Talk:Porcupine family: Difference between revisions
+ my reasons |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
: I strongly disagree. This makes it difficult to compare porcupine with other temps. Basically I'm saying the 7-limit, 11-limit, etc. are flatlands where all the systems can be studied and compared. This idea of defining temps on 2.3.5.11 and then adding 7 makes the scene opaque and hard to sort out. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 12:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC) | : I strongly disagree. This makes it difficult to compare porcupine with other temps. Basically I'm saying the 7-limit, 11-limit, etc. are flatlands where all the systems can be studied and compared. This idea of defining temps on 2.3.5.11 and then adding 7 makes the scene opaque and hard to sort out. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 12:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC) | ||
:: Why obscure the idea that different systems more naturally support different primes? This seems like a crucial piece of info about any given temperament. Meantone works best in 2.3.5.7, mintra works best in 3.5.7.11, kleismic works best in 2.3.5.13, and porcupine works best in 2.3.5.11. | |||
2.3.5.7 porcupine is simply unnatural. It is not a convergence of 2.3.5.7.11 porcupine and any other reasonable porcupine mapping, because strong porcupine has no other reasonable mapping of 11 than the porkypine version. Therefore, there is no reason to talk about it on its own. --[[User:VectorGraphics|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics|talk]]) 23:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC) | |||