually inserted if need be. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 03:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

::: Showing a single standard tuning by default has the issue of which though. If they're on board with KE (if we can show that it's practically almost always very close to POTE) then that's not an issue, but otherwise I presume it means that they'd want it to be POTE; I would object to POTE being the standard tuning to show (as opposed to, say, KE) just as they object to CTE. In such a case it seems better to just show a few tunings side-by-side and let the reader make their own judgement. The values given are only meant to be a starting point anyways (for if one doesn't want to use an EDO tuning). --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 03:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

:::: My pick for the standard tuning would be TE, with the others (POTE, KE, CTE, anything else) being included in the collapsed box. There seems to be a lot of disagreement about which pure-octaves optimal tuning is acceptable, but most people seem to be okay with TE as the stretched-octaves one, so with TE being the least controversial, it seems to make sense to list it first. --[[User:BudjarnLambeth|Budjarn Lambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth|talk]]) 06:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

::::: I think most users will want a pure-octave tuning to start with and that's why the controversy is on the pure-octave tunings. If there was only one tuning then KE would meet the needs of all parties the best, but at this point it's clear that POTE is to be preserved and CTE is to be added. If we add KE to POTE then they serve the same purpose so it's a waste of space. So I'll add CTE to POTE while leaving the question of replacing POTE with KE to the future. I think additional tunings can be added in the dedicated page for the temperament, properly organized as its own block. (All those additions are low-priority to me so if I'm doing it all alone, it won't happen too quick.) [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 08:43, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 180: / Line 180: @@
 : FWIW, that's essentially what I was trying to say in my comment starting with "KE tuning seems acceptable to me" (although I don't understand the specifics enough to argue it more strongly). I don't mind the other solution of listing CTE, POTE and TE together though if that will cause less friction going forwards, although I still think that due to POTE's trivial derivability from TE it seems redundant/unnecessary to list, but I guess dividing the cent values by the ratio between the tempered octave and pure octave (even though trivially easy) is enough of a hassle for anyone who really wants POTE specifically to justify listing it. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 00:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 :: So far, my suggestion is to have a single standard optimal tuning displayed in any given temperament data block, and optionally append a collapsible box containing more "optimal tunings" for various optimization methods. These would serve as quick references for people who do not wish to use a calculator, namely if one wants to compare similar temperaments at a glance. These tunings can most likely be computed dynamically if we have the right modules, but they could also just be manually inserted if need be. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 03:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 ::: Showing a single standard tuning by default has the issue of which though. If they're on board with KE (if we can show that it's practically almost always very close to POTE) then that's not an issue, but otherwise I presume it means that they'd want it to be POTE; I would object to POTE being the standard tuning to show (as opposed to, say, KE) just as they object to CTE. In such a case it seems better to just show a few tunings side-by-side and let the reader make their own judgement. The values given are only meant to be a starting point anyways (for if one doesn't want to use an EDO tuning). --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 03:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 :::: My pick for the standard tuning would be TE, with the others (POTE, KE, CTE, anything else) being included in the collapsed box. There seems to be a lot of disagreement about which pure-octaves optimal tuning is acceptable, but most people seem to be okay with TE as the stretched-octaves one, so with TE being the least controversial, it seems to make sense to list it first. --[[User:BudjarnLambeth|Budjarn Lambeth]] ([[User talk:BudjarnLambeth|talk]]) 06:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
+::::: I think most users will want a pure-octave tuning to start with and that's why the controversy is on the pure-octave tunings. If there was only one tuning then KE would meet the needs of all parties the best, but at this point it's clear that POTE is to be preserved and CTE is to be added. If we add KE to POTE then they serve the same purpose so it's a waste of space. So I'll add CTE to POTE while leaving the question of replacing POTE with KE to the future. I think additional tunings can be added in the dedicated page for the temperament, properly organized as its own block. (All those additions are low-priority to me so if I'm doing it all alone, it won't happen too quick.) [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 08:43, 18 March 2024 (UTC)