User:BudjarnLambeth/Bird’s eye view of rank-2 temperaments: Difference between revisions

← Older edit Newer edit →

VisualWikitext

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 The columns categorise temperaments by [[complexity]].
-Rank 2 temperaments can generate scales with any number of notes per [[equave]]. However, if they have too few notes, they won't be able approximate enough targeted intervals to be useful, and if they have too many notes, they will be filled with dead weight notes that don't approximate anything and just get in the way. There is a kind of 'goldilocks zone' in the middle, an amount of notes that is 'just right', and this goldilocks zone varies from temperament to temperament. In an informal, non-rigorous sense, that is what complexity measures.
+Rank 2 temperaments can generate scales with any number of notes per [[equave]]. However, if they have too few notes, they won't be able approximate enough targeted intervals to be useful, and if they have too many notes, they will be filled with extra notes that don't serve much purpose and get in the way. Just how many notes is about right, varies from temperament to temperament. In layman’s terms: More notes needed = more complexity, less notes needed = less complexity. The real definition of complexity is more involved and rigorous than this, but this is good enough for the purposes of a broad overview page.
-On this page, the approximate 'goldilocks number' of notes per equate is estimated by subtracting the smallest number in the second row of a temperament's mapping from the largest. Extra leniency is afforded to temperaments with multiple periods per octave as they are disadvantaged by this method.