Talk:Marvel: Difference between revisions

Line 129:

:: Oh and yes I understand and accept the rationale of allowing arbitrarily large edo tunings, it just seems a bit arbitrary to me is all because at that point why not hand-optimize rather than accept a specific edo's tuning? (For this reason I do think that consistency is an important factor to consider if you do want to use an edo tuning specifically.) --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 17:56, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

::: You completely missed my specific question about using odd-limit tonality diamonds. I never questioned anything about octave equivalence. My question was about what intervals were chosen and how they were processed from the tonality diamonds, a set of intervals with duplicate/unreduced elements.

::: I suppose you were giving an answer to my argument that tuning the octave pure no longer made sense with complexity weighting. Since your reasons just defend pure octaves alone without addressing anything in the context of complexity weighting, my argument still holds. I mean, pure octaves and complexity weighting are at odds. All your reasons for pure octaves just add up to my point that complexity weighting isn't right.

::: A growing weight suddenly plunging to zero at the edge of the limit is a paradox becuz the limit a user cares about is supposed to be fuzzy, so that there's supposed to be a fairly smooth rolloff. I can't imagine that one cares about intervals of an odd number so much that they put them at the peak of the weighting curve, and then doesn't care at all when it comes to the very next odd number just becuz those intervals are more complex by a very tiny margin. So altho you measured a variety of odd limits to seemingly give results for a variety of use cases, if each individual case were impractical, they'd prolly not magically combine to something practical.

::: You said: "[25-odd-limit] is the smallest odd-limit which introduces a tempered equivalence within the interval set of the odd-limit other than the trivial [16/15~15/14]". First of all I don't share the view that 15/14~16/15 is trivial equivalence. It is equivalence just like any other. The exception you made for it was your own artistic choice. Next, I said 25/16 was conflated with 14/9, and that no sane person would measure how off the tempered interval was from 25/16 as much as from 14/9. I said 25/16 wasn't completely discarded in any prime-optimized tuning. All of them were addressing the topic of tempered equivalence you raised.

::: I believe I've written plenty about why intervals of 25 are best tempered to something simpler. For one thing, they were considered wolf during the meantone era. 32/25 was considered a wolf version of 5/4, tho some used it artistically, possibly thanks to how close it was to none else than 9/7. I've also written plenty about how 21 is the septimal analog of 15, whereas it's more reasonable to group 25 with very next odd number, 27, which is clearly wolf.

::: I feel whether your algorithm only searches patent vals is comparatively a minor issue. I felt like pointing it out but omitted it in my first reply. I mean perhaps it's highly customizable, as you said, but did you ever customize how it chooses and processes intervals from the tonality diamonds? Did you ever customize the weighting curve? Also when you said it was universally interesting and convincing I wonder who you've tested it with. Why not getting back to the XA Discord server? Everyone misses you (for a debate with you :d). [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 12:03, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 129: / Line 129: @@
 :: Oh and yes I understand and accept the rationale of allowing arbitrarily large edo tunings, it just seems a bit arbitrary to me is all because at that point why not hand-optimize rather than accept a specific edo's tuning? (For this reason I do think that consistency is an important factor to consider if you do want to use an edo tuning specifically.) --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 17:56, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
+::: You completely missed my specific question about using odd-limit tonality diamonds. I never questioned anything about octave equivalence. My question was about what intervals were chosen and how they were processed from the tonality diamonds, a set of intervals with duplicate/unreduced elements.
+::: I suppose you were giving an answer to my argument that tuning the octave pure no longer made sense with complexity weighting. Since your reasons just defend pure octaves alone without addressing anything in the context of complexity weighting, my argument still holds. I mean, pure octaves and complexity weighting are at odds. All your reasons for pure octaves just add up to my point that complexity weighting isn't right.
+::: A growing weight suddenly plunging to zero at the edge of the limit is a paradox becuz the limit a user cares about is supposed to be fuzzy, so that there's supposed to be a fairly smooth rolloff. I can't imagine that one cares about intervals of an odd number so much that they put them at the peak of the weighting curve, and then doesn't care at all when it comes to the very next odd number just becuz those intervals are more complex by a very tiny margin. So altho you measured a variety of odd limits to seemingly give results for a variety of use cases, if each individual case were impractical, they'd prolly not magically combine to something practical.
+::: You said: "[25-odd-limit] is the smallest odd-limit which introduces a tempered equivalence within the interval set of the odd-limit other than the trivial [16/15~15/14]". First of all I don't share the view that 15/14~16/15 is trivial equivalence. It is equivalence just like any other. The exception you made for it was your own artistic choice. Next, I said 25/16 was conflated with 14/9, and that no sane person would measure how off the tempered interval was from 25/16 as much as from 14/9. I said 25/16 wasn't completely discarded in any prime-optimized tuning. All of them were addressing the topic of tempered equivalence you raised.
+::: I believe I've written plenty about why intervals of 25 are best tempered to something simpler. For one thing, they were considered wolf during the meantone era. 32/25 was considered a wolf version of 5/4, tho some used it artistically, possibly thanks to how close it was to none else than 9/7. I've also written plenty about how 21 is the septimal analog of 15, whereas it's more reasonable to group 25 with very next odd number, 27, which is clearly wolf.
+::: I feel whether your algorithm only searches patent vals is comparatively a minor issue. I felt like pointing it out but omitted it in my first reply. I mean perhaps it's highly customizable, as you said, but did you ever customize how it chooses and processes intervals from the tonality diamonds? Did you ever customize the weighting curve? Also when you said it was universally interesting and convincing I wonder who you've tested it with. Why not getting back to the XA Discord server? Everyone misses you (for a debate with you :d). [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 12:03, 17 January 2025 (UTC)