Talk:Sensipent family: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
:::: It isn't an esoteric extension. It gives interpretation to the gen as [[~]][[40/31]][[~]][[31/24]], which is an extremely accurate ([[961/960|S31]] difference) harmonical interpretation of the sqrt(5/3) gen. It'd be easier to argue that the schismic extension to prime 41 is arbitrary due to the distance on the chain required to reach prime 41, although even that isn't that strange as it's via S81, so is good in any tuning with an accurate syntonic comma. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 16:55, 23 August 2026 (UTC) | :::: It isn't an esoteric extension. It gives interpretation to the gen as [[~]][[40/31]][[~]][[31/24]], which is an extremely accurate ([[961/960|S31]] difference) harmonical interpretation of the sqrt(5/3) gen. It'd be easier to argue that the schismic extension to prime 41 is arbitrary due to the distance on the chain required to reach prime 41, although even that isn't that strange as it's via S81, so is good in any tuning with an accurate syntonic comma. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 16:55, 23 August 2026 (UTC) | ||
::::: It's esoteric cuz the subgroup is esoteric. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 03:48, 24 August 2026 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:49, 24 August 2026
Is 2.3.5.31 sensipent not accurate enough to be canonical?
I ask because the optimal ET sequence starts 8, 11c, 19, 46, 65 for both but 5-limit sensipent finishes with 539, 604c, 669c while 2.3.5.31 finishes with 344, 409, 474, 539, 604c, so both reach the constrained range implied by 539 and 604c. Also, it looked prettier and presented interesting information up-front in its previous form. Take a look at this diff. I certainly understand moving the sendai section but the 2.3.5.31 subgroup should rightly be categorised as an extension, no? --Godtone (talk) 23:18, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
- It's canonical. Just that I decided that any subgroup temp that skips two or more primes should be placed at the bottom of the page, so that you see the 7-limit temps sooner and see the 2.3.5.11 and 2.3.5.7.11 temps both immediately at the H3 level:
== 2.3.5 == === 2.3.5.11 === == 2.3.5.7 == === 2.3.5.7.11 ===
- If you agree a subgroup extension is canonical s.t there's no ambiguity (meaning it's unique among alternatives) then I believe it should be presented as such (as an extension proper, but with a subheader indicating it's a subgroup extension, as it was before). Furthermore, your reason seems backwards to me; shouldn't a subgroup extension that isn't in the increasing order of primes be prioritised at the very top, as it represents unique information? --Godtone (talk)
- I believe subgroup extensions may be prioritized if they skip one prime. Any more than one, they tend to be esoteric, and there's not much logic to putting them at the top organizationally. Instead, the overview section should be expanded to inform the readers of a subgroup extensions section. —FloraC (talk) 16:04, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- It isn't an esoteric extension. It gives interpretation to the gen as ~40/31~31/24, which is an extremely accurate (S31 difference) harmonical interpretation of the sqrt(5/3) gen. It'd be easier to argue that the schismic extension to prime 41 is arbitrary due to the distance on the chain required to reach prime 41, although even that isn't that strange as it's via S81, so is good in any tuning with an accurate syntonic comma. --Godtone (talk) 16:55, 23 August 2026 (UTC)