Talk:Direct approximation: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 136: | Line 136: | ||
:: From what I gather, the Direct Approximations of harmonics in a given EDO come together as generators which comprise that EDO's Simple Map or Patent Val. However, the approximations of other intervals derived indirectly by means of the patent val (which may be arguably termed the "Patent Approximations" or, more ambiguously, "patent intervals") may not be identical to said intervals' direct approximations. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 02:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC) | :: From what I gather, the Direct Approximations of harmonics in a given EDO come together as generators which comprise that EDO's Simple Map or Patent Val. However, the approximations of other intervals derived indirectly by means of the patent val (which may be arguably termed the "Patent Approximations" or, more ambiguously, "patent intervals") may not be identical to said intervals' direct approximations. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 02:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC) | ||
::: I confirm Aura's previous statement; the only intervals whose direct approximations are guaranteed to match their mapping by the simple map in RTT are the prime harmonics (or whichever intervals are the generators of the JI subgroup), because direct approximation of each of them is how the simple map is defined. | |||
::: Although I'd prefer we keep "patent" out of it. Why not "direct intervals", such as a "direct fifth", if you're looking for something pithy like that? --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 02:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC) | |||