User talk:Overthink/Table of 311edo intervals: Difference between revisions

Aura (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
== Superprime ==
== Superprime ==
I don't know about you, but I'd label 64/63 as the superprime.  As for 1\311, I think we need a better name... --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 23:47, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
I don't know about you, but I'd label 64/63 as the superprime.  As for 1\311, I think we need a better name... --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 23:47, 18 January 2026 (UTC)


Line 8: Line 7:


:: Oh, and 33/32 would be the Ultraprime, and you can derive ultramajor and inframinor from ~33/32 relative to Pythagorean intervals, such as 8192/8019 being the inframinor second and 297/256 being the ultramajor second.  There's also the paramajor fourth (11/8), and the paraminor fourth (128/99) and the paramajor fifth (99/64) and the paraminor fifth (16/11).  --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 00:32, 19 January 2026 (UTC)
:: Oh, and 33/32 would be the Ultraprime, and you can derive ultramajor and inframinor from ~33/32 relative to Pythagorean intervals, such as 8192/8019 being the inframinor second and 297/256 being the ultramajor second.  There's also the paramajor fourth (11/8), and the paraminor fourth (128/99) and the paramajor fifth (99/64) and the paraminor fifth (16/11).  --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 00:32, 19 January 2026 (UTC)
I don't think edosteps should be named, especially not for an edo as large as 311. Marking the diatonic interval categories should be enough. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 09:19, 19 January 2026 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Overthink/Table of 311edo intervals".