Complexity: Difference between revisions
Complexity of a just interval and complexity of a tempered interval should always go together |
→Complexity of a temperament: - badness (moved to the dedicated article) |
||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
A commonly used temperament complexity measure is [[Tenney–Euclidean temperament measures #TE complexity|Tenney–Euclidean complexity]], which works nicely for multirank temperaments and equal temperaments alike. | A commonly used temperament complexity measure is [[Tenney–Euclidean temperament measures #TE complexity|Tenney–Euclidean complexity]], which works nicely for multirank temperaments and equal temperaments alike. | ||
For an [[equal temperament]], a simpler definition of the complexity is the number of notes per octave, which means that [[12edo|12et]] has a complexity of 12, etc. For unusual mappings where 2 is mapped to a strange number of steps, that does not work. Norm-based complexities such as TE complexity are foolproof and equave-agnostic, however. For example, the TE complexity of 31et is 30.98, which is close to the edo number as expected for a patent val. But if one were to take the TE complexity of {{val| 1 1900 2785 3370 }}, which is technically a tuning of 1et, they would get 1038.83, which matches the complexity of the tuning much better than the naive approach of simply taking 1 for the complexity, and means that that val is roughly equivalent to 1039et in complexity | For an [[equal temperament]], a simpler definition of the complexity is the number of notes per octave, which means that [[12edo|12et]] has a complexity of 12, etc. For unusual mappings where 2 is mapped to a strange number of steps, that does not work. Norm-based complexities such as TE complexity are foolproof and equave-agnostic, however. For example, the TE complexity of 31et is 30.98, which is close to the edo number as expected for a patent val. But if one were to take the TE complexity of {{val| 1 1900 2785 3370 }}, which is technically a tuning of 1et, they would get 1038.83, which matches the complexity of the tuning much better than the naive approach of simply taking 1 for the complexity, and means that that val is roughly equivalent to 1039et in complexity. | ||
== Links == | == Links == | ||