Tuning ranges of regular temperaments: Difference between revisions
Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs) →Examples: separate examples into sections, and eliminate the "diamond nice" type in favor of simply stating both types |
Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs) fix heading structure (examples needed deeper nesting) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
There are various methods which have been suggested for defining '''tuning ranges appropriate to a given [[regular temperament]]'''. | There are various methods which have been suggested for defining '''tuning ranges appropriate to a given [[regular temperament]]'''. | ||
= Diamond tuning ranges = | |||
[[Andrew Milne]], [[Bill Sethares]] and [[James Plamondon]] defined some important tuning ranges. Their "valid" range was defined in ''Tuning Continua and Keyboard Layouts'' in the ''Journal of Mathematics and Music''<ref>Andrew Milne, William Sethares & James Plamondon (2008) Tuning continua and keyboard layouts, Journal of Mathematics and Music, 2:1, 1-19, DOI: [https://doi.org/10.1080/17459730701828677 10.1080/17459730701828677]</ref>; according to Milne, this tuning range was Sethares's contribution. Their "purer" range was discussed in the technical report ''X_System'' in the Open University’s repository. | [[Andrew Milne]], [[Bill Sethares]] and [[James Plamondon]] defined some important tuning ranges. Their "valid" range was defined in ''Tuning Continua and Keyboard Layouts'' in the ''Journal of Mathematics and Music''<ref>Andrew Milne, William Sethares & James Plamondon (2008) Tuning continua and keyboard layouts, Journal of Mathematics and Music, 2:1, 1-19, DOI: [https://doi.org/10.1080/17459730701828677 10.1080/17459730701828677]</ref>; according to Milne, this tuning range was Sethares's contribution. Their "purer" range was discussed in the technical report ''X_System'' in the Open University’s repository. | ||
| Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
The three vertices with entirely rational number values for the approximations of 3 and 5 are not in the diamond monotone range, so only the [2, 1620/539, (4/3)×sqrt (14), 291600/41503, (44/15)×sqrt (14)] tuning is both diamond tradeoff and diamond monotone. Other examples of tunings that are both diamond tradeoff and diamond monotone are 41''p''/41, 53''p''/53, 72''p''/72 etc.; however 19''p''/19, 22''p''/22 and 31''p''/31 are not in the diamond tradeoff range. | The three vertices with entirely rational number values for the approximations of 3 and 5 are not in the diamond monotone range, so only the [2, 1620/539, (4/3)×sqrt (14), 291600/41503, (44/15)×sqrt (14)] tuning is both diamond tradeoff and diamond monotone. Other examples of tunings that are both diamond tradeoff and diamond monotone are 41''p''/41, 53''p''/53, 72''p''/72 etc.; however 19''p''/19, 22''p''/22 and 31''p''/31 are not in the diamond tradeoff range. | ||
= Other tuning ranges = | |||
The diamond tuning ranges, though they have historical momentum, do not preclude definition of other validity ranges for the tuning of temperaments. The topic of tuning ranges is relatively subjective. Milne himself has described the diamond tuning ranges as "convenient mathematical fictions", and proposed that the reality would be to define some sort of empirically obtained range of tunings over which a sample of participants can correctly identify that tuning's intervals in the way prescribed by the mapping. But realistically, that is an almost impossible question to even ask of participants, and relies upon all sorts of a priori assumptions about categorizations of intervals by their ratio, which is quite possibly an entirely bogus notion. | The diamond tuning ranges, though they have historical momentum, do not preclude definition of other validity ranges for the tuning of temperaments. The topic of tuning ranges is relatively subjective. Milne himself has described the diamond tuning ranges as "convenient mathematical fictions", and proposed that the reality would be to define some sort of empirically obtained range of tunings over which a sample of participants can correctly identify that tuning's intervals in the way prescribed by the mapping. But realistically, that is an almost impossible question to even ask of participants, and relies upon all sorts of a priori assumptions about categorizations of intervals by their ratio, which is quite possibly an entirely bogus notion. | ||
| Line 78: | Line 78: | ||
Others have proposed the [[step ratio spectrum]] as a helpful way of thinking about tuning ranges. | Others have proposed the [[step ratio spectrum]] as a helpful way of thinking about tuning ranges. | ||
= References = | |||
<references/> | <references/> | ||