|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| = ARCHIVED WIKISPACES DISCUSSION BELOW =
| | {{WSArchiveLink}} |
| '''All discussion below is archived from the Wikispaces export in its original unaltered form.'''
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| == Kuato Family ==
| |
| Why does Laconic Family link to Kuato Family?
| |
| | |
| - '''genewardsmith''' October 17, 2011, 11:20:34 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| My bad, I fixed it now.
| |
| | |
| - '''mbattaglia1''' October 17, 2011, 12:37:03 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| == perhaps should be split into two pages ==
| |
| I was considering throwing this into the General Theory mix as well, but I think the opening paragraph is a bit too technical for the average reader to understand (folks in XA chat seem to be in agreement). But given a bit more thought, this seems to be the very thing that we were trying to avoid by doing the General/Mathematical theory split in the first place: it has a precisely worded but rather technical mathematical introduction, but then contains several "tutorial paragraphs" on things like "Why should I care about Regular Temperament?" and so the whole thing is rather bloated.
| |
| | |
| I need to throw something into the General Theory queue for regular temperaments, and except for the first paragraph this would be great. I suggest one of the following approaches could improve things
| |
| | |
| - We write a more general-style introduction to match the "tutorial"-ish nature of the rest of the page, and split the mathematical one off into its own page
| |
| | |
| - We write a more general-style intro and then create a "Mathematical Definition" subheading, and keep it in one page
| |
| | |
| - I write a general-style intro and keep it on its own page
| |
| | |
| I think that #1 is ideal because I think that #2 will get bloated, and it doesn't make sense to have a dedicated tutorial page plus a mixed tutorial/math page. What are your thoughts?
| |
| | |
| - '''mbattaglia1''' September 18, 2011, 10:12:14 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Bumping this again for feedback, will otherwise attempt a split sometime later
| |
| | |
| - '''mbattaglia1''' September 19, 2011, 10:51:16 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| #1 sounds good
| |
| | |
| - '''genewardsmith''' September 19, 2011, 11:50:28 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| == sensipent ==
| |
| The sensipent comma is listed on scala as the medium semicomma, I edited the page to represent this. This comma is also missing a monzo.
| |
| | |
| - '''Natebedell''' September 04, 2011, 11:39:04 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| == List of Temperaments ==
| |
| Do we really need to list a bunch of 5-limit rank-2 temperaments on this very page? Can't we just link to a catalog of them?
| |
| | |
| If we must list them, I think shortening the list might be a good idea.
| |
| | |
| - '''igliashon''' July 16, 2011, 01:31:04 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| == Golden Meantone ==
| |
| Where should Kornerup's golden meantone go? Regards --- peu <small>Jun 1, 2010</small>
| |
| | |
| - '''xenwolf''' June 01, 2010, 02:54:46 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| It's a tuning choice and could be mentioned as such on meantone or meantone family, but the whole metallic tuning business really rates its own page.
| |
| | |
| - '''genewardsmith''' June 01, 2010, 04:48:30 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Oh, I started the Discussion on the wrong page, Meantone family was it meant for. Excuse my green question, what is the meaning of <em>metallic tuning business</em>? --- peu <small>Jun 1, 2010</small>
| |
| | |
| - '''xenwolf''' June 01, 2010, 05:21:47 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
