User talk:Lhearne: Difference between revisions

Line 104:

::::::::::::::: The spectimal kleisma indeed seems a good possibility indeed. Could use the letter 'k' perhaps. --[[User:Lhearne|Lhearne]] ([[User talk:Lhearne|talk]]) 08:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::: I like the sound of using "K" for intervals like the septimal kleisma, but I still think that 33/32 needs its own identity as an interval in the final system because of its size and the interval math that I mentioned concerning how it adds up to make a whole tone. Besides, just as the Pythagorean axis controls diatonic interval arithmetic, so the Alpharabian axis controls ~~quartertone or~~ "paradiatonic" arithmetic. What's more, we can more easily account for ~~septimal,~~ tridecimal and septendecimal quartertones once we start adding or subtracting commas from 33/32. With that in mind, I think that we can use "M" for both "Major" and "Paramajor", and "m" for both "minor" and "paraminor" on account of both the Major-Minor distinction, and the Paramajor-Paraminor distinction behaving similarly to one another in most respects when it comes to interval arithmetic. For distinguishing the two neutral intervals, we can use "N" for "Greater Neutral" and "n" for "lesser neutral". We can then save the "U" for the remaining modifications of diatonic intervals by 33/32 due to "Parasuper-" and "Parasub-" still needing letters, and using "Up/Under" makes about as much sense as anything for this when it comes to shorthand. I think that having this system in place would go quite a ways towards establishing the order of prefixes as well, with "U" being adjacent to the numeral like with any "M" or "N". With ~~this in mind~~, Wide and Narrow can then be represented by ">" and "<" respectively, since these modifications aren't attached to a specific comma. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 15:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::: I like the sound of using "K" for intervals like the septimal kleisma, but I still think that 33/32 needs its own identity as an interval in the final system because of its size and the interval math that I mentioned concerning how it adds up to make a whole tone. Besides, just as the Pythagorean axis controls diatonic interval arithmetic, so the Alpharabian axis controls what I call "paradiatonic arithmetic". Paradiatonic arithmetic deals with quartertones and the "distorted diatonic" systems of EDOs like 13edo. What's more, we can more easily account for tridecimal and septendecimal quartertones, as well as more complicated septimal intervals, once we start adding or subtracting commas from 33/32. With that in mind, I think that we can use "M" for both "Major" and "Paramajor", and "m" for both "minor" and "paraminor" on account of both the Major-Minor distinction, and the Paramajor-Paraminor distinction behaving similarly to one another in most respects when it comes to interval arithmetic. For distinguishing the two neutral intervals, we can use "N" for "Greater Neutral" and "n" for "lesser neutral". We can then save the "U" for the remaining modifications of diatonic intervals by 33/32 due to "Parasuper-" and "Parasub-" still needing letters, and using "Up/Under" makes about as much sense as anything for this when it comes to shorthand. I think that having this system in place would go quite a ways towards establishing the order of prefixes as well, with "U" being adjacent to the numeral like with any "M" or "N". With that now established, Wide and Narrow can then be represented by ">" and "<" respectively since these modifications aren't attached to a specific comma, and this frees up "W" for use with another comma. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 16:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:13, 6 February 2021 view source Aura (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled 5,920 edits No edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 16:11, 6 February 2021 view source Aura (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled 5,920 edits No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 104:		Line 104:
	::::::::::::::: The spectimal kleisma indeed seems a good possibility indeed. Could use the letter 'k' perhaps. --[[User:Lhearne\|Lhearne]] ([[User talk:Lhearne\|talk]]) 08:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)		::::::::::::::: The spectimal kleisma indeed seems a good possibility indeed. Could use the letter 'k' perhaps. --[[User:Lhearne\|Lhearne]] ([[User talk:Lhearne\|talk]]) 08:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

	:::::::::::::::: I like the sound of using "K" for intervals like the septimal kleisma, but I still think that 33/32 needs its own identity as an interval in the final system because of its size and the interval math that I mentioned concerning how it adds up to make a whole tone. Besides, just as the Pythagorean axis controls diatonic interval arithmetic, so the Alpharabian axis controls ~~quartertone or~~ "paradiatonic" arithmetic. What's more, we can more easily account for ~~septimal,~~ tridecimal and septendecimal quartertones once we start adding or subtracting commas from 33/32. With that in mind, I think that we can use "M" for both "Major" and "Paramajor", and "m" for both "minor" and "paraminor" on account of both the Major-Minor distinction, and the Paramajor-Paraminor distinction behaving similarly to one another in most respects when it comes to interval arithmetic. For distinguishing the two neutral intervals, we can use "N" for "Greater Neutral" and "n" for "lesser neutral". We can then save the "U" for the remaining modifications of diatonic intervals by 33/32 due to "Parasuper-" and "Parasub-" still needing letters, and using "Up/Under" makes about as much sense as anything for this when it comes to shorthand. I think that having this system in place would go quite a ways towards establishing the order of prefixes as well, with "U" being adjacent to the numeral like with any "M" or "N". With ~~this in mind~~, Wide and Narrow can then be represented by ">" and "<" respectively, since these modifications aren't attached to a specific comma. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 15:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)		:::::::::::::::: I like the sound of using "K" for intervals like the septimal kleisma, but I still think that 33/32 needs its own identity as an interval in the final system because of its size and the interval math that I mentioned concerning how it adds up to make a whole tone. Besides, just as the Pythagorean axis controls diatonic interval arithmetic, so the Alpharabian axis controls what I call "paradiatonic arithmetic". Paradiatonic arithmetic deals with quartertones and the "distorted diatonic" systems of EDOs like 13edo. What's more, we can more easily account for tridecimal and septendecimal quartertones, as well as more complicated septimal intervals, once we start adding or subtracting commas from 33/32. With that in mind, I think that we can use "M" for both "Major" and "Paramajor", and "m" for both "minor" and "paraminor" on account of both the Major-Minor distinction, and the Paramajor-Paraminor distinction behaving similarly to one another in most respects when it comes to interval arithmetic. For distinguishing the two neutral intervals, we can use "N" for "Greater Neutral" and "n" for "lesser neutral". We can then save the "U" for the remaining modifications of diatonic intervals by 33/32 due to "Parasuper-" and "Parasub-" still needing letters, and using "Up/Under" makes about as much sense as anything for this when it comes to shorthand. I think that having this system in place would go quite a ways towards establishing the order of prefixes as well, with "U" being adjacent to the numeral like with any "M" or "N". With that now established, Wide and Narrow can then be represented by ">" and "<" respectively since these modifications aren't attached to a specific comma, and this frees up "W" for use with another comma. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 16:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC)