Survey of efficient temperaments by subgroup: Difference between revisions

BudjarnLambeth (talk | contribs)
Table of temperaments (5 to 45 notes per equave): Break into 2 tables to try to address others' complaints about messiness
Line 39: Line 39:
== Table of temperaments (5 to 45 notes per equave) ==
== Table of temperaments (5 to 45 notes per equave) ==
The temperaments within each cell should be sorted by accuracy, with the lowest [[damage]] (highest accuracy) temperament listed first.  
The temperaments within each cell should be sorted by accuracy, with the lowest [[damage]] (highest accuracy) temperament listed first.  
<!--
<!--
If you see any temperaments listed in the wrong order, or see any temperaments in the wrong "approx. number of notes needed" category, please move them to the correct position.
If you see any temperaments listed in the wrong order, or see any temperaments in the wrong "approx. number of notes needed" category, please move them to the correct position.
Line 48: Line 47:
-->
-->


=== Full prime limits ===
{| class="wikitable center-all"
{| class="wikitable center-all"
|-
|-
Line 97: Line 97:
|  
|  
| [[lupercalia]]+++, [[nautilus]]+++, [[negroni]]+++, [[injera]]+
| [[lupercalia]]+++, [[nautilus]]+++, [[negroni]]+++, [[injera]]+
|}
=== Other subgroups ===
{| class="wikitable center-all"
|-
! JI subgroup
! ~10 notes per equave<ref group="note">Number of notes per equave was estimated by multiplying the temperament’s [[graham complexity]] by 2.</ref>
! ~20 notes
! ~30 notes
! ~40 notes
|-
|-
! 2.3.5.7.other ''n''
! 2.3.5.7.other ''n''