User talk:Godtone: Difference between revisions

Line 83:

::: Yes sorry, I thought it was clear but in retrospect it could be talking about harmonics not patent val EDOs. The reason I wrote it in such a way is because its concise and seemed unambiguous to me, but also because I'm not sure how to make "from 100 EDO to 200 EDO" sound right... is it "in the range of EDOs 100 to 200" or "from 100 to 200 EDO" or something else? --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 19:17, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

::: Oh and the reason it appears in the edit history of 181 EDO is because I accidentally added the sentence to the wrong EDO as I had misremembered the number of the EDO, but I removed that sentence from the page for 181 EDO when I realised. I am sure that the one here is right: [[183edo#Prime_harmonics]]. 161edo is also quite a strong system so I am pretty sure that one is right as it came second to 183 EDO a lot. Note 161 EDO's great strength as a no-9's 23-odd-limit system. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 19:19, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

::: Oh and the reason it appears in the edit history of 181 EDO is because I accidentally added the sentence to the wrong EDO as I had misremembered the number of the EDO, but I removed that sentence from the page for 181 EDO when I realised. I am sure that the one here is right: [[183edo#Prime_harmonics]]. 161edo is also quite a strong system so I am pretty sure that one is right as it came second to 183 EDO a lot. Note 161 EDO's great strength as a no-9's 21-odd-limit system. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 19:31, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:25, 6 March 2022 view source Godtone (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, emailconfirmed 2,420 edits m →Meaning of a sentence: got a little confused, should be fixed now ← Older edit		Revision as of 19:31, 6 March 2022 view source Godtone (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, emailconfirmed 2,420 edits m →Meaning of a sentence: HOPEFULLY FIXED Newer edit →
Line 83:		Line 83:
	::: Yes sorry, I thought it was clear but in retrospect it could be talking about harmonics not patent val EDOs. The reason I wrote it in such a way is because its concise and seemed unambiguous to me, but also because I'm not sure how to make "from 100 EDO to 200 EDO" sound right... is it "in the range of EDOs 100 to 200" or "from 100 to 200 EDO" or something else? --[[User:Godtone\|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone\|talk]]) 19:17, 6 March 2022 (UTC)		::: Yes sorry, I thought it was clear but in retrospect it could be talking about harmonics not patent val EDOs. The reason I wrote it in such a way is because its concise and seemed unambiguous to me, but also because I'm not sure how to make "from 100 EDO to 200 EDO" sound right... is it "in the range of EDOs 100 to 200" or "from 100 to 200 EDO" or something else? --[[User:Godtone\|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone\|talk]]) 19:17, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

	::: Oh and the reason it appears in the edit history of 181 EDO is because I accidentally added the sentence to the wrong EDO as I had misremembered the number of the EDO, but I removed that sentence from the page for 181 EDO when I realised. I am sure that the one here is right: [[183edo#Prime_harmonics]]. 161edo is also quite a strong system so I am pretty sure that one is right as it came second to 183 EDO a lot. Note 161 EDO's great strength as a no-9's 23-odd-limit system. --[[User:Godtone\|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone\|talk]]) 19:19, 6 March 2022 (UTC)		::: Oh and the reason it appears in the edit history of 181 EDO is because I accidentally added the sentence to the wrong EDO as I had misremembered the number of the EDO, but I removed that sentence from the page for 181 EDO when I realised. I am sure that the one here is right: [[183edo#Prime_harmonics]]. 161edo is also quite a strong system so I am pretty sure that one is right as it came second to 183 EDO a lot. Note 161 EDO's great strength as a no-9's 21-odd-limit system. --[[User:Godtone\|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone\|talk]]) 19:31, 6 March 2022 (UTC)