Patent val: Difference between revisions

Wikispaces>guest
**Imported revision 247216643 - Original comment: **
Wikispaces>jdfreivald
**Imported revision 247254579 - Original comment: **
Line 1: Line 1:
<h2>IMPORTED REVISION FROM WIKISPACES</h2>
<h2>IMPORTED REVISION FROM WIKISPACES</h2>
This is an imported revision from Wikispaces. The revision metadata is included below for reference:<br>
This is an imported revision from Wikispaces. The revision metadata is included below for reference:<br>
: This revision was by author [[User:guest|guest]] and made on <tt>2011-08-20 14:23:32 UTC</tt>.<br>
: This revision was by author [[User:jdfreivald|jdfreivald]] and made on <tt>2011-08-20 18:36:15 UTC</tt>.<br>
: The original revision id was <tt>247216643</tt>.<br>
: The original revision id was <tt>247254579</tt>.<br>
: The revision comment was: <tt></tt><br>
: The revision comment was: <tt></tt><br>
The revision contents are below, presented both in the original Wikispaces Wikitext format, and in HTML exactly as Wikispaces rendered it.<br>
The revision contents are below, presented both in the original Wikispaces Wikitext format, and in HTML exactly as Wikispaces rendered it.<br>
Line 14: Line 14:
For any prime p we can find a corresponding p-limit val in a canonical manner by [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalar_multiplication|scalar multiplying]] &lt;1 [[log2]](3) log2(5) ... log(p)| by N and rounding to the nearest integer. In general this is not guaranteed to be the most accurate available val, but if N-edo has enough relative accuracy in the p-limit, it will be. The name //patent// comes from the fact that "patent" in one sense of the word is a synonym for "obvious"; the patent val may or may not be the best choice but it's the obvious choice.
For any prime p we can find a corresponding p-limit val in a canonical manner by [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalar_multiplication|scalar multiplying]] &lt;1 [[log2]](3) log2(5) ... log(p)| by N and rounding to the nearest integer. In general this is not guaranteed to be the most accurate available val, but if N-edo has enough relative accuracy in the p-limit, it will be. The name //patent// comes from the fact that "patent" in one sense of the word is a synonym for "obvious"; the patent val may or may not be the best choice but it's the obvious choice.


One way to think of this process is to first ask, "How many 1200-cent steps (octaves) does it take to get to each prime?" It takes one 1200-cent step to get to 2/1, log2(3) steps to get to 3/1, log2(5) to get to 5/1, and so on. This gives us &lt;1 1.585 2.322 2.807 3.459 ... log2(p) |.
One way to think of this process is to first ask, "How many 1200-cent steps (octaves) does it take to get to each prime?" It takes one full-octave step to get to 2/1, log2(3) steps to get to 3/1, log2(5) to get to 5/1, and so on. This gives us &lt;1 1.585 2.322 2.807 3.459 ... log2(p) |.


Then ask, "How many more N-EDO steps does it take to get to the same places?" One 12-EDO step is 1/12th of an octave, by definition; therefore, you need 12 times as many steps to reach 2/1, 3/1, 5/1... Similarly, one 31-EDO step is 1/31st of an octave, so you need 31 times as many steps to reach 2/1, 3/1, 5/1...
Then ask, "How many more N-EDO steps does it take to get to the same places?" One 12-EDO step is 1/12th of an octave, by definition; therefore, you need 12 times as many steps to reach 2/1, 3/1, 5/1... Similarly, one 31-EDO step is 1/31st of an octave, so you need 31 times as many steps to reach 2/1, 3/1, 5/1...
Line 87: Line 87:
For any prime p we can find a corresponding p-limit val in a canonical manner by &lt;a class="wiki_link_ext" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalar_multiplication" rel="nofollow"&gt;scalar multiplying&lt;/a&gt; &amp;lt;1 &lt;a class="wiki_link" href="/log2"&gt;log2&lt;/a&gt;(3) log2(5) ... log(p)| by N and rounding to the nearest integer. In general this is not guaranteed to be the most accurate available val, but if N-edo has enough relative accuracy in the p-limit, it will be. The name &lt;em&gt;patent&lt;/em&gt; comes from the fact that &amp;quot;patent&amp;quot; in one sense of the word is a synonym for &amp;quot;obvious&amp;quot;; the patent val may or may not be the best choice but it's the obvious choice.&lt;br /&gt;
For any prime p we can find a corresponding p-limit val in a canonical manner by &lt;a class="wiki_link_ext" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalar_multiplication" rel="nofollow"&gt;scalar multiplying&lt;/a&gt; &amp;lt;1 &lt;a class="wiki_link" href="/log2"&gt;log2&lt;/a&gt;(3) log2(5) ... log(p)| by N and rounding to the nearest integer. In general this is not guaranteed to be the most accurate available val, but if N-edo has enough relative accuracy in the p-limit, it will be. The name &lt;em&gt;patent&lt;/em&gt; comes from the fact that &amp;quot;patent&amp;quot; in one sense of the word is a synonym for &amp;quot;obvious&amp;quot;; the patent val may or may not be the best choice but it's the obvious choice.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One way to think of this process is to first ask, &amp;quot;How many 1200-cent steps (octaves) does it take to get to each prime?&amp;quot; It takes one 1200-cent step to get to 2/1, log2(3) steps to get to 3/1, log2(5) to get to 5/1, and so on. This gives us &amp;lt;1 1.585 2.322 2.807 3.459 ... log2(p) |.&lt;br /&gt;
One way to think of this process is to first ask, &amp;quot;How many 1200-cent steps (octaves) does it take to get to each prime?&amp;quot; It takes one full-octave step to get to 2/1, log2(3) steps to get to 3/1, log2(5) to get to 5/1, and so on. This gives us &amp;lt;1 1.585 2.322 2.807 3.459 ... log2(p) |.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Then ask, &amp;quot;How many more N-EDO steps does it take to get to the same places?&amp;quot; One 12-EDO step is 1/12th of an octave, by definition; therefore, you need 12 times as many steps to reach 2/1, 3/1, 5/1... Similarly, one 31-EDO step is 1/31st of an octave, so you need 31 times as many steps to reach 2/1, 3/1, 5/1...&lt;br /&gt;
Then ask, &amp;quot;How many more N-EDO steps does it take to get to the same places?&amp;quot; One 12-EDO step is 1/12th of an octave, by definition; therefore, you need 12 times as many steps to reach 2/1, 3/1, 5/1... Similarly, one 31-EDO step is 1/31st of an octave, so you need 31 times as many steps to reach 2/1, 3/1, 5/1...&lt;br /&gt;