Talk:Ainismic chords

From Xenharmonic Wiki
Revision as of 12:10, 30 December 2020 by Xenwolf (talk | contribs) (Structure: re)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Questions

Shouldn't it be 1-13/11-17/12 which has steps 13/11-6/5-24/17, and shouldn't 1-6/5-17/12 which has steps 6/5-13/11-24/17? I'm asking because tempering out the ainos comma equates 17/12 with 78/55, 17/9 with 104/55, and 26/17 with 55/36, and, judging from the others on the list, the last steps should basically close the chord at the octave. Sorry, I had this wrong in earlier versions of this comment --Aura (talk) 17:04, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Yeah I made a mistake. There are even more triads btw. FloraC (talk) 17:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Like what? Unfortunately, I'm not sure what method to use to find these other triads. --Aura (talk) 17:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Something involving 17/13. I don't either use a systematic method. FloraC (talk) 18:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Structure

From my perspective this article is unreadable. Maybe text is the wrong tool to express its intention? --Xenwolf (talk) 20:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I wasn't sure how to style an article like this, and so I figured that I'd mimic the structure of some of the other articles on specific essentially tempered chord types. Apparently that didn't work to well. --Aura (talk) 23:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
It's much better now with a list. Maybe also the repeating parts could be cut. I also tried to build a table from it which turned out to be not as good as I expected. Maybe there is a better way of presenting chords and steps but I have to admit that this is not easy in wikitext. --Xenwolf (talk) 12:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Essentially Tempered Chords

I have to admit that the definition of "Essentially Tempered Chords" kind of flew over my head when I read it the first time. --Aura (talk) 05:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I tried reading again, and it still flies over my head. --Aura (talk) 06:01, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

It's confusingly written. Anyway, the problem of your addition was that you didn't notice the notion is based on odd limits (not prime limits), so intervals like 44/39 is not considered "17-limit". FloraC (talk) 06:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)