Talk:Normal forms: Difference between revisions

Line 134:

:::::::::::: That all said! Yes, I think "minimal ratio form" is good and I would be happy if you used it. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 20:59, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

::::::::::::: Re: equave-reduced generator form. You're aware that 3/1 octave-reduces to 3/2 and not 4/3? Porcupine's generator, in the positive generator form, is 10/9. 10/9 octave-reduces to 10/9 and not 9/5. I think the part we both missed is that the positive generator form should be used as a starting point to derive this form.

::::::::::::: Re: names. You're totally right that including ''product'' in the name is a helpful mnemonic. Good point. However, by using descriptive names its distinctiveness is lost in return. Here's an extension of the "product of what" problem: what if there's another "product complexity"? I just came up with one, which is a product of numerator, denominator, and interval size, in the hope of punishing larger intervals so that 77/1 is measured more complex than 11/7. Not to seriously use it, what I mean to show is how easy for the phrase to be neutralized and turned into an empty signifier.

::::::::::::: Anyway, I'mma work on this page. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 01:04, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

@@ Line 134: / Line 134: @@
 :::::::::::: That all said! Yes, I think "minimal ratio form" is good and I would be happy if you used it. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 20:59, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
+::::::::::::: Re: equave-reduced generator form. You're aware that 3/1 octave-reduces to 3/2 and not 4/3? Porcupine's generator, in the positive generator form, is 10/9. 10/9 octave-reduces to 10/9 and not 9/5. I think the part we both missed is that the positive generator form should be used as a starting point to derive this form.
+::::::::::::: Re: names. You're totally right that including ''product'' in the name is a helpful mnemonic. Good point. However, by using descriptive names its distinctiveness is lost in return. Here's an extension of the "product of what" problem: what if there's another "product complexity"? I just came up with one, which is a product of numerator, denominator, and interval size, in the hope of punishing larger intervals so that 77/1 is measured more complex than 11/7. Not to seriously use it, what I mean to show is how easy for the phrase to be neutralized and turned into an empty signifier.
+::::::::::::: Anyway, I'mma work on this page. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 01:04, 2 October 2021 (UTC)