Talk:Kite's thoughts on fifthspans: Difference between revisions
Fifthward and fourthward distances for multi-ring EDOs? |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:: Thanks a lot. I expected that there was a good explanation. The problem I have reported seems to affect mainly people who are not native English speakers. I think the changes you made removed the confusion. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 20:49, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | :: Thanks a lot. I expected that there was a good explanation. The problem I have reported seems to affect mainly people who are not native English speakers. I think the changes you made removed the confusion. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 20:49, 21 November 2020 (UTC) | ||
== Fifthward and fourthward distances for multi-ring EDOs? == | |||
It occurred to me that it should be possible to define fifthward and fourthward distances for multi-ring EDOs if fractional distances are allowed. For instance, 34EDO has 2 rings of fifths, so with only integer fifthwards and fourthwards distances, the fifthwards/fourthwards antipode is undefined. But if we divide the perfect fifth (20\34) in 4 (5\34), we get the odd number of 1\34 increments we need to move between rings of fifths. Then we can define a fifthward distance for any interval in 34EDO, for instance its best approximation to 5/4, which is 11\34: Moving upwards by 9 quarter-fifths (9/4 fifths) gives us 45\34, which octave-reduces to 11\34. Since Tetracot divides the (tempered) perfect fifth into 4 equal parts, this provides a reason why the Tetracot generalized/isomorphic keyboard mapping is a good one for making use o the excellent 5-limit harmony of 34EDO. | |||
[[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 21:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC) | |||