Talk:Arithmetic tuning
Proposed changes
First, I propose freeing the word arithmetic in the sense of arithmetic-like, and thereby changing:
- Arithmetic tuning to arithmetic-like tuning;
- AFS to EFS (equal frequency sequence), and alternatively as I much prefer, arithmetic sequence, in which case arithmetic means equal frequency;
- ALS to ELS (equal length sequence), and alternatively as I much prefer, inverse-arithmetic sequence, in which case inverse-arithmetic means equal length.
I don't see a reason why AFS and ALS shouldn't follow the naming convention of EFD and ELD.
Second, I don't believe most of these concepts need "specifications", or at least their use should be discouraged due to the lack of orthogonality. Iow one specification is often encompassed by another, and specifying a tuning system in these ways can be confusing.
For example, AS25/24 is equivalent to 1ed25/24. It's good to keep these concepts and good to know 1ed25/24 is an equal multiplication or ambitonal sequence (in fact they can be defined as 1ed-p), but 1ed25/24 should be its standard identifier.
Similarly, otonal division holds well as a concept, but n-od-p isn't a great way to specify it. It should be specified as n-efd-p i.e. n-ad-p (and mode 12 since that's a distinct naming system). Consider also we've agreed that EFD is now intended to be a generic term and not reserved for irrational tunings.
FloraC (talk) 12:12, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- The reason why "AFS" is used instead of "EFS" is because an arithmetic sequence is an established mathematical concept with a logical name, whereas the name "equal sequence" is neither logical nor established. I have edited the article to clarify this.
- For an individual, standardization to something such as exclusively using EDs may be fine, but Paul, Billy, and I designed this system to work for the wider community, a collection of individuals with diverse wants and needs, and I think it's clear that for some people in some circumstances, conceptualizing tunings as sequences will be more intuitive or appropriate.
- EFD was never "reserved" for irrational. It should support either irrational or rational. If that’s not clear in an article, please feel free to correct it or point it out to me. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 16:34, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well, that again narrows down to how we use the term arithmetic. Just as I expected, there are geometric progression and harmonic progression besides arithmetic progression aka sequence. I don't find it very cool to only take arithmetic progression without also taking geometric progression – adapted as equal here, and harmonic progression – adapted as inverse-arithmetic here.
- I guess you have a fair point at least for an alias of those unity divisions. But still, I believe identifiers like "12odo" should be discouraged due to lack of orthogonality. It's either 12ado aka 12efdo or mode 12.