User:BudjarnLambeth: Difference between revisions

Line 204:

* It’s fine to explore the 2.3.5.101 [[subgroup]] if you want to. It doesn’t matter that it’s less [[concordant]] than 2.3.5.7. Explore it anyway and see what happens. Do some stuff with [[:Category:Novelties|arbitrary numbers]] that don’t make logical sense and just see what comes of it. That’s where the fun is!

* I would prefer to use a temperament [[Temperament naming|named]] something fun like “waterslide” or “jinglebells” even if it has lots of error, over one named something dry and bland like “countertrihexakleismatic” even if it’s super [[damage|accurate]] and technically [[badness|better]] - a bland name can kill a temperament’s appeal, a fun name can create appeal out of nothing.

* Most of the ‘mathematically best options’ in music tuning that can be found, have already been found. We 2020s theorists missed out on the initial [[RTT]] gold rush of the 1990s and 2000s, so we’re not ever going to discover low-[[badness]] temperaments in the full [[5-limit]], [[7-limit]] or [[11-limit]], we were born too late to explore those. But we were born just in time to explore more niche, out-of-left-field things. The 90s/00s theorists built the fundamental bedrock. Our job now is decorate its edges with interesting little edge cases and offshoots, be those things like higher limit extensions, no-n subgroup temperaments, dual-n subgroup temperaments, anything like that. Their job in 1990-2010 was to ask “what are the most concordant tunings possible?”. Or job in 2020-2040 is to ask “if we take one of those concordant temperaments and do this to it, what happens? Is it still useable? Is it interesting?”

* Most of the ‘mathematically best options’ in music tuning that can be found, have already been found. We 2020s theorists missed out on the initial [[RTT]] gold rush of the 1990s and 2000s, so we’re not ever going to discover low-[[badness]] temperaments in the full [[5-limit]], [[7-limit]] or [[11-limit]], we were born too late to explore those. But we were born just in time to explore more niche, out-of-left-field things. The 90s/00s theorists built the fundamental bedrock. Our job now is decorate its edges with interesting little edge cases and offshoots, be those things like higher limit extensions, no-n subgroup temperaments, dual-n subgroup temperaments, anything like that. Their job in 1990-2010 was to ask “what are the most concordant tunings possible?”. Our job in 2020-2040 is to ask “if we take one of those concordant temperaments and do this to it, what happens? Is it still useable? Is it interesting?”

* For those who are interested in making more major discoveries than that, though, the fields that are still wide open are [[just intonation]] and [[equal-step tuning]]s.

** There probably are JI scales out there that are very very consonant, and also xenharmonic at the same time, that no one has ever found yet. There are so many approaches to JI, from [[primodality]] to [[combination product set]]s and so on, and most of them have been barely scratched at all in terms of discovering techniques to approach each of the tunings generated with that method. JI right now in 2024 is wide open in the same was RTT was in 1990.

@@ Line 204: / Line 204: @@
 * It’s fine to explore the 2.3.5.101 [[subgroup]] if you want to. It doesn’t matter that it’s less [[concordant]] than 2.3.5.7. Explore it anyway and see what happens. Do some stuff with [[:Category:Novelties|arbitrary numbers]] that don’t make logical sense and just see what comes of it. That’s where the fun is!
 * I would prefer to use a temperament [[Temperament naming|named]] something fun like “waterslide” or “jinglebells” even if it has lots of error, over one named something dry and bland like “countertrihexakleismatic” even if it’s super [[damage|accurate]] and technically [[badness|better]] - a bland name can kill a temperament’s appeal, a fun name can create appeal out of nothing.
-* Most of the ‘mathematically best options’ in music tuning that can be found, have already been found. We 2020s theorists missed out on the initial [[RTT]] gold rush of the 1990s and 2000s, so we’re not ever going to discover low-[[badness]] temperaments in the full [[5-limit]], [[7-limit]] or [[11-limit]], we were born too late to explore those. But we were born just in time to explore more niche, out-of-left-field things. The 90s/00s theorists built the fundamental bedrock. Our job now is decorate its edges with interesting little edge cases and offshoots, be those things like higher limit extensions, no-n subgroup temperaments, dual-n subgroup temperaments, anything like that. Their job in 1990-2010 was to ask “what are the most concordant tunings possible?”. Or job in 2020-2040 is to ask “if we take one of those concordant temperaments and do this to it, what happens? Is it still useable? Is it interesting?”
+* Most of the ‘mathematically best options’ in music tuning that can be found, have already been found. We 2020s theorists missed out on the initial [[RTT]] gold rush of the 1990s and 2000s, so we’re not ever going to discover low-[[badness]] temperaments in the full [[5-limit]], [[7-limit]] or [[11-limit]], we were born too late to explore those. But we were born just in time to explore more niche, out-of-left-field things. The 90s/00s theorists built the fundamental bedrock. Our job now is decorate its edges with interesting little edge cases and offshoots, be those things like higher limit extensions, no-n subgroup temperaments, dual-n subgroup temperaments, anything like that. Their job in 1990-2010 was to ask “what are the most concordant tunings possible?”. Our job in 2020-2040 is to ask “if we take one of those concordant temperaments and do this to it, what happens? Is it still useable? Is it interesting?”
 * For those who are interested in making more major discoveries than that, though, the fields that are still wide open are [[just intonation]] and [[equal-step tuning]]s.
 ** There probably are JI scales out there that are very very consonant, and also xenharmonic at the same time, that no one has ever found yet. There are so many approaches to JI, from [[primodality]] to [[combination product set]]s and so on, and most of them have been barely scratched at all in terms of discovering techniques to approach each of the tunings generated with that method. JI right now in 2024 is wide open in the same was RTT was in 1990.