User talk:Xenwolf: Difference between revisions

Line 269:

:[...unindenting...]

Okay, so, I'm considering the idea of extending the current 159edo notation system to the 13-limit, with this being the highest prime extension due to the 13-limit being the last paradiatonic prime, and the last one that offers something new other than modulation possibilities. However, this would involve further modifying Helmholtz-Ellis notation to better accommodate trientones (one third tones) and stuff such, and I'm also considering other alterations along the same lines- for instance, reviving the original Helmholtz-Ellis 11-limit quartertone glyph and putting it to a different use relative to the 11-limit to represent a raising by [[45/44]], and pairing it with a new symbol to represent a lowering by [[45/44]]. However, I need more feedback on our current 159edo system first, and so far, all I know is that I need to build on the familiar in order to create this notation system, which, if all goes well, can be integrated with an improved version of the SHEFKHED interval naming system that has been extended to 171edo... --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 21:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

: I think it is good to have a basis for discussion at all, it does not have to be perfect. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 21:57, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

@@ Line 269: / Line 269: @@
 :[...unindenting...]
 Okay, so, I'm considering the idea of extending the current 159edo notation system to the 13-limit, with this being the highest prime extension due to the 13-limit being the last paradiatonic prime, and the last one that offers something new other than modulation possibilities.  However, this would involve further modifying Helmholtz-Ellis notation to better accommodate trientones (one third tones) and stuff such, and I'm also considering other alterations along the same lines- for instance, reviving the original Helmholtz-Ellis 11-limit quartertone glyph and putting it to a different use relative to the 11-limit to represent a raising by [[45/44]], and pairing it with a new symbol to represent a lowering by [[45/44]].  However, I need more feedback on our current 159edo system first, and so far, all I know is that I need to build on the familiar in order to create this notation system, which, if all goes well, can be integrated with an improved version of the SHEFKHED interval naming system that has been extended to 171edo... --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 21:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
+: I think it is good to have a basis for discussion at all, it does not have to be perfect. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 21:57, 6 October 2020 (UTC)