Complexity: Difference between revisions
I love this quote and I must add it here to highlight the issue presented in the intro |
CompactStar (talk | contribs) There is nothing prohibiting ultra-low badness temperaments from existing, it's just extremely rare |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Being a characteristic of [[temperament]]s, complexity can be used to evaluate and compare them. Generally speaking, if a temperament has high complexity, that means that interesting pitches (e.g. ones [[consonant]] with each other) are many [[generator]]s apart, so useful scales tend to have many notes. If a temperament has low complexity, fewer generators are required, and scales with fewer notes are more likely to be useful. | Being a characteristic of [[temperament]]s, complexity can be used to evaluate and compare them. Generally speaking, if a temperament has high complexity, that means that interesting pitches (e.g. ones [[consonant]] with each other) are many [[generator]]s apart, so useful scales tend to have many notes. If a temperament has low complexity, fewer generators are required, and scales with fewer notes are more likely to be useful. | ||
Complexity and [[error]] are both usually treated as undesirable characteristics, but there is a trade-off between them in that very low complexity temperaments (e.g. small [[edo]]s) | Complexity and [[error]] are both usually treated as undesirable characteristics, but there is a trade-off between them in that very low complexity temperaments (e.g. small [[edo]]s) typically do not have low error, and very low error temperaments (e.g. [[microtemperament]]s or [[JI]] itself) typically do not have low complexity. [[Badness]] is a way to combine complexity and error such that a search for low-badness temperaments yields results with a particularly good trade-off between complexity and error. | ||
== Complexity of an interval in a temperament == | == Complexity of an interval in a temperament == | ||