Defactoring terminology proposal: Difference between revisions
Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs) clean things up |
Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs) move basic terminological history facts from the terminology change proposal into the general audience page on Mike's suggestion |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Several concerns with the term "saturation" may be identified: | Several concerns with the term "saturation" may be identified: | ||
# It does not have any obvious musical or mathematical meaning in this context | # It does not have any obvious musical or mathematical meaning in this context. | ||
# It has another unrelated meaning within xenharmonics that it would conflict with: https://en.xen.wiki/w/Anomalous_saturated_suspension | # It has another unrelated meaning within xenharmonics that it would conflict with: https://en.xen.wiki/w/Anomalous_saturated_suspension | ||
# The most common everyday usage of that word is for "saturated fats", which are the bad kind of fats, so it has negative associations, despite "saturation" being the ''good'' state for a matrix to be in. | # The most common everyday usage of that word is for "saturated fats", which are the bad kind of fats, so it has negative associations, despite "saturation" being the ''good'' state for a matrix to be in. | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
As for the term "torsion", the concerns with it are: | As for the term "torsion", the concerns with it are: | ||
# Again, it does not have any obvious musical or mathematical meaning in this context | # Again, it does not have any obvious musical or mathematical meaning in this context. | ||
# There is an argument that using torsion in this way is an abuse of the term, which was originally applied to periodicity blocks, not temperaments<ref>See: https://yahootuninggroupsultimatebackup.github.io/tuning-math/topicId_2937 which is also referred to here http://tonalsoft.com/enc/t/torsion.aspx</ref>. Both periodicity blocks and temperaments can be defined by lists of commas. And either way, these lists can be saturated or unsaturated. But in the case of periodicity blocks — where commas ''are not tempered out'' — there is an audible difference in the choice between a saturated and unsaturated list, whereas with a temperament — where commas ''are tempered out'' — there is no audible difference. In concrete terms, while it can make sense to construct a Fokker block with {{vector|-4 4 -1}} in the middle and {{vector|-8 8 -2}} = 2{{vector|-4 4 -1}} at the edge — which leads to a pitch system with 24 pitches instead of 12 where half of the pitches are a copy of the other half but offset by a fixed amount — it does not make sense to imagine a temperament which tempers out 2{{vector|-4 4 -1}} but does not temper out {{vector|-4 4 -1}}. And so the conflation<ref>See: https://yahootuninggroupsultimatebackup.github.io/tuning-math/topicId_2033.html#2405</ref> of the two situations by using the same term is misleading, so the authors of this particle believe that the term torsion should not be used in RTT. While it can be argued that it is ''theoretically possible'' to interpret RTT using mathematical structures like quotient subgroups, lattices, and free abelian groups, or in other words, as if a temperament looked like a periodicity block, in which case one can imagine a reality where e.g. (81/80)² is tempered out while 81/80 is not, this is not how temperaments actually sound from a musical point of view in our physical reality; in this case, the inherently projective approach to linear algebra, where tempered out (81/80)² and 81/80 map to the same tempered lattice node, models this problem better. So "torsion" could be preserved as a term for the effect on periodicity blocks (though there's almost certainly something more helpful than that, but that's a battle for another day<ref>Furthermore, care should be taken to recognize the difference in behavior between, say<br><br> | # There is an argument that using torsion in this way is an abuse of the term, which was originally applied to periodicity blocks, not temperaments<ref>See: https://yahootuninggroupsultimatebackup.github.io/tuning-math/topicId_2937 which is also referred to here http://tonalsoft.com/enc/t/torsion.aspx</ref>. Both periodicity blocks and temperaments can be defined by lists of commas. And either way, these lists can be saturated or unsaturated. But in the case of periodicity blocks — where commas ''are not tempered out'' — there is an audible difference in the choice between a saturated and unsaturated list, whereas with a temperament — where commas ''are tempered out'' — there is no audible difference. In concrete terms, while it can make sense to construct a Fokker block with {{vector|-4 4 -1}} in the middle and {{vector|-8 8 -2}} = 2{{vector|-4 4 -1}} at the edge — which leads to a pitch system with 24 pitches instead of 12 where half of the pitches are a copy of the other half but offset by a fixed amount — it does not make sense to imagine a temperament which tempers out 2{{vector|-4 4 -1}} but does not temper out {{vector|-4 4 -1}}. And so the conflation<ref>See: https://yahootuninggroupsultimatebackup.github.io/tuning-math/topicId_2033.html#2405</ref> of the two situations by using the same term is misleading, so the authors of this particle believe that the term torsion should not be used in RTT. While it can be argued that it is ''theoretically possible'' to interpret RTT using mathematical structures like quotient subgroups, lattices, and free abelian groups, or in other words, as if a temperament looked like a periodicity block, in which case one can imagine a reality where e.g. (81/80)² is tempered out while 81/80 is not, this is not how temperaments actually sound from a musical point of view in our physical reality; in this case, the inherently projective approach to linear algebra, where tempered out (81/80)² and 81/80 map to the same tempered lattice node, models this problem better. So "torsion" could be preserved as a term for the effect on periodicity blocks (though there's almost certainly something more helpful than that, but that's a battle for another day<ref>Furthermore, care should be taken to recognize the difference in behavior between, say<br><br> | ||
<math> | <math> | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
And as for the word "contorsion", here are its problems: | And as for the word "contorsion", here are its problems: | ||
# Again, it does not have any obvious musical or mathematical meaning in this context. It's a word that was invented for RTT in 2002 | # Again, it does not have any obvious musical or mathematical meaning in this context. It's a word that was invented specially for RTT in 2002. The prefix co- or con- is sometimes used to form terms for things that are the duals of others (e.g. vectors and ''co''vectors), so the term "con-torsion" was coined to refer to the dual concept of torsion. But "torsion" already has a couple problems as described above, so "contorsion" just compounds those, while being a made-up word. So the authors here believe it would be best to banish the term "contorsion" from the RTT community altogether. | ||
# A word with the same spelling was also coined with a different mathematical meaning outside of RTT, in the field of differential geometry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contorsion_tensor<ref>In this field, it does definitely represent twisting, like in a Möbius strip. Also, DG contorsion is related to DG torsion by subtraction, not duality.</ref> | # A word with the same spelling was also coined with a different mathematical meaning outside of RTT, in the field of differential geometry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contorsion_tensor<ref>In this field, it does definitely represent twisting, like in a Möbius strip. Also, DG contorsion is related to DG torsion by subtraction, not duality.</ref> | ||
# It is prone to spelling confusion. People commonly refer to temperaments with contorsion as "contorted". But contorted is the adjective form of a different word, contortion, with a t, not an s. The proper adjective form of contorsion would be contorsioned. It also exerts confusion back on usages of "torsion"; would you use "torted" instead of torsioned? Or would people prefer "torsional" and "contorsional", even though that suggests only of or pertaining to in general rather than having the effect applied.<ref>If it was meant to most strongly evoke duality with torsion, it should have been spelled "cotorsion". Naming it "contorsion" is an annoying step toward "contortion" but stopping halfway there. But this isn't a strong point, because duality with torsion was the false assumption mentioned above.</ref> | # It is prone to spelling confusion. People commonly refer to temperaments with contorsion as "contorted". But contorted is the adjective form of a different word, contortion, with a t, not an s. The proper adjective form of contorsion would be contorsioned. It also exerts confusion back on usages of "torsion"; would you use "torted" instead of torsioned? Or would people prefer "torsional" and "contorsional", even though that suggests only of or pertaining to in general rather than having the effect applied.<ref>If it was meant to most strongly evoke duality with torsion, it should have been spelled "cotorsion". Naming it "contorsion" is an annoying step toward "contortion" but stopping halfway there. But this isn't a strong point, because duality with torsion was the false assumption mentioned above.</ref> | ||