Talk:Complexity

Article should be changed to a disambiguation list

This article begins by defining complexity as a property of temperaments, based on generator counts required to reach intervals. Then it generalizes this generator-count type of measurement to intervals and chords. But then it provides a list of other complexity measures, some of which are for arbitrary pitch class sets, and some which are not based on generator counts. It doesn't even list various norms and heights that are frequently referred to as complexities as well, per their general mathematical names.

My suggestion is that it's not appropriate for the article on "complexity" to give one of many measurements of temperaments as the primary definition for xenharmonics. It's clear that there are many different objects in xenharmonics whose complexities are measured, and in many different ways. Each definition of complexity should be given a specific name and be linked out to from this hub page. I suppose the complexities should be grouped, either by object type (temperament, chord, interval, pitch class set) or some other characteristic.

But of course I think we should discuss before any action is taken. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 00:32, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Interestingly, I don't think of all these complexities as different senses of the concept itself, but the same concept applied to different subjects. That was the guiding idea to which I reworked the intro. FloraC (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I think your rework is great. Thanks for that, Flora. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 19:38, 31 December 2022 (UTC)