User:BudjarnLambeth/My opinion on zeta peak indexes: Difference between revisions
Created page with "<div style="border: 1px green solid; background-color: #efe; padding: 0.5em 1em; margin-bottom: 1em"> __NEWSECTIONLINK__ ;(!!!) ;This is not a proper wiki page. It is NOT FACTUAL unlike the rest of the wiki, it is ONLY OPINION. ;The rest of the wiki is supposed to be 100% fact, 0% opinion. ;This page is the opposite. This page is 0% fact, 100% opinion. ;This page is only ever intended as a casual opinion column which never tries to..." |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
I ''don't'' believe that zeta peak indexes are | I ''don't'' believe that zeta peak indexes are mathematically perfect, optimal equal tunings. I don't think that there is anything especially about zeta peak indexes that sets them apart from any other stretched/compressed-octaves or stretched/compressed-tritaves tuning. | ||
But I still really like zeta peak indexes, because they are ''good enough'' for me. They usually approximate most of the the most important primes better than their pure-octaves/pure-tritaves equivalent edo/edt, with very few downsides. | But I still really like zeta peak indexes, because they are ''good enough'' for me. They usually approximate most of the the most important primes better than their pure-octaves/pure-tritaves equivalent edo/edt, with very few downsides. | ||