Talk:POTE tuning: Difference between revisions

From Xenharmonic Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Mike Battaglia (talk | contribs)
m 1 revision imported: Moving archived Wikispaces discussion to subpage
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WSArchiveLink}}
{{WSArchiveLink}}
== "Find POTE = T/T[1]" ==
It doesn't seem to handle the case where the period is a fraction of an octave. For example, try this diaschismic mapping: [{{val|2, 2, 7, 15}}, {{val|0, 1, -2, -8}}]. We know the period is half an octave. Indeed,
T = [599.44659699 703.03185125]
Now POTE = T/T[1] gives
POTE = [1200.        1407.36176623]
Is this correct?
Besides, since I don't see a definition of TE generator, I don't know if it should be octave reduced, period reduced or left as is. Changing the basis definitely changes the result. Does TE generators specify a basis or whatever maps are accepted?
From my perspective, this seems more intuitive:
* Find the TE octave: o = (T*V)<sub>1</sub>, that is, the first entry of T*V.
* POTE = T/o
resulting in
POTE = [600.        703.68088312]
Any idea? [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 09:14, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:14, 6 June 2020

This page also contains archived Wikispaces discussion.

"Find POTE = T/T[1]"

It doesn't seem to handle the case where the period is a fraction of an octave. For example, try this diaschismic mapping: [2, 2, 7, 15], 0, 1, -2, -8]]. We know the period is half an octave. Indeed,

T = [599.44659699 703.03185125]

Now POTE = T/T[1] gives

POTE = [1200. 1407.36176623]

Is this correct?

Besides, since I don't see a definition of TE generator, I don't know if it should be octave reduced, period reduced or left as is. Changing the basis definitely changes the result. Does TE generators specify a basis or whatever maps are accepted?

From my perspective, this seems more intuitive:

  • Find the TE octave: o = (T*V)1, that is, the first entry of T*V.
  • POTE = T/o

resulting in

POTE = [600. 703.68088312]

Any idea? FloraC (talk) 09:14, 6 June 2020 (UTC)