Talk:IFDO: Difference between revisions

Line 22:

:: --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 18:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

::: Adding my grain of salt: I don't think it's wrong to have both a systematic naming system for theorists who want to get everything covered unambiguously and, in parallel, a set of everyday terms for musicians. I view cmloegcmluin's system of harmonotonic tunings as a systematic naming system, whereas the term "IDO" tries to follow the footsteps of "EDO" as a more colloquial term (i.e. not as unambiguous, but understood by most in context). I personally don't like "IDO" because I find it much harder to understand compared to "subharmonic series segment" (used by Sevish and probably more before/after him) or "undertone scale" (used by Andrew Heathwaite and probably more before/after him), while also not being as explicit as cmloegcmluin's systematic terminology. There are also shorthand notations like 24::12 (pronounced as "subharmonics 24 to 12") that convey more effectively the idea of "12ido" that aren't much longer or harder to say than "12ido". As for fractional-order tuning systems, I think it's better to start by developing a systematic naming system, if only because it might not turn out useful or necessary to make it musician-friendly later. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 01:11, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

:::: I don't see how ''inverse-arithmetic division'' could be described as more "colloquial" than ''equal division of length''. To me it seems impossible to argue that this is more of an "everyday term for musicians", since ID references a recently made-up variation on a mathematical mean which most musicians do not know in the first place, while ELD references the physical property of string or resonating chamber length that practicing musicians actually physically deal with. The EFD/E(P)D/ELD system is both the unambiguous and comprehensive system for theorists as well as the more accessible system for music makers, and it has slight (2 years) historical precedence. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 02:17, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 :: --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 18:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 ::: Adding my grain of salt: I don't think it's wrong to have both a systematic naming system for theorists who want to get everything covered unambiguously and, in parallel, a set of everyday terms for musicians. I view cmloegcmluin's system of harmonotonic tunings as a systematic naming system, whereas the term "IDO" tries to follow the footsteps of "EDO" as a more colloquial term (i.e. not as unambiguous, but understood by most in context). I personally don't like "IDO" because I find it much harder to understand compared to "subharmonic series segment" (used by Sevish and probably more before/after him) or "undertone scale" (used by Andrew Heathwaite and probably more before/after him), while also not being as explicit as cmloegcmluin's systematic terminology. There are also shorthand notations like 24::12 (pronounced as "subharmonics 24 to 12") that convey more effectively the idea of "12ido" that aren't much longer or harder to say than "12ido". As for fractional-order tuning systems, I think it's better to start by developing a systematic naming system, if only because it might not turn out useful or necessary to make it musician-friendly later. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 01:11, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
+:::: I don't see how ''inverse-arithmetic division'' could be described as more "colloquial" than ''equal division of length''. To me it seems impossible to argue that this is more of an "everyday term for musicians", since ID references a recently made-up variation on a mathematical mean which most musicians do not know in the first place, while ELD references the physical property of string or resonating chamber length that practicing musicians actually physically deal with. The EFD/E(P)D/ELD system is both the unambiguous and comprehensive system for theorists as well as the more accessible system for music makers, and it has slight (2 years) historical precedence. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 02:17, 29 March 2023 (UTC)