Talk:Rodan: Difference between revisions

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 :::: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 22:05, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
+::::: A lot of ratios of 49, 63, etc. are simple subgroup ratios. I disagree with a wholesale removal of those intervals. MCJI interpretations of LCJI ratios can come into sufficient use in complex chords, for one. I might clean things up once I revise other sections of the page, i.e. discard complex interpretations where simple ones exist, prioritizing harmonics and low-limit intervals when it comes to culling the complex ones. I personally believe those other temperament pages would benefit from more of these than currently exist, honestly, and if I had the power to revise their interval chains, I would do so. Also keep in mind that all of the pages you mentioned are very old articles, and I don't believe they're entirely reflective of current wiki consensus.
+::::: As for the 11 vs 13 vs 17-limit issue, I feel it's an arbitrary choice, and so I stand by a point that making a cutoff based on generator-complexity of primes makes sense here. All of 7-limit, 11-limit, 13-limit, and 17-limit rodan are pretty coherent structures in their own right, though I'd argue that 13-limit is the least "harmonically complete" (sensu Osmium) out of all of these. -- [[User:Lériendil|Lériendil]] ([[User talk:Lériendil|talk]]) 23:57, 15 June 2025 (UTC)