Talk:Normal forms: Difference between revisions

Line 120:

:::::::::: Re: mingen coinage. For the record that was Dave's coinage, not mine, and I have some qualms about it, but I have been promulgating it, so your point stands. Of your suggestions, I like "minimal ratio form" the best; "minimal comma form" leaves open for me the interpretation that the comma be smallest in ''cents'', which is more akin to the sense in which "minimal generator form" uses "minimal", but I think it is more appropriate to deal with commas as ratios but generators as cents values. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 20:27, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

::::::::::: Re: equave-reduced generator form. This is defined as follows. The mapping is normalized such that each generator is reduced by the formal prime represented by the first column (which is formally regarded as the equave). It's usually the octave but can be others, depending on the subgroup. That's my understanding of ''musician's form'' but I'm aware it's up to Dave to determine what musician's form is.

::::::::::: Re: height and product. Look, I presented you ''equave-reduced generator form'' which I reckon is straightforward enough, yet you still asked me about the definition. I think that's an exemplar case to show that a name isn't anything but a sign, and the relatability between the signifier and the signified can't be expected due to semiotic arbitrariness. Specifically, even if we go with ''product height'', the reader will wonder it's the product of what. The answer "numerator and denominator" isn't emergent, with so many existing measures of intervals. Therefore, I reserve that it requires about the same amount of explanation.

::::::::::: Since "product of what" isn't emergent, it's questionable whether there's any substance in the word ''product''. I'd rather use ''ratio'' or ''comma'' instead in our name of the matrix form because that contains some stuff at least. So I'll go with ''minimal ratio form''. Ok?

::::::::::: Re: POTE generator(s) line. Problem is the generators in this line in all the temp pages don't consistently come from a certain form. My plan is to regulate them to the equave-reduced generator form. Not related but I'll also revise this line to ''Optimal tuning (POTE)''. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 16:59, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@@ Line 120: / Line 120: @@
 :::::::::: Re: mingen coinage. For the record that was Dave's coinage, not mine, and I have some qualms about it, but I have been promulgating it, so your point stands. Of your suggestions, I like "minimal ratio form" the best; "minimal comma form" leaves open for me the interpretation that the comma be smallest in ''cents'', which is more akin to the sense in which "minimal generator form" uses "minimal", but I think it is more appropriate to deal with commas as ratios but generators as cents values. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 20:27, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
+::::::::::: Re: equave-reduced generator form. This is defined as follows. The mapping is normalized such that each generator is reduced by the formal prime represented by the first column (which is formally regarded as the equave). It's usually the octave but can be others, depending on the subgroup. That's my understanding of ''musician's form'' but I'm aware it's up to Dave to determine what musician's form is.
+::::::::::: Re: height and product. Look, I presented you ''equave-reduced generator form'' which I reckon is straightforward enough, yet you still asked me about the definition. I think that's an exemplar case to show that a name isn't anything but a sign, and the relatability between the signifier and the signified can't be expected due to semiotic arbitrariness. Specifically, even if we go with ''product height'', the reader will wonder it's the product of what. The answer "numerator and denominator" isn't emergent, with so many existing measures of intervals. Therefore, I reserve that it requires about the same amount of explanation.
+::::::::::: Since "product of what" isn't emergent, it's questionable whether there's any substance in the word ''product''. I'd rather use ''ratio'' or ''comma'' instead in our name of the matrix form because that contains some stuff at least. So I'll go with ''minimal ratio form''. Ok?
+::::::::::: Re: POTE generator(s) line. Problem is the generators in this line in all the temp pages don't consistently come from a certain form. My plan is to regulate them to the equave-reduced generator form. Not related but I'll also revise this line to ''Optimal tuning (POTE)''. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 16:59, 1 October 2021 (UTC)