No edit summary
Aura (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 17: Line 17:
:::: Realistic use cases don't matter. Every single list model is subjectively best, so it's very wrong to include only one in [[:en:Help:Wiki help]]. And all [[list model]]s really are equally acceptable; it's racist to say that a plaintext or defined list model results in an invalid list. And the convention that an edit consisting only of a list model change should not be done is supposed to prevent the edit war bug. [[User:PiotrGrochowski|PiotrGrochowski]] ([[User talk:PiotrGrochowski|talk]]) 16:11, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
:::: Realistic use cases don't matter. Every single list model is subjectively best, so it's very wrong to include only one in [[:en:Help:Wiki help]]. And all [[list model]]s really are equally acceptable; it's racist to say that a plaintext or defined list model results in an invalid list. And the convention that an edit consisting only of a list model change should not be done is supposed to prevent the edit war bug. [[User:PiotrGrochowski|PiotrGrochowski]] ([[User talk:PiotrGrochowski|talk]]) 16:11, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
::::Maybe [[:en:Help:Wiki help#Lists]] should soft redirect to [[:en:List model]], like [[:dev:Help:Wiki help#Lists]] does? Whatever the final solution may be, it definitely must show all [[list model]]s as possibilities that users may use, with no subjective recommendation or anything. The objective advantages and disadvantages are too specific to be shown in [[:en:Help:Wiki help|the xen.wiki school]], and they can always be found out by users later on, so it's best to state all [[list model]]s neutrally. Can't believe you are complaining while doing worse in [[:en:Help:Wiki help]]. [[User:PiotrGrochowski|PiotrGrochowski]] ([[User talk:PiotrGrochowski|talk]]) 05:17, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
::::Maybe [[:en:Help:Wiki help#Lists]] should soft redirect to [[:en:List model]], like [[:dev:Help:Wiki help#Lists]] does? Whatever the final solution may be, it definitely must show all [[list model]]s as possibilities that users may use, with no subjective recommendation or anything. The objective advantages and disadvantages are too specific to be shown in [[:en:Help:Wiki help|the xen.wiki school]], and they can always be found out by users later on, so it's best to state all [[list model]]s neutrally. Can't believe you are complaining while doing worse in [[:en:Help:Wiki help]]. [[User:PiotrGrochowski|PiotrGrochowski]] ([[User talk:PiotrGrochowski|talk]]) 05:17, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
== 11-limit Intervals ==
Hello there, I see that the intervals 55/32 and 64/55 are not present in the chart on the Gallery of Just Intervals page, and I have no idea how to add them as I don't know how to add cells to the chart.  As I told Mike Battaglia in a recent email, I've found both 55/32 and 64/55 extremely useful in 11-limit music as they help harmonically bridge the 16/11 fifth.  They are made even more useful by the fact that they differ from septimal intervals such as 12/7 and 7/6 by only a Keenanisma.  Accordingly, I use them in a 44:55:64 overtonal triads built on the octave-reduced eleventh harmonic of the tonic as a predominant chord, and this is one of the two best 11-limit chords to use for such a purpose as it is clearly distinct from a diminished chord.  While this chord is strange-sounding, it can help to evoke a sense of both the strange and wonderful, particularly if followed up by a traditional dominant seventh built on the third harmonic of the tonic.  Possible set-ups I've found so far include a 4:5:6 major triad built on the octave-reduced third harmonic, a 10:12:15 minor triad built on the octave-reduced fifth harmonic, a 27:32:40 minor third built on the octave-reduced twenty-seventh harmonic, and of course, the tonic triad itself. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 12:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)