User talk:Xenwolf

Please help me and you by using the [+New topic] function for new topics.
New topics, placed at the end, will be answered earlier than inserted ones or "sub-questions".
Yes: it's a very basic letter system. But it works.
Thanks for understanding.

MonoBook issue

When in the MonoBook skin, the Search bar is down, so it requires scrolling. PiotrGrochowski (talk) 11:47, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I suggest not to use a user-defined skin. After Wikipedia switched to Vector, MonoBook seems to be no longer maintained by the MediaWiki team. Maybe you can still use MonoBook and change the search bar position via user-defined CSS and/or user-defined JavaScript, but I'm currently not able to help you with this issue. --Xenwolf (talk) 13:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

That's in Special:Preferences by the way. PiotrGrochowski (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

A nice advantage of MediaWiki is that broken links are immediately visible, which is helpful in pages like EDO#100...199. PiotrGrochowski (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely. I even more like the MediaWiki tables, look here for a little table demo :) --Xenwolf (talk) 14:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Why is there a site named dev.xen.wiki that copies the xenharmonic articles and uses Timeless as the default skin? What's the point of that site? PiotrGrochowski (talk) 13:10, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

It's a test page as it seems, there was a poll on Facebook which skin to prefer, it's still open, but a majority for Default (=Vector) is on the horizon. --Xenwolf (talk) 14:28, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Why did you ban me?!

Allowing any list model is the exact opposite of a personal opinion! You are so ironic! PiotrGrochowski (talk) 07:04, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Nobody disallows your opinion. But it's extremely disturbing that you tell people working on this wikis for years that they are childish if they use the simplest thing possible to write lists. Maybe it's a misconception to think that MediaWiki is about coding, it's about writing and communication. Did you read the help pages in Wikipedia or MediaWiki? What do you think about their expertise? They start with simple lists, later they explain HTML-like features, but they try to keep the wiki text as readable as possible and usable in diffs. Most (if not all lists we used in this wiki were simple enough for basic lists). Show me the actual problem that can be solved via template:list that cannot be solved via * and #. I mean: find an existing one, not construct one. I see a problem in very long lines containing a lot of </li><li> markup: they are not easy to change and they have a lower signal-to-noise ratio. And this can be solved by basic lists.
And as to answer your initial question: You try to invent Conventions for the wiki with a lot of effort and when I tried to correct you about this, you show how fast you can revert my justified changes and tell me that I'm vandalizing the wiki? I have not enough time to play this I'm better than you game. I have the feeling that you don't read carefully what other people write.
Best regards --Xenwolf (talk) 13:19, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

It's true that you are worse than me. You are the one trying to push a personal opinion. All list models are equally acceptable and a specific one should not be taught in en:Help:Wiki help, no matter what advantages it might have. PiotrGrochowski (talk) 14:42, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I suggest to set up an own page "Help:Links" or "Help:Link" to contain the options <ul><li></li></ul> and <ol><li></li></ol> as well as your list template(s), provided that they are introduced with realistic use cases not as "just another opinion". Pages with style A ("my pages") and pages with style B ("your pages") without good reason will cause endless future wars, won't it? As for your claim that preferring * and # would show a "personal opinion": you remember your "unofficial poll"? I hope this helps you understand why a help page should start to teach the simplest way first. And when you claim "All list models are equally acceptable", this is wrong. A list template will have limits, and <br/> doesn't build a valid list, right? The HTML list tags are acceptable if they are well structured even in the source code since basically everyone should be able to edit the wiki not only those who are coding in HTML. Best regards --Xenwolf (talk) 15:37, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Realistic use cases don't matter. Every single list model is subjectively best, so it's very wrong to include only one in en:Help:Wiki help. And all list models really are equally acceptable; it's racist to say that a plaintext or defined list model results in an invalid list. And the convention that an edit consisting only of a list model change should not be done is supposed to prevent the edit war bug. PiotrGrochowski (talk) 16:11, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Maybe en:Help:Wiki help#Lists should soft redirect to en:List model, like dev:Help:Wiki help#Lists does? Whatever the final solution may be, it definitely must show all list models as possibilities that users may use, with no subjective recommendation or anything. The objective advantages and disadvantages are too specific to be shown in the xen.wiki school, and they can always be found out by users later on, so it's best to state all list models neutrally. Can't believe you are complaining while doing worse in en:Help:Wiki help. PiotrGrochowski (talk) 05:17, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

11-limit Intervals

Hello there, I see that the intervals 55/32 and 64/55 are not present in the chart on the Gallery of Just Intervals page, and I have no idea how to add them as I don't know how to add cells to the chart. As I told Mike Battaglia in a recent email, I've found both 55/32 and 64/55 extremely useful in 11-limit music as they help harmonically bridge the 16/11 fifth. They are made even more useful by the fact that they differ from septimal intervals such as 12/7 and 7/6 by only a Keenanisma. Accordingly, I use them in a 44:55:64 overtonal triads built on the octave-reduced eleventh harmonic of the tonic as a predominant chord, and this is one of the two best 11-limit chords to use for such a purpose as it is clearly distinct from a diminished chord. While this chord is strange-sounding, it can help to evoke a sense of both the strange and wonderful, particularly if followed up by a traditional dominant seventh built on the third harmonic of the tonic. Possible set-ups I've found so far include a 4:5:6 major triad built on the octave-reduced third harmonic, a 10:12:15 minor triad built on the octave-reduced fifth harmonic, a 27:32:40 minor third built on the octave-reduced twenty-seventh harmonic, and of course, the tonic triad itself. --Aura (talk) 12:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Excuse me for the second message, and sorry if your user talk page isn't the right place for having this discussion, but I just found 64/55 on the list on the Gallery of Just Intervals page. However, 55/32 is still missing though, and I still don't know how to add it. --Aura (talk) 12:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I tried to add some of the information (to 55/32, 64/55, Gallery of just intervals).

BTW: Welcome on board, Aura 🙂

--Xenwolf (talk) 16:48, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I took the time to complete the first sentence of information on 55/32, and I added information to 64/55 about the triad formed with a 5/4 major third and a 64/55 keenanismic subminor third. I hope you can test this triad out for yourself. --Aura (talk) 20:01, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Links on my User Page

Hey, I just created an EDO impressions page- with the link at the bottom of my user page. However, the links on my user page need work in general, and I'm not sure how to go about fixing them, let alone getting my work seen on the Table of EDO impressions... Could you spare a moment and help me out? Thanks! --Aura (talk) 00:56, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

I tried my best. The links are relatively easy to understand. First remember square brackets (double for internal, single for external links). Internal links are automatically built from page titles (the case of the very first character is ignored). External links always start with http(s), the URL part stops at the first space, what follows (before the closing bracket) is taken as display text. Read the whole story under Help:Links. Have a nice day 🙂 --Xenwolf (talk) 08:36, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a ton! Hopefully all I have to do now is study what you did this... --Aura (talk) 14:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Diatonic Functions of Xenharmonic Intervals

Okay, so one thing I'm interested in is covering the diatonic functions of notes at various intervals' distance away from the tonic- you know, for microtonal composers who still want to work with tonality- I honestly think pages like 3/2 and 4/3 could benefit from having information on things like this. On another note, do we have information on the thirty-five 12edo proper modes? Pages documenting these modes would serve to gather variations and alternative tunings for these scales and modes into one place. For the record, I know that in my own microtonal composing, I tend not to go very far from my 12edo roots for reasons detaild in A recovering microtonalist's critical reaction to Why Microtonality, yet, I also can't help but agree with Mike S in his comments in Microtonalists critical reaction to a recovering microtonalists critical reaction to Why Microtonaltiy? on 7-limit and 11-limit being important- in fact, I would add the 13-limit to his list. --Aura (talk) 16:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

First, I guess that I'm not the right person to ask about diatonic functions of notes. Second, as far as I know there are no pages about the 35 12edo modes, but it could as well be that I only missed it/them. Third, I didn't compose anything yet. Currently I mostly help others to put information into the wiki ... I really like listening xen music of any kind, I also like "meditating" on intervals, that's why I uploaded several sound examples, especially those in prime limits above 5. But I also know that timbre is very important. BTW: today I discovered that 11/7 has a very convincing sound. --Xenwolf (talk) 19:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, to be fair, you are one of the people who runs this wiki- at least to my knowledge- so you're one of the first people I can think of to ask about even the possibility of adding information to the wiki about the diatonic functions of notes at various intervals away from the tonic- just as a guide to help microtonal composers. Truth be told, I think Mike Battaglia could also be of help in deciding and working on the matter as he's got experience with jazz, but still, it's just as well that I approached you about this because I don't want to put stuff on this wiki if it doesn't belong here. As to whether or not there are pages on the 35 modes of 12edo that are "proper" in the sense mentioned on the Periodic scale page, I did find a page about what a Mode is. The reason I brought all this up in the first place is because I've found that in tunings closer to JI, the conventional Ionian, Dorian, Phrygian, Lydian, Mixolydian and Aeolian scales are not simply modes of the same diatonic scale, but rather, differing diatonic scales in their own right on account of using different tunings of their notes relative to one another for the purposes of establishing tonality. Locrian however proves to be an exception to this as according to my calculations, it is still a mode of the Lydian scale if you don't use 77/64 as the minor third above the tonic- I know I myself prefer to use 77/64 as the minor third above the tonic for Locrian as well as for minor scales in general so there's that. --Aura (talk) 00:40, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

If you wish to add information - including new pages - to the wiki, you are welcome. I'm very interested in learning about your perspective on modes. And should it still happen that you add duplicate information, others will point it out to us.--Xenwolf (talk) 12:06, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay, so I've added the page on my diatonic scales, however, it needs a table of contents due to its size... --Aura (talk) 22:12, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Continuation to the latter on User talk:Aura/Aura's Diatonic Scales. --Xenwolf (talk) 09:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Unnoticeable Comma

Okay, so I've recently found an unnoticeable comma- 117440512/117406179- that is only slightly more than half a cent in size. It is the difference between five 33/32 quartertones and a 7/6 subminor third, as well as the difference between six 33/32 quartertones and a 77/64 minor third... I've only seen it mentioned once on this wiki aside from on talk pages- specifically on the page for 3125edo- and I've also been told that it doesn't have a name... Since this unnoticeable comma involves 11-limit quartertones, can we call it the "Quartisma"? If so, then when this comma is tempered out, then can we can call the resulting temperaments "Quartismatic"? --Aura (talk) 22:12, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I have to ask about the name for the temperaments that temper out this comma because as I mentioned to Inthar on Sam's talk page, the comma's proposed name "Quartisma" comes from "Quarter" and "Schisma" on account of the comma both involving stacks of quartertones and being extremely small itself, and, the name for temperaments that temper out the Schisma is "Schismatic". --Aura (talk) 23:08, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Never mind about the name for the temperaments now... I think we've settled on the name "Quartismic" for the temperament name. However, now I'm curious... I know that 159edo is the first EDO divisible by 53 to temper out the "Quartisma", however, I also see that 24edo tempers out this interval as well... So that leaves me with questions as to which EDOs temper out the "Quartisma" and which ones don't... --Aura (talk) 00:50, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Since you're tempering out a comma in a rank-4 JI subgroup (2.3.7.11), you'll have to find 3 linearly independent (non-contorted) edos (not necessarily using their patent vals) that temper out the comma. None of the other relatively simple edos I can think of (17edo, 26edo, 34edo) do it, though. IlL (talk) 03:00, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Apparently 46edo (using the patent val) does! So the edos that are quartismic are all edos of the form 24A + 46B + 159C, where A, B, C are integers (but the resulting edo might not be a patent val). IlL (talk) 03:04, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I do know that the page for 3125edo makes mention of the Quartisma by way of it's ratio- 117440512/117406179. However, it's not totally clear from the text on that page whether 3125 actually tempers out the Quartisma or not. --Aura (talk) 03:18, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I believe it does. (It's saying that all the 11 limit commas tempered out by 3125 can be found by taking linear combinations of the commas given.) IlL (talk) 03:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

So that's four different EDOs that temper out the quartisma, and none of these EDOs seem to have the exact same prime factorizations- though 46edo and 24edo do share a prime factor in 2... --Aura (talk) 03:49, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I have to admit that I don't know all the necessary math for this, it is the patent vals for the intervals 33/32, 7/6 and 77/64 in 24edo and 159edo that make me suspect that these EDOs temper out the quartisma in the first place. It would be nice to confirm these findings with the more rigorous math- however, I'm not in a position to do this as I don't know the right equations and stuff, and chances are that I wouldn't even know the meanings of some of the symbols involved... --Aura (talk) 04:01, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

3125 = 17*159 + 5*46 + 8*24 so we're ok unless it's a non-patent val of 3125 or something. [It's not about the prime factorization of the edo number, it's about whether the edo is a sum of some number of the edos 24, 46 and 159 or not.] IlL (talk) 04:17, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay then... With this knowledge in hand, let's see if we can find other quartismic EDOs... Chances are high that any additional EDOs we find are bound to have ridiculously small step sizes though... --Aura (talk) 04:27, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh and before we continue, let's take this to your own talk page, shall we, Inthar?

Sorry about blowing up your talk page Xenwolf... --Aura (talk) 04:34, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Have you been following the ongoing discussion on how I've dubbed 117440512/117406179 the "quartisma" and on what EDOs temper it out? I bring this up because when we gather enough data, I'm thinking we should add pages about both the quartisma and the temperaments that result from it being tempered out. That and I hope other people in the microtonal community like the name I've picked... --Aura (talk) 00:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I, personally, am not a big friend of the name "Quartisma". Is it really obvious that it comes from "Quarter tone" and "Schisma"? But I do not want to stop you here in any way. Good luck! 🙂 --Xenwolf (talk) 06:53, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, to be frank, even if it isn't obvious, the term "quart" itself often means "quarter"- even if "quart" is dated or even obsolete, see this Wiktionary entry. Besides, "quartertonisma" strikes me as being a bit too long and awkward... --Aura (talk) 12:32, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hey Xenwolf, I see you're doing work on microtemperaments right about now. For the record the quartisma is about 0.50619 cents in size, and so tempering it out results in a microtemperament. I figured I'd bring this up while you're at it. --Aura (talk) 17:10, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Aura, I'm only formally working on redirects and categories (gardening/housekeeping stuff). if you feel that something should be linked or categorized, don't hesitate to do it yourself! (to be honest I'm not an expert in (micro)temperament terminology).

Best regards --Xenwolf (talk) 17:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Tridecimal Neutral Intervals

I don't know about you, but something tells me we need additional names for 39/32 and 64/39 that reference how they are tridecimal neutral intervals. I know that I personally would prefer to call 39/32 the "Tridecimal Narrow Neutral Third" while calling 16/13 the "Tridecimal Wide Neutral Third". Similarly, I would call 13/8 the "Tridecimal Narrow Neutral Sixth" while calling 64/39 the "Tridecimal Wide Neutral Sixth". --Aura (talk) 00:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I have nothing against the names you suggest. In the opposite: I'm a bit lost with finding the right name. Please change the pages at your own free discretion. --Xenwolf (talk) 06:43, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I suggest small tridecimal neutral third and (large/greater) tridecimal neutral third. FloraC (talk) 07:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay then. --Aura (talk) 12:20, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Linking Info on Articles to Relevant Comments on Talk Pages

Hello Xenwolf, I just recently modified the page on 3125edo to reflect how it is so far the only EDO known to have been confirmed as tempering out the quartisma prior to me finding out that comma's significance. I can see from the page's history at its current site address that the info on 3125edo tempering out the quartisma has been known at least since 2015 when it was imported here by Gene Ward Smith- or by someone else with the username "genewardsmith" on Wikispaces. However, I certainly can't forget the day I discovered the quartisma's significance, and thus, since the earliest comments about the quartisma's significance on this Wiki are dated September 6th, 2020, I'd like to see this confirmed by means of a link to the relevant discussions on Sam's talkpage and your talkpage. --Aura (talk) 02:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

If you link to talks, it could help to add the permanent link as well (see this example). --Xenwolf (talk) 05:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay, here's a link to the other relevant comment... I hope this helps...

Cantonisma

Hey, I just checked the calculations with wolfram alpha, and it turns out that 159edo tempers out the cantonisma- the unnoticeable comma which is the difference between three 14/13 trienthirds and one 5/4 major third. I'm wondering if there should be a page on the cantonisma and those temperaments that temper it out... --Aura (talk) 15:18, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Why not? --Xenwolf (talk) 21:16, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Classifying Prime Limits by Diatonic Function

I have an idea as to how to classify primes based on their functions relative to the tonic, but I don't know if I should modify the harmonic limit page for this or not. I know I would classify the 2-limit as being the "Pitch Class Prime" in light of how pitches related to the tonic by powers of two naturally seem to our hearing to be the same as the tonic in ways that other primes don't. I would classify the 3-limit and the 5-limit as the "Diatonic Primes" for their key functions in just diatonic and just chromatic music. I would classify the 7-limit, 11-limit and 13-limit as the "Paradiatonic Primes because of their relative ease of use as accidentals in otherwise diatonic keys, and, due to the fact that these relatively low primes can create intervals that can be readily used as alongside diatonic intervals or even as substitutions for them. I'd go on to classify the 17-limit and 19-limit as "Quasidiatonic Primes" owing to the most basic intervals in these families having striking similarities to diatonic intervals, but with greater complexity. I'd then go on to label the 23-limit, the 29-limit, and 31-limit the "Pseudodiatonic Primes" because even though these primes are not diatonic by any stretch, they can still serve as substitutes for the paradiatonic primes in a pinch. Does all this sound like a good idea to you? --Aura (talk) 19:17, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

I think the harmonic limit page is a good place for your classification concept (maybe as a section?), but I must say that the classifications (especially the distinction between Quasi and Pseudo) after Paradiatonic look a bit strange (or artificial/sophisticated) to me. In general, I don't believe in such a high precision of the human ear. --Xenwolf (talk) 19:31, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

The distincton between "Quasidiatonic Primes" and "Pseudodiatonic Primes" boils down to the fact that the base 17-limit and 19-limit intervals closely resemble diatonic intervals, whereas this is not the case for the 23-limit, 29-limit, and 31-limit. This has the effect of determining how well the related ratios tend to blend in with diatonic harmonies. --Aura (talk) 19:42, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, I'm not the one who will draw red lines here. Please add you ideas freely! --Xenwolf (talk) 19:46, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay Xenwolf, I've posted my ideas of consonance, feel free to check this stuff out. --Aura (talk) 05:15, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Spitting "Quartimic Temperaments" into multiple pages

Hey! Given what you are doing, I think it would be best if we split the page "Quartimic Temperaments" into "Quartisma" and "Quartismic Family". The page "Quartisma" would be the page containing the information on the quartisma itself, while the page "Quartismic Family" could contain the information on the various quartismic temperaments. With this in mind, the page "Quartisma" would read as follows:

The quartisma or Saquinlu-azo comma is a comma with a ratio of 117440512/117406179 and a monzo of [24 -6 0 1 -5⟩. It is an unnoticeable comma of the 11-limit- specifically one of the the 2.9.7.11 subgroup- with a value of approximately 0.50619 cents. The quartisma is significant on account of it being the difference between a stack of five 33/32 quartertones and one 7/6 subminor third in Just Intonation. The quartismic temperament or Saquinlu-azo temperament is the temperament that tempers out this comma, for the list of such temperaments, see Quartismic family.

Of course, while we're in the process of splitting things up, we need to keep the old "Quartimic Temperaments". Once all the data has been retrieved- including the data from the talk pages- then we can delete the old "Quartimic Temperaments" page.

I'd appreciate some help with this. --Aura (talk) 13:39, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Looks good so far. Would it be okay to just rename the Quartismic temperaments article into Quartismic family? --Xenwolf (talk) 13:48, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Actually, yes, but I don't know how to do that... --Aura (talk) 13:55, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Done. (Renaming requires organizer rights which you haven't.) --Xenwolf (talk) 13:57, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Quartismic family seems to have a good start now. --Xenwolf (talk) 14:22, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
PS: I'll be a bit AFK for now.

Neapolitan Augmented Sixth

Hey, Xenwolf, I know I gave 225/128 the name "Neapolitan Augmented Sixth" on this wiki on the assumption that there were other people who have also referred to this interval by that same name- even if there's only a handful, as the two Neapolitan scales don't seem to be all that well known by musicians at large. However, I can't help but wonder if I inadvertently coined my own name for 225/128, because I don't personally know of any other people besides me who refer to it by the name "Neapolitan Augmented Sixth". All I know for sure is that the Just Semitone has a ratio of 16/15, and that in any Neapolitan scale, there's an area where two semitones occur consecutively, adding up to a diminished third- the octave complement of this is an augmented sixth. So it stands to reason- at least from what I know- that in any 5-limit just Neapolitan scale, there's an area where two 16/15 semitones occur consecutively, adding up to a 256/225 diminished third, and the octave complement of this is a 225/128 augmented sixth... I just want to know for sure that I'm doing this right and not spreading misinformation... --Aura (talk) 19:35, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't know if you are right. Let's see if another one knows better ... --Xenwolf (talk) 19:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I should point out that if my assumption about the "Neapolitan Augmented Sixth" is correct, however, it might help explain why people say 7/4 is also an augmented sixth, as 7/4 is smaller than 225/128, and the two are equated in marvel temperaments- even though this sort of thing seems to bother Flora. --Aura (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I see no problem with intervals serving two (or more) different functions. This is common in 12edo, the intervals (on interval pages) are not bound to any temperament or ET. --Xenwolf (talk) 19:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Right then. I guess the secondary name "Neapolitan Augmented Sixth" for 225/128 stays. However, I should also point out that it seems that notes in the region roughly between 256/255 and 7/6 and in the region roughly between 12/7 and 225/128 are the most susceptible to having multiple functions even within the same system. If so, then I guess it's a good thing I labeled the paradiatonic functions of these regions "Varicant" and "Contravaricant", as "Varicant" means "straddling". For the record, if you want to know which region I've labeled what, well, all you have to do is look at the scale's direction of construction, as when you start from the Tonic and travel in this direction, the "Contravaricant" region is the one that's encountered first, with the "Varicant" region being its counterpart. --Aura (talk) 19:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

The (contra)varicant naming seems helpful. Have you maybe an image at hand for it, so your "all you have to do is look" would fit better. I'm really not great at finding/building scales. --Xenwolf (talk) 20:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I'll be able to do this better once my theory on treble-down tonality and my terminology on these two pages become more firmly established, as this sort of theory is largely unique to me at this point. --Aura (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Do also bear in mind that I'm having to make sure to pick the optimal boundaries for some of the different diatonic and paradiatonic regions at the moment. --Aura (talk) 20:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Diatonic and Paradiatonic Function Map

Hey Xenwolf, remember when you asked for an image for the locations of different diatonic and paradiatonic regions? Well, here it is...

I hope you find this helpful... Do bear in mind that this is a preliminary version... --Aura (talk) 18:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the image. --Xenwolf (talk) 08:18, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

What do you plan on doing with the image? --Aura (talk) 09:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh, and you're welcome... --Aura (talk) 09:03, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

It's interesting to see the regions (zones) and their names and the borders. Concerning the relation to known concepts, it could as well include the positions of some just intervals such as 5/4 or 7/4 (even if they don't represent zones or zone borders). And, well, the legend is a bit confusing (Where is up and down?). Wouldn't it be less confusing to use ratios below 1.0 for undertones (such as 1/2 .. 2/3 .. 3/4 .. 1/1 .. 4/3 .. 3/2 .. 2/1)? And, sorry for so much criticism, could you increase the resolution a bit? --Xenwolf (talk) 10:03, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I could definitely make a larger chart and show the positions of some of the more well-known intervals. However, I need a good way to really show how Bass-Up contrasts with Treble-Down in terms of structure. The starting point is in the center of the chart as 1/1 is guaranteed to be your initial Tonic- as is 2/1- though I suppose it wouldn't hurt to make that clearer. The reason I used ratios above 1/1 for all intervals regardless of direction is to show distance from the Tonic in the center- I mean, the Dominant really is characterized by being situated at 3/2 away from the Tonic in the direction of construction. --Aura (talk) 10:22, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I didn't know that the site wouldn't let me replace the older file with a new version... Let me try and post the newest version for real this time... --Aura (talk) 01:12, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Very interesting graph. Thanks for sharing. --Xenwolf (talk) 19:50, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, can you make more sense of this graph than you could the earlier version? --Aura (talk) 19:55, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Names and functions of 45/44, 55/54 and 33/32

Hey Xenwolf, I see in your recent creation of the 242/225 article that you said that 45/44 felt like an undecimal chroma to you. You're not the first to say something to that effect, as I myself have called 45/44 the "greater undecimal parachroma" and 55/54 the "lesser undecimal parachroma". That said, since we've also decided that 33/32 is somewhat similar in the sense of having chroma-like properties, and since a "parachroma" is an interval with properties akin to a chroma, only involving primes 7, 11, and thirteen, I think we need to give 33/32 a name that both reflects its parachromatic nature and sets it apart from both 45/44 and 55/54. Do you have any ideas? --Aura (talk) 19:44, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Just for the record, the only name I can currently think of for 33/32 is the "undecimal parachromatic quartertone". This name contrasts with other more complicated undecimal intervals in the area such as 512/495, which could perhaps be called the "undecimal paradiatonic quartertone"... --Aura (talk) 19:50, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

I have to admit that this observation is very new to me. I'm not even sure if I didn't mix things up. I need more time for this. BTW: I like the varicant/contravarivant regions of your graph. --Xenwolf (talk) 19:56, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Trust me, you're right about 45/44. I know because I've attempted to use it before in my own compositions. Oh, and thanks for your comments on the graph! --Aura (talk) 19:58, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

If you're worried about whether or not you can use 45/44 in melodies, well, I can assure you from experience that you can use even 64/63 in melodies, and that's even smaller than 45/44. I'd only really be concerned on this front if the interval was smaller than 25 cents. --Aura (talk) 20:03, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Names for New Third and Sixth

Xenwolf, there's already both a tridecimal minor third in 13/11 and a tridecimal major sixth in 22/13... We need to come up with some better names... --Aura (talk) 20:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I see that this new minor third and new major sixth differ from the old ones by 693/676... Perhaps the new minor third and new major sixth should be named for this comma... That is, once we give it a name... --Aura (talk) 20:15, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

As to solve this issue, any suggestion is welcome. I already looked into the gallery of just intervals and saw the name clashes I caused. --Xenwolf (talk) 20:19, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

BTW: it can also be that these pages seem useless to you. I must honestly admit that sometimes I simply let myself be driven by curiosity for unusual sounds. --Xenwolf (talk) 20:21, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

No problem...

Hmm... I have to admit we need a good name for the 693/676 comma... Wait- this is no comma... it has a value of about 42.9985270 cents! --Aura (talk) 20:36, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, calling 693/676 a "comma" is a bad idea... I mean, the idea of 33/32 being called a "comma" already bugs me considering it's a very useful quartertone, not something we want to try and temper out- unless of course we're talking about EDOs like 12edo or something... --Aura (talk) 20:41, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Being a comma is not a death sentence for an interval ;) As I learned, we have these ranges: 0 .. 3.5 cents for unnoticeable, 3.5 .. 30 cents for "comma", 30 .. 100 cents for medium comma, and 100 cents and above for large commas. Especially the "commacity" is another dimension. I'd say even the Tone 9/8 is some kind of comma. I think that the higher the limit the more intervals fight for being the representative of that limit, the classic diatonic nomenclature (minor/major) helps a bit but this is also limited. --Xenwolf (talk) 21:02, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

At the same time, however, only intervals above 25 cents can be reasonably used as melodic intervals, and, the way I see it, commas in the purest sense can't really do that well. Yes, I'm aware that there are limitations to the classic diatonic nomenclature, however, said nomenclature is still needed, even if we must incorporate it into a larger system. --Aura (talk) 02:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

For now, what about "submajor" and "supraminor" for 26/21 and 63/52? Since there is septendecimal submajor third 21/17 and septendecimal supraminor third 17/14. FloraC (talk) 02:34, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Hmm... I think that might work, but I can't speak for Xenwolf on this... --Aura (talk) 02:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, I changed the names of 26/21, 63/52, 104/63, and 21/13 accordingly. --Xenwolf (talk) 05:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

MOS scales of various EDOs

Hey, Xenwolf, since 159edo now has its own category, should we add 79MOS 159edo to said category? To be fair, I'm also proposing that we link 31edo MOS scales under Category:31edo in the same way, and that we do the same for other edos and their MOS scales. --Aura (talk) 18:18, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

This absolutely makes sense. Just don't be afraid to categorize pages! Categorizing is by no means reserved for organizers only, on the contrary: if you discover that a category is missing or too much, think about how it could be changed and express suggestions for improvement actively (by making appropriate changes). --Xenwolf (talk) 18:26, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

PS: (already changed in your comment): Linking categories is of course possible. It's done by placing a colon just after the opening bracket pair, like this [[:Category:31edo]]. --Xenwolf (talk) 18:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Notation for 159edo

Excuse me, Xenwolf, I've been waiting for a response from Mike Battaglia on this, but he seems to be busy or something... I'd like to hear what y'all think of this proposed system for notation in 159edo- admittedly the drawing is a bit crude, but all the same, I'd like to know if this combination of mainstream quartertone accidentals, Helmholz notation, and Ups and Downs notation is any good...

You should notice right away that I'm combining simple accidentals to create composite accidentals- at least this way there aren't so many simple accidentals to memorize, and you won't loose track of all the iterations of the Ups and Downs accidentals... Any thoughts? --Aura (talk) 18:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

It's hard for me to value this: I have little experiences with high-order EDOs (well, I already know that 53edo (=159/3) has good approximations of 5-limit ratios). In the image, it's unclear to me where I am at a given tick. However, The idea of combining accidentals seems good to me, provided the (de)composition rules are simple and unambiguous. What about the "grammar" of this system: what kind of music (scales etc.) is this notation supposed to support? --Xenwolf (talk) 19:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, how should I make it easier for you to keep track of where you are at any given tick?

As for what this is supposed to support, I'm looking to support things like different varieties of near-just diatonic scales, as well as near-just harmonic major scales, near-just harmonic minor scales, near-just melodic minor scales, and near-just neapolitan scales. I'm also thinking of supporting of at least two proper 7-limit heptatonic scales with modes and derivatives using supermajor and subminor triads, and I'm also looking to support basic 11-limit music. Basically, I'm trying to make high-order edos like 159edo more accessible to composers with a background in 12edo and 24edo. Still, it's clear that this system needs some work. --Aura (talk) 21:03, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

It seems to me that you are searching for a basis (or superset) of actual tonal systems. Do you know 205edo, which builds the basis of the Hunt System? Maybe the theory webpages of the author could be of help for you. About the ticks: you maybe show only the set of accidentals - I searched for the 159 relation in that graph. So the tick distance seem to be 1\159, right? --Xenwolf (talk) 08:52, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

The tick distance on that chart is indeed 1\159, and the distance between the larger ticks is one whole tone of 9/8. I feel it's necessary to show the ticks on some level to show how the accidentals relate to one another. That said, I wouldn't mind removing the composite accidentals and only showing the simple accidentals on the chart. That said, the Helmholz arrows indicating the raising or lowering by a syntonic comma seem to need a host accidental in order to even appear to begin with, and the only thing new about their appearance in this chart is that they can now be bound to mainstream quartertone accidentals. --Aura (talk) 10:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

There is another issue with the graphics that I should have pointed out a long time ago, I'm sorry it's only now: it's the resolution again: the symbols are to small. I'm trying to make a SVG image myself of it (right now installing font QMuML9.ttf that should contain quarter tone accidentals...) --Xenwolf (talk) 10:29, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, the thing is that I'm not exactly the best one to ask for high-resolution images without large image size seeing as I'm stuck with MS paint for creating images in the first place... --Aura (talk) 10:33, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Did I mention that chances are high that one might have difficulty combining the Helmholz syntonic comma arrows with the quartertone accidentals using existing fonts? I mean, the idea of combining these two things together seems fairly new, as Helmholz notation itself has a different symbols for 11-limit demisharps and seems to lack symbols for both 11-limit sesquisharps and sesquiflats... --Aura (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

[MS paint] I guessed that, and that's why I decided to try a version myself (SVG images, supported by the wiki software, can be created with Inkscape, but it's not as easy for beginners, I have some experiences with it). [Did I mention] The font mentioned above was a miss, as was the Unicode "Musical Symbols Block", the latter only contains one flavor for quarter-tone accidentals, so I have to pick the ones you use from Wikipedia Commons. --Xenwolf (talk) 10:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

For the record, MuseScore 3 seems to support both Helmholz notation and the quartertone accidentals I use. However, I'm again confronted with the problem of combining the Helmholtz syntonic comma arrows with the mainstream quartertone accidentals... --Aura (talk) 11:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

PS: please be a bit less agile on your questions/comments. Changing questions afterwards creates edit conflicts to the one who want's to answer (this is the 5th time I try to save my answer). --Xenwolf (talk) 10:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry about that... I must confess I feel the need to get the comments and questions down as quickly as possible before I forget about them... --Aura (talk) 11:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

I can't believe I forgot about this, but I honestly think that there are other 11-limit chromas that need to be addressed besides just 33/32, as 45/44 and 55/54 seem to also be worth taking account of. Even though I'm in favor of not only making a new version of Helmholtz/Ellis notation in which the current symbol for raising by 33/32 is replaced by the mainstream demi-sharp accidental but also putting the current Helmholtz/Ellis symbol for raising by 33/32 to use in representing one of the other 11-limit chromas instead, the fact is that I don't have the capabilities nor the permissions to do such a thing myself... --Aura (talk) 10:47, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

[...unindenting...]

I finally got the picture done, as said with Inkscape (originally in SVG format), here is a PNG preview:

It's not perfect, but hopefully better to read now. Well, a bit of legend is still missing. Are the accidentals reproduced correctly? --Xenwolf (talk) 13:28, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

I think that the sharps, flats, naturals, demisharps, demiflats, sesquisharps and sesquiflats are indeed reproduced correctly, as are the Ups-and-Downs-derived accidentals- which I'll simply call up-darts and down-darts. However, when it come to both the Helmholtz syntonic comma arrows, as wells as the Helmholtz septimal accidentals, you might find help in reproducing them by looking at the Helmholtz-Ellis notation page. On another note, I realized in looking this over that I myself botched some of the composite accidentals. Specifically, for the composite accidentals comprised of the sesquisharp and the different varieties of down-darts, as the two elements in these composite accidentals should be arranged in the same order as in the combinations of the sesquisharp and the up-darts... --Aura (talk) 16:58, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

I reworked the file (same filename, if you don't see changes, force a browser reload). The symbols are now based on the HEJI SVG we already have. I'd upload the combinations you used for your notation that are not part of HEJI (of quartertone accidentals with syntonic commas). I also started the page 159edo notation with a table that contains inline combinations of some symbols, I hope I counted correctly. --Xenwolf (talk) 12:23, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

After I made a few corrections in the table, I checked things over, and I'd definitely say you've counted correctly. --Aura (talk) 17:10, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

[...unindenting...]

Okay, so, I'm considering the idea of extending the current 159edo notation system to the 13-limit, with this being the highest prime extension due to the 13-limit being the last paradiatonic prime, and the last one that offers something new other than modulation possibilities. However, this would involve further modifying Helmholtz-Ellis notation to better accommodate trientones (one third tones) and stuff such, and I'm also considering other alterations along the same lines- for instance, reviving the original Helmholtz-Ellis 11-limit quartertone glyph and putting it to a different use relative to the 11-limit to represent a raising by 45/44, and pairing it with a new symbol to represent a lowering by 45/44. However, I need more feedback on our current 159edo system first, and so far, all I know is that I need to build on the familiar in order to create this notation system, which, if all goes well, can be integrated with an improved version of the SHEFKHED interval naming system that has been extended to 171edo... --Aura (talk) 21:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I think it is good to have a basis for discussion at all, it does not have to be perfect. --Xenwolf (talk) 21:57, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean by that? --Aura (talk) 22:00, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I picked out your more feedback on our current 159edo system because I find that it would be helpful to wait for responses from people who did not participate in the development, like Kite. I'm still not experienced with high-order EDOs. I think all these additional characters reduce the legibility of the notation in a considerable way. When I compare this with the conventional system, say for baroque music, where I casually pick up the accidentals and do not really have to decipher them, also because there is usually only one variant that makes musical sense, I get almost dizzy in our "battle of symbols". In the classic notation, accidentals are not just modifiers for single notes, but signs that indicate the change of the tonal base. I'm still searching for a parallel in alternative tonal systems. --Xenwolf (talk) 22:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

You are right in saying that in the classic notation, accidentals are not just modifiers for single notes, but signs that indicate the change of the tonal base. The classical and quartertone accidentals as found in this system actually have the same function, believe it or not- yes, this is even true of the combinations of these accidentals and the syntonic comma arrows. I mean, if Jacob Collier can seamlessly modulate from E-Natrual Major to G-Demisharp Major, I want to know the specifics of the notes he uses, and if changing keys seamlessly like that involves using different tunings for notes, I want to see the tuning changes in action- hence the need for so many accidentals. --Aura (talk) 22:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Nevertheless, we do need feedback from others who did not participate in the development, and I'm hoping that my reasoning for the sheer number of accidentals- namely my need to see tuning changes in action- makes sense to these other people as well. --Aura (talk) 23:08, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

[...unindenting...]

Hey, Xenwolf, I just realized- the rastma, 243/242, is something akin to an 11-limit version of the syntonic comma... What's more striking is that a stack of three rastmas differs from a syntonic comma by 1771561/1771470, which has a value of only about 0.08893 cents... So, perhaps 243/242 is the interval that we need to consider as a JI basis for the single step of 159edo... --Aura (talk) 07:21, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

So, based on Kite's feedback, I have several proposals for modifying the current Helmholtz-Ellis-based system- see our discussion on dart symbols. --Aura (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Xenwolf, do you have time to help me rework our Helmholtz-Ellis-based notations system? --Aura (talk) 14:10, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Hardly this time, but it depends on whether there are concrete questions to answer (easy), to discuss topics in their full breadth (hard), or to make glyphs (impossible). For me it's still unclear how your approach relates to 205edo one of Hunt. Did you have a look on it (41x5 leads to a system with a perfect 3-limit approximation and very good to fair approximations of other limits)? --Xenwolf (talk) 14:28, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay, firstly, the steps of 205edo are a bit too small, and are likely to blend into one another, whereas 159edo doesn't have that problem as the step size is greater than 7 cents. In comparing the patent vals up to the 17-limit, I can see that the approximations of the 3-limit, 7-limit and 11-limit in 159edo are superior to those of 205edo in terms of absolute error, though the reverse is true when it comes to the 5-limit, the 13-limit and the 17-limit. Considering that the 3-limit is the major diatonic navigational prime for the main key signatures, while the 11-limit is the major paradiatonic navigational prime for things like quartertone key signatures, and that both of these prime limits are significant for the many microtonalists who end up starting with 24edo on account of 24edo being perhaps one the best known microtonal systems, I'd say that 159edo's better performance in these limits is a major factor to be considered, as are the issues with 205edo's smaller stepsize. Are there any other facets of the relationship between my approach to 159edo and Hunt's approach to 205edo that you wish to know about? --Aura (talk) 16:02, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for having a look into it.

You wrote: the approximations of the 3-limit, 7-limit and 11-limit in 159edo are superior - I guess you mean p-limit intervals here? How do you measure approximation quality (I mean 9/7 is also a 7-limit interval)? I tried this calculator but was not satisfied with the idea of averaging. For me it is also still unclear which set of musical intervals can be regarded as sufficiently representative, if such an idea makes sense at all... --Xenwolf (talk) 18:59, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

For the record, that whole phrase reads: the approximations of the 3-limit, 7-limit and 11-limit in 159edo are superior to those of 205edo in terms of absolute error. Long story short, I measure the absolute errors in cents as they accumulate when tempered p-limit intervals are stacked, and the number of such intervals I can stack without the absolute error exceeding an unnoticeable comma's distance of 3.5 cents determines the quality of representation, and thus the portions of the harmonic lattice that can be sufficiently represented by any given EDO. --Aura (talk) 19:44, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

For prime limits that form the backbone of key signature navigation such as the 3-limit and the 11-limit, having a high number of tempered intervals that can be stacked without exceeding an unnoticeable comma's distance of 3.5 cents is actually pretty important. --Aura (talk) 19:52, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

In the case of 9/7, we have two prime factors to consider- the 3-limit, and the 7-limit. Now, I can already assure you that you can only use one tempered 7-limit interval max before the absolute error exceeds 3.5 cents, as after 7/4, the next interval in the 7-limit chain is 49/32, and the difference between the JI version and the 159edo-tempered version exceeds 3.5 cents, and this is also true for the 205edo-tempered version of 49/32. However, when two different EDOs have the same number of intervals of a given p-limit that can be stacked before the absolute error exceeds 3.5 cents, it is the absolute error in cents of the tempered stack relative to the JI equvalent that determines which EDO is superior for representing that p-limit, with the better EDO for representation having the smaller absolute error in cents. --Aura (talk) 20:05, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Using the same calculator that you linked, I tested how 159edo and 205edo each represent this set of intervals- 3/2, 9/8, 27/16, 81/64, 243/128, 729/512, 5/4, 25/16, 125/64, 625/512, 7/4, 49/32, 343/256, 11/8, 121/64, 13/8, 169/128, 17/16 and 289/256- and as I'm forced to limit the interval set somehow, I've decided that the odd-limit of any interval in the set has to be less than 1024. I looked for the number of "P" ratings given by both 205edo and 159edo, as "P" ratings are the only ratings I'm really interested in at this point, and I also looked at their distribution. Both 205edo and 159edo give 7 "P" ratings total out of this set, and are surpassed in this respect by 147edo, which has 8. However, one of the P-rated intervals for 147edo is for 343/326, the best approximation of which cannot be reached by stacking three of 147edo's best tempered version of 7/4 and octave reducing, thus resulting in this interval's disqualification. Furthermore, the 147edo-tempered versions of six of the other 7 intervals in the starting interval set given a "P" rating in Hunt's system have absolute errors in cents that are greater than those of their 159edo-tempered counterparts which are also P-rated- a decisive loss for 147edo. --Aura (talk) 02:13, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

As for the remaining head to head comparison of 159edo and 205edo in terms of how good their representation is, one of the P-rated intervals for 205edo is 49/32, the best approximation of which cannot be reached by stacking two of 205edo's best tempered version of 7/4 and octave reducing, resulting in this interval's disqualification. Four of 205edo's remaining P-rated intervals are all solidly in the in the 5-limit chain, and another P-rated interval is 17/16- the 205edo-tempered version of which is better than the 159edo-tempered version- the final P-rated interval for 205edo is 3/2, and 159edo-tempered version of this interval has less absolute error in cents than the 205edo-tempered version, leaving 205edo with only 5 P-rated intervals that are not outperformed by their 159edo counterparts. This means a decisive loss for 205edo. --Aura (talk) 02:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry about the long string of comments... I hope you can get through them all, because I want to know your thoughts on the process I used and my reasoning for choosing 159edo over 205edo. --Aura (talk) 03:09, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

[...unindenting...]

Xenwolf, do you have time to help me remake glyphs and stuff for a new notation system? I want to take the feedback from Sam and Kite into account for this... --Aura (talk) 15:28, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

That depends on how well you can explain what you need. I think it should be possible to describe a toolbox, graphical elements, layout aspects. A rough sketch might also help to illustrate things. --Xenwolf (talk) 18:46, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Right. I hope my descriptions in the new section of the relevant talk page can be of help. The only issue I can think of so far is that I need to come up with a good way to represent the rastma... --Aura (talk) 19:01, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

New Interval Categorizations

Continuing our discussion from the 5/4 talk page, do you think my proposal for new interval categorizations is at least half decent? I mean, if "classic" is too ambiguous, we need to find better descriptors for intervals like 5/4, don't we? --Aura (talk) 16:56, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not in the mood to participate in this discussion right now. --Xenwolf (talk) 17:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah. Perhaps we can have this discussion at another time then. --Aura (talk) 18:30, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Another Comma

Hey Xenwolf, I've found this unnoticeable comma- 1771561/1769472- that marks the difference between three 128/121 semitones and one 32/27 minor third, and I would like to give it a name... Since the 3-limit and the 11-limit are both major navigational primes, I think we can call this comma the "nexusma", or the "nexus comma" or something like that... What do you think? --Aura (talk) 06:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I don't see how you reach "nexus" here. --Xenwolf (talk) 12:27, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Tempering out 1771561/1769472 leads to the joining of two navigational primes limits- the 3-limit and the 11-limit- and "nexus" means "a connection or series of connections linking two or more things". --Aura (talk) 14:53, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

If "nexus" isn't a good basis for a name, what's another term that reflects this joining of two navigational primes? --Aura (talk) 17:39, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

If I understand you right, you say 3 and 11 are "navigational primes"; That they are primes is of course already known to me, but I lack any idea what exactly you could mean by "navigational".

BTW: your image File:Possible Quartertone Accidentals.png looks quite clear to me. --Xenwolf (talk) 18:01, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Navigational primes are those that lay the groundwork for defining key signatures. The 3-limit defines the primary diatonic key signatures, while the 11-limit defines paradiatonic and secondary diatonic key signatures. While the 5-limit, the 7-limit and the 13-limit also help define key signatures, they only define the exact variant of any given key signature- for instance, in distinguishing an Intense Major key from the standard Pythagorean Major key. --Aura (talk) 18:41, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Examples of primary diatonic key signatures include C Major, G Major, G-Sharp Minor, B-Flat Minor, and so on. Examples of secondary diatonic key signatures include G-Demisharp Major, F-Demisharp Minor, B-Demiflat Major, and D-Demisharp Minor. --Aura (talk) 18:48, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

So, does my definition of "navigational primes" as per this page make sense? If so, does my idea of calling 1771561/1769472 the "nexusma", or the "nexus comma" also make sense? --Aura (talk) 17:27, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that kind of makes sense. But I'm not fully convinced by the high priority you assign to 11 after 3. --Xenwolf (talk) 17:50, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

So, anything I need to think about in terms of my reasoning for assigning the 11-limit such a high priority? What are the objections I need to answer? --Aura (talk) 18:06, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

I currently have not the time to read and study a lot of text. I read your last additions but maybe not as carefully as you may expect. I have no experience with quartertone music so far, so I probably have difficulties with things that are obvious in your eyes. If I look at it from a mathematical perspective, I only see that the higher the p-limit, the higher the density of fractions between 1 and 2. But please don't let my personal objections stop you from working out your theories in the Wiki. You are welcome to do so in the main namespace of the wiki; it's really not that new pages would have to be created as subpages of the user page and then go through a review process. And I have far too little knowledge of and experience with microtonal music to be a suitable "examiner". --Xenwolf (talk) 18:35, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay, if that's the case, do you think that Kite and Flora could be of help? --Aura (talk) 18:58, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Maybe. Kite does a lot of practical work in microtonality 41edo guitars etc. Flora is new, but seems to have good mathematical skills. --Xenwolf (talk) 19:31, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh yes, regarding the 12 sign symbols you suggested, I was really close to starting the detail work, but then realized that we have to consider the graphical context. After all, these symbols will be on and between staves, and yet you have to be able to recognize them and distinguish them safely. So this will also make a bit more work. Maybe I'll try a first rough draft showing the 12 symbols in 2 positions each. --Xenwolf (talk) 19:31, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Right then. In the meantime, I'd best get to work putting the theory I've come up with here down on the page detailing my Concepts of Tonality... --Aura (talk) 19:35, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

All I know in this case is that if the 3-limit is used to assign pitch relations between the standard notes, and you want to have a standard for assigning pitch relations for keys like G-Demisharp Major, which Jacob Collier uses in his rendition of "In the Bleak Midwinter", we need some sort of relatively simple limit by which we can build off of the 3-limit in order to access such keys. Furthermore, we need to ensure maximal separation from the standard keys in a case like this. It may be true that when the rastma isn't tempered out, there's multiple possibilities, but given what I demonstrated on constructing a 9/8 whole tone using just four 11-limit intervals in my recent response to Kite's recent comments on the talk page for 159edo notation, I can't help but think that 33/32 is bound to be perhaps the most important among quartertones, especially in light of the one example of a stack of three 33/32 parachromatic quartertones plus a 4096/3993 paradiatonic quartertone adding up to a full 9/8 whole tone- you can't get much more straightforward in adding up quartertones than that. --Aura (talk) 18:19, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Your Ideas seem interesting and may make sense musically. But the process of underpinning these musically appealing ideas with a solid theoretical foundation seems very complicated and nerve-racking to me. --Xenwolf (talk) 18:35, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

It is a very complicated job, but someone has to do it, and since I work more extensively with the 11-limit than most people here, it looks like that job falls largely to me. --Aura (talk) 18:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

If you're looking for a definition of "parachromatic" and "paradiatonic" as it relates to quartertones, let's look at the traditional distinction between "diatonic" and "chromatic" amongst semitones. From my observations so far, two parachromatic quartertones add up to a chromatic semitone, while a parachromatic quartertone and a paradiatonic quartertone add up to make a diatonic semitone. Therefore, it takes three parachromatic quartertones and one paradiatonic quartertone to make a 9/8 whole tone. --Aura (talk) 18:47, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Alpharabian Comma

Hey Xenwolf, I botched the title of the Alpharabian comma page, as the word "comma" should not be capitalized. I'm hoping you can fix it. Thanks! --Aura (talk) 23:15, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Link on Nexuma Page

Hey, Xenwolf, I figured that when you said the "demonstrably" link on the Nexuma page was questionable, you were talking about the way that link was written, but were you also talking about the content of that link? I asked Kite to look over that particular page to make sure the content there was up to snuff... --Aura (talk) 09:56, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I find the linking style questionable, not the referred text.

Nobody is happy to get a long text to find (theirselves) the answer for a seemingly simple question, so this "'demonstrably' trap" is (in my opinion) a good example for the problem referred by

If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter.

Well, of course not a big issue, but for me it's kind of important. --Xenwolf (talk) 10:56, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, I've never been good with shorter stuff- it doesn't feel like I can say what I need to say in shorter writings. Oh, and the very first sentence of that lengthy page says, and I quote:

"It seems that some people in the community want to know how my system relates to the more well-known approach of Aaron Hunt- a simple question with a complicated answer."

I must confess, I'm on the Autism spectrum- I have Asperger's specifically- and yes verbose writing like that is classic Asperger's for you... --Aura (talk) 12:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Writing/reading is a great tool but it takes time. If we consider that writing time is spent once and reading time is again and again, we understand that it pays off to invest in a great reading experience. --Xenwolf (talk) 13:35, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

If someone needs to create a more reader-friendly version of my writings on the not-so-simple subject of music theory, then so be it. In the meantime, I can remove the "demonstrably" link. --Aura (talk) 12:20, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

For working together on such ideas, it could be better to place them (maybe in parts) in the article namespace as soon as you feel that you are done with it... --Xenwolf (talk) 13:35, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

A small addition: I'm not sure that I am the only one who is interested in the relation of your system to the Hunt system. (I'm not even sure if the H-System has gained any special popularity at all.) --Xenwolf (talk) 13:50, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Who else do you think might be interested in my system besides you and Sam? --Aura (talk) 05:27, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I think, it will interest a lot of people if it turns out to be consistent (I have to read your latest additions (ca. 7000 characters)) ... ---Xenwolf (talk) 09:44, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Music in an Approximation of 94edo

Hello, Xenwolf, have you noticed how on my user page there are two new songs? I just wondered if you had seen them- they were posted here because they were written in an approximation of 94edo, so there's that. --Aura (talk) 22:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes of course, quite nice compositions. Of course you have to stay in the background if it is to serve as music for a computer game or movie. To me, the tonal base mostly sounds close to 12edo - maybe my personal JND is a lot above average. --Xenwolf (talk) 07:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

It is no surprise that when you work in diatonic keys in other EDOs, you end up with a sound that is close to 12edo, but in this case, the sound is better. --Aura (talk) 08:42, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, there are some passages where I found the sound not better. I'll give the details later. --Xenwolf (talk) 09:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

If you're talking about the parts where I used the grave fifth, well, I have to say that the dissonance of the grave fifth is actually a way of bringing out the functions of a Minor VI chord in Major, as ending the phrase with a dissonant grave fifth really seems to hit home that "we're not done yet". I mean, isn't that kind of the point of a deceptive cadence anyway? --Aura (talk) 09:22, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

On a similar note, dissonance of the fifth on the Major III chord in Minor is a way of preventing the tonicization of that chord as well as giving it more propulsive force. --Aura (talk) 09:28, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

With all that said, I have to admit that at the time I wrote these pieces, I didn't exactly have an appreciation for how the dissonance of the grave fifth affects the flow of the music. It's the same way with the 11-limit chords that I use in these songs. --Aura (talk) 09:43, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Contributions

Hey, Xenwolf, I can't help but wonder what y'all think of my contributions to both this wiki and to microtonality in general at this point. I mean, I'm pretty new here and here I am seemingly upending stuff with new music theory and what not. Then there's the fact that I talk to people on this wiki a lot... I hope I'm not being disruptive in the wrong sorts of ways... --Aura (talk) 16:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I think it's all good. I think people are busy with their stuff, so the responses to contents is currently low. If you are on facebook, there are some groups, which are - as I remember - more responsive (I'm not there any more, it's too time wasting). --Xenwolf (talk) 16:22, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Heh, I don't mess with Facebook. I have enough to keep track of on Reddit and Discord... --Aura (talk) 16:28, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Reddit seems me a better place, aren't some of the other xenharmonists active there? I try to restrict my social energy 😉 here in the Xenwiki. --Xenwolf (talk) 18:39, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Not going to lie, I don't know who's who on Reddit... --Aura (talk) 19:00, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

The Song that Started It All for Me

Hey, Xenwolf, I've finally gotten the courage to release "Folly of a Drunk"- the piece that started it all. It's now on my user page, and I want to hear what you think of it. --Aura (talk) 18:19, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so far, I'll soon take the time to listen to it; right now, I have to do some important (but completely unrelated) stuff. --Xenwolf (talk) 18:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Right. I hope to hear what you have to say. --Aura (talk) 18:50, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

So, do you have the chance to listen now? --Aura (talk) 20:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

You should not have mentioned the name Jacob Collier, I did not know him at all, now I spent hours on YouTube and stirred up my whole environment (not to mention the age depression of the amateur musician).

I also heard your piece, it has some very interesting twists and turns, but on the other hand it is not easy to follow them. The more ornamental quarter notes for example at the beginning are of course no problem. Unfortunately, where the modulation enters unfamiliar paths, it becomes quite difficult to penetrate acoustically. Certainly these twists and turns seem surprising.But the overall logic is quite difficult for me to understand (also because my ear is very much at home in the range between meantone and Pythagorean tuning), maybe it would help to look into the notes. But the overall logic is quite difficult for me to understand (also because my ear is very much at home in the range between midrange and Pythagorean tuning), maybe it would help to look into the notes.

In conclusion, I must admit that I tend to respond more to contemplative pieces (much to the chagrin of my wife, who always has to listen to such "sad things") and your piece starts off in such a cheerful marching rhythm, which is quite a bit of an effort. --Xenwolf (talk) 10:47, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

The song "Folly of a Drunk", is a song that is meant to go along with a scene of a book I'm trying to write. Specifically, as per the name, it goes together with a scene in which a character gets drunk and makes a fool of himself while humming snatches of this same tune- unaware that the song was written in part to basically make fun of the stupid things that drunks do. I hope this make some level of sense. --Aura (talk) 12:46, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

I also listened to the tune just now and I agree that melodic quartertones are easy for my ear to follow (albeit I’ll agree with George Secor that as a melodic step quartertone is a bit small and tends to be recognized more as a dynamics feature, like a glide, and not an element of melody; but here that glide-iness AFAIU is just bull’s eye), but the harmonic shifts are sudden and quick and I’m left puzzled but can’t grow an anticipation for harmonic movements. This is easily an effect of that this harmonic system is novel to me and those moves aren’t repeated several times like e. g. Sevish does. Aura, thank you for showing this piece to us, but I’d be glad if maybe in another piece the interesting harmony bits would be exposed in more detail and a bit slower for an untrained ear to follow! :) --Arseniiv (talk) 18:51, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Let's be honest, the sudden and quick modulations are a good reflection of a drunk's likelihood of following the first impulse that comes to mind, as well as the possibility of things going from good to either awkward or bad at the drop of a hat.

Believe it or not, one of the key notes in the modulation, D-Demisharp- the note situated at an 11/8 fourth above the main tonic of A-Natural- actually occurs once in the bass near the end of each major section of the song up until the modulation, and the same chord in which it occurs is actually a simpler and slightly modified version of one of the chords used in the modulation itself. If you want, I'll be happy to make separate practice pieces demonstrating the chord progressions in question. --Aura (talk) 19:32, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, it would be interesting to listen to. --Arseniiv (talk) 19:54, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Right then. Let me get to work on it. For the record, I'll have to put all the elements of the individual chords together for these demos rather than staggering the chords like in the actual song. --Aura (talk) 21:05, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Here's a practice piece containing the key chord progressions of "Folly of a Drunk" that you might have missed due to the speed of the piece... --Aura (talk) 09:26, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

One more thing... At the request of Kite, I've put the score for the song up on my user page, so if you want to check that out, feel free. --Aura (talk) 10:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I decided to move at least my part of the discussion to your page as it doesn’t concern Xenwolf. Here. --Arseniiv (talk) 14:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Xenwolf, I think I can explain the logic of some of the weirder chord progressions in the modulation as well as why they work. One thing I seem to notice is that root motion by 3/2 and 4/3 works musically because of a strong harmonic affiliation. This same mechanism is at play for root motion by 5/4, 8/5, 8/7 and 7/4. On the other hand, root motion by roughly 600 cents also works musically, but by a different mechanism- that of sheer contrast. Root motion by 11/8 and 16/11 essentially brings both mechanisms into play at once- harmonic affiliation because 11/8 and 16/11 are the 11th harmonic and 11th subharmonic respectively, and sheer contrast because these pitches are located between 525 cents and 675 cents. The fact that this works musically is attested to by the number of people who actually find Folly of a Drunk catchy and actually enjoy the strange, unexpected modulation. --Aura (talk) 15:02, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

How about a page for discussing the current wiki projects and ideas what to do and their state?

I have seen such a page on a couple of wikis but now I can’t find how it was called. Something like Xenharmonic Wiki:Things to do or Xenharmonic Wiki:Noticeboard? I think a page like that would be good to make a rough list of mechanical mundane tasks a user like me may be able to do. I noticed you added a monzo and other information to an interval page and wondered if there many pages like this to help with. I already thought about writing a code snippet to print an interval’s mathematical stats like monzo formatted with use of this wiki’s templates, if it would be useful. Then it would find a rightful place in a section of this “what’s up now” page.

On minutiae: the page itself might contain concise desctiptions of various things and tasks and have links to subpages dedicated to them where they can be further guided with help messages and specs if needed, discussed on Talk:s etc., and Talk: for the central page would naturally be a place to discuss interesting global movements which one is shy to post right into the central page. (Like, “we need these pages made clearer” doesn’t need any discussion but “we need to style the wiki in Comic Sans” obviously does.)

Though by no means I propose strict organization: first and foremost just a dump of what everyone considers useful and interesting to do together and have help with, and in which manner it’s seen to be to do best, and what useful tools are suggested — all like that.

Anything in that vein. What do you think? (If there’s already a page with that purpose, yay! I didn’t search very thoroughly.) --Arseniiv (talk) 15:18, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

I fully agree with you in this. There are pages that could have turned into this root page, the one linked in the sidebar as Conventions is such a thing, but its discussion is quite old. I was also looking for a suitable place where proposals could be published that - after reaching an acceptable positive quota - could turn into conventions. What I think is obvious: all that should take place in the Project namespace (Xenharmonic Wiki:...). Find a good root name for such a community project and we'll start it right now! 🙂 There is already a lot to do, for instance provide support for archiving outdated discussions. --Xenwolf (talk) 16:49, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Cool! Yeah I agree about placing it in XW namespace, as Help: looks like it’s more for established tools, not discussion. So I’ll write something on Xenharmonic Wiki:Things to do, and later if a better name arrives, let it be renamed. --Arseniiv (talk) 17:13, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Great! I am looking forward to joining the project! We will probably have to reintegrate things like Migration FAQ, Wikifuture, and Bugs/Talk:Bugs sometime. --Xenwolf (talk) 17:23, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Previewing math

Did you notice previewing on edit doesn’t display math? (Test: [math]\cos\frac{\pi}7[/math].) Looking at the HTML code, it seems MathJax script isn’t added for the editing page. Maybe it can be configured somewhere? (I know it’s possibly excluded when editing because it’s heavy, but maybe that won’t end up as an issue?) --Arseniiv (talk) 15:54, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't observe that. It takes a bit time, but works (I changed your test for testing: [math]\cos\frac{\pi}{17}[/math]). --Xenwolf (talk) 15:59, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Oh… :( In my case it shows up as precisely this: <span style="opacity:0.5">[math]\cos\frac{\pi}{17}[/math]</span>. I’m not sure it can shed some light on the issue but it’s all I have. Checked ad-blocking extensions and found none that could cut MathJax off. I’ll check my wiki preferences, maybe I switched something off unknowingly… (But math shows up normally when I load the page not as a preview, in case I may have written that unclearly.) --Arseniiv (talk) 17:21, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Oops, it gets rendered when the page is loaded normally. Changed to <nowiki. --Arseniiv (talk) 17:22, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Quick Questions

Would you mind if I ask several quick questions? At the moment, I have four:

1. External links cause rendering of the big margin after the anchor text before next work; it breaks the layout and the look pretty badly. Can it be fixed?
2. I found another problem: there is the URL probably registered as the user: ../w/User:Contribution, so it appears in the “Special pages” list. At the same time, the page shows the contributions. Don't you think it needs some fix? — SA 08:26, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
3. The problems with that very bad yet important page MicrotonalInstruments referenced from the main navigation bar: it gives the title header "MicrotonalInstruments", must become "Microtonal Instruments", at the same time, the change should not break possible existing links (redirection?). (I want to wikify this page well because I already put some important fixes. But they go nowhere, because it is mostly dirty HTML inside wiki, not wiki — not maintainable. Before it is wikified, further effort would be a waste of time. I would do it, but not at once, and only when I'm tired of main work, that will require keeping this page "Under construction" for a short period of time.) — SA 17:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
4. Do we have a proper place for posting publications, like articles? It seems obvious: no. Say, we have the section "Theory", but no publications can be added to any of the first 3 items, which are already the self-consistent publications, only a new tool can be added to "Useful Tools". But not every publication can be classified as "Theory" or "Tools". So, don't you think we need a section "Articles" or "Publications" referenced from the main toolbar and the page similar to Practice/Instruments, Practice/Software, or Practice/Projects? — SA 19:19, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

On the MicrotonalInstruments item above: I've found your comment in the history: "please resist any dd-"workarounds" the wiki will get fixed soon". I totally agree. I was about to show to you this kind of work-around, sorry that I make some redundant noise. I'm interested in resolving of the issue with the page name and "MicrotonalInstruments" vs. "Microtonal Instruments". When I have time, I can start to wikify the page without waiting to the fix of externally reference margin and other fixes. Would you agree is the only reasonable way to fix this content is to wikify it first? If I start, could we possibly clash if you do some fixes in parallel? Hope not... — SA 19:07, 27 November 2020 (UTC) By the way, I didn't get notification on your comment I mentioned above, just happened to look in the history and see it, even though this page is on my Watchlist. It is supposed to work this way? — SA 19:07, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

(Just for the record: we do have the history of changes and archiving, but these wiki techniques are badly outdated and not so operational. The civilized approach is the coupling with some appropriate revision control system, the way it is done by GitHub and its embedded Wiki (multiple standards with the default in the form of Markdown). By the way, I'm one of the collaborates at Microsoft Visual Studio Code, the author of Markdown extension written in JavaScript; it does a lot of things related to the document self-consistency, automatic TOC and links with advanced options, and, importantly, does typographic corrections on output, for example, converts --, ---, or "" into typographically correct Unicode, and a lot more, anyway, I got tons of experience with that. These typographical problems are very irritating to me. I examine the possibility of improving things by Mediawiki scripting — not at all sure if it may make sense. First of all, not so unsafe. Then, corrections wiki to wiki is bad: wiki source should remain clear, the corrections should be done on the fly between wiki and resulting HTML rendering, but it may work only globally, not on the per-user basis. Besides, JavaScript is badly outdated here. So, probably nothing would pay off the effort.) — SA 19:05, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!

— SA (talk), 21:46, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

If I understand you correctly, you asking for the space after external links? This is an issue that is seemingly caused by the update. We have to wait for it to be fixed at least until next week, I fear. Unfortunately, I can't tell you more about this. I'm not the maintainer of the wiki nor have access to the configuration, so we have to be patient ... --Xenwolf (talk) 23:35, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

That's right, after the external links. I will be patient, no problem with that :-). Thank you anyway. I'm an impossible perfectionist and think about changing the layouts in case the problem is permanent. — SA (talk), 04:57, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, there is a user named Contribution. It may be confusing sometimes but I think there is nothing to fix. --Xenwolf (talk) 08:53, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't know who did it, but I can see that the problem was just fixed completely, maybe even better than I expected. Whoever took care of that matter, I would like to express my full satisfaction. Thank you, people! — SA, Wednesday 2020 December 9, 22:00 UTC

Could it really be that you did no browser refresh for such a long time? The issue was already found and fixed on 30 November 2020. There was a configuration issue that caused the CSS being expected in the wrong path. Aura told me around the same day that the problems he reported were gone so I expected you would also observe it. Unfortunately no measures were (or could be?) taken to force a cache invalidation. --Xenwolf (talk) 22:55, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

To delete

Sorry, I created this page by paste "typo", it has to be deleted: https://en.xen.wiki/w/Pagename Please, what to do next time if such thing happens? — Thank you. — SA 03:08, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Deletion done. In cases like this, place {{delete}} into the page and describe why in the summary, this way it will be listed in Category:Pages nominated for deletion. The details may change in future to support an accessible discussion for the more difficult cases. --Xenwolf (talk) 12:43, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

PS: sorry to bother again: what you are doing by indenting your signature might look great for you but decreases the usability for others. --Xenwolf (talk) 12:43, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the deletion. After you've done it, I've found this procedure in the documentation. — SA, Wednesday 2020 December 9, 06:21 UTC

The indented signature? First, this is my old style, so I'm using a different template now, more compliant with your view on it, but... Then please explain what's wrong with the indented signature? I happened to indent it again, recently, but that was an ad hoc use in a special case: the last word in my post was the internal link to an existing page, so I found it inappropriate to have the signature on the same line referencing content unrelated to me. If you think this is wrong, what should be better? I do agree that simplicity and clarity has higher priority, but what's wrong with an extra indent, in the situation when pages are all stuffed with many of them? — SA, Wednesday 2020 December 9, 06:28 UTC

Space Tour

Hey Wolf, I've recently completed a massive 20-minute-long song called "Space Tour", and it's now available on my userpage. I hope you like it! --Aura (talk) 19:16, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Just listening. What I hear is great so far, thanks a lot for sharing. Reading the story is still on my todo list. BTW: great audio background for checking the last changes in the wiki. --Xenwolf (talk) 20:27, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

So Wolf, have you finished listening to the whole song? --Aura (talk) 22:22, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Of course. More than once. Maybe you should post it on a platform (SoundCloud?) where you can earn likes and reposts for it. --Xenwolf (talk) 23:40, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

How about a link on Reddit? --Aura (talk) 23:42, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Wha not, but I'm not the right person to ask, since I'm not active there. On SoundCloud I am --Xenwolf (talk) 23:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! You'll find the section between 13:19 and 14:32 to be quite intense though. --Aura (talk) 20:29, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Really interesting, but it doesn't stop there. It would be good to know which EDO is used where. --Xenwolf (talk) 20:40, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

It's all in a near-perfect approximation of 159edo, but this EDO is mimicking other EDOs at different times, so there's that. So, I guess I'll have to highlight which parts of the song mimic which EDOs, including the transitions. --Aura (talk) 20:47, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

There you go, Wolf, I've added the info on which EDO is used and or mimicked in which parts of the song. --Aura (talk) 21:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. But maybe it could be even more helpful in the song description (File:Space Tour.mp3#Summary). The upload summary (cut if too long) gets transformed into the section "Summary" which can be edited later in the usual way. --Xenwolf (talk) 21:26, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

There, I've added the EDO-mimicry information to the #Summary section. --Aura (talk) 21:35, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Oh, and thanks for the info about how to alter the summaries of files. I needed that. --Aura (talk) 21:38, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

User Categories

Since I am in the Eastern Time Zone, I think we need to add my user page to the correct categoy. I'm also a native speaker of English, though I do engage in conlanging. --Aura (talk) 14:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Absolutely. Until now we only had UTC±%d-categories, but this is sub-optimal if you live in a time zone that implements DST. So I added new time zone categories right now Category:User in EST/EDT, which should meet your requirements and Category:User in CET/CEST where I will move my user page now, more will follow at request. Maybe also Category:User on Discord could be interesting to you - would you think this is the correct name? --Xenwolf (talk) 17:12, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Category:User on Discord is definitly an interesting category, though so far it seems only me and Arseniiv are there at the moment. --Aura (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Ah, here is also Category:User en-N. To add your user page to this category, place [[Category:User en-N]] into it (without the code and nowiki formatting). --Xenwolf (talk) 17:17, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Right --Aura (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

There is also no user in en-N, but the categories don't reflect the truth. Nobody is forced to add their user page to one of these categories, but I think it would be helpful to have some more grouping information. --Xenwolf (talk) 17:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, I added my user profile to en-N, so that's one. --Aura (talk) 17:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Great :) --Xenwolf (talk) 17:41, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. For the record, it seems that Category:User on facebook needs to be moved to Category:User on Facebook, though I guess we should make double sure before making this move. --Aura (talk) 17:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Posting on the same page in parallel

I noticed that when I post on some page, and another participant is doing the same on the same page in parallel, sometimes I lose my new fragment of text. I assumed that I simply don't follow some correct order of operation. Any advice? — thank you! — SA, Wednesday 2020 December 9, 05:38 UTC

Well, edit conflicts sometimes happen, especially when the other person doesn't know about what you're doing. It's not your fault, at least to my knowledge. Xenwolf may know more, but in some respects, I doubt he'd say something much different that what I'm saying here. The only other thing he'd probably say is something to the effect that rapid chats are better kept to platforms like Discord and Facebook and Reddit. Unfortunately, as I've mentioned to him, I don't have Facebook and many of the microtonalists that I'm aware of do. Hopefully once we expand to Discord, this problem will be at least partially taken care of. --Aura (talk) 05:44, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I should have also mentioned that Xenwolf has also suggested that to me that I type out what I want to say on a separate document and correct it there before I post here in the User Talk pages, but I have to admit I'd sooner see more chats on Discord. If Xenwolf has anything to add to this, especially if it's stuff I don't know about or have forgotten about, then he should respond to us himself, but since I'm not an admin, I wouldn't know. --Aura (talk) 05:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, a separate document. It's worse than I thought, as I assumed I've done something inaccurately, but you say it's not the reason. Yes, a separate document is what I actually do, but I thought there is a really correct way. In the Wiki systems I worked with, such conflicts are well resolved. — SA, Wednesday 2020 December 9, 06:10 UTC

It is? Well, chances are it's just a matter of poor timing then. I do know that when I've been on the receiving end of edit conflicts where I lose my text there is a procedure to make sure your text gets in- look to see what you typed as opposed to what the other person typed, and then see if you can insert your text into the edit window in the correct spot without deleting the other person's text. If there are any more details that need to be resolved, or elements of the procedure that need a better explanation, Xenwolf should know about them. --Aura (talk) 06:13, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion Wolf, could you perhaps walk SA through the procedure of how to deal with those edit conflicts in which it's your own comments that get lost? I now think that advice for that particular scenario is what SA was asking for initially, but I misunderstood him as asking about why it is that some edit conflicts happen and why they eliminate one person's comments at one time and the other person's comments at another time. --Aura (talk) 07:06, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

The wiki software is not a valid forum or chat surrogate. It's optimized for collaboratively editing content. There is a chat linked in the side bar, maybe this could be populated to, but others may be even better. --Xenwolf (talk) 08:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Edit conflicts typically happen if editors work through an intended plan save by save, but this plan isn't visible to others. The wiki software traditionally^{(see below)} detects conflicts by comparing the base revision of your edit with the last saved revision. In case the last save was after you started editing, you get a warning when you hit [Save changes], this warning includes two boxes, the upper is the text of you collision "opponent", the lower is your text. You may now resolve the conflict by hand. I personally prefer to copy my text before saving (especially in talks with Aura, no offense intended, I just do it, also in other circumstances on other MediaWiki-based wikis). Another option is to copy your changes from the lower box into the upper box, then save it, than apply the "opponent's" edit by help of the history (this option has the downside that others already saw your edit and will probably try the same in parallel). You can (and perhaps should) deliberately provoke an editing conflict by performing two edits in the described manner on a personal page (i.e. in your own user namespace) with two browser tabs. This way the aspects will be much clearer to you than from my dry description. --Xenwolf (talk) 08:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I know that there are platforms that are much better in formal conflict resolution (i.e. merging edits), especially the git-based wiki solutions. But this doesn't help here. MediaWiki has many advantages but as a community project itself it's road map looks somewhat unprofessional to developers new to it. (BTW: they'll move to GitLab soon) --Xenwolf (talk) 08:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I said traditionally because the wiki software obviously had improvements in this aspect. I know of "edit conflicts" that have been silently resolved maybe in other sections, maybe if the line distance is higher than one. After the upgrade to 1.35, also the change diffs look different than before, that is, more helpful. --Xenwolf (talk) 08:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

SoundCloud

Thank you for suggesting to look into SoundCloud!

I only want to have the links for those who see this site for the first time, as in my case:

SoundCloud

— SA, Wednesday 2020 December 9, 06:03 UTC

Sorry, it's not clear to me what you you are trying to say. --Xenwolf (talk) 08:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Island Comma a.k.a. Parizeksma‎

Hey, Xenwolf, it appears that the name "parizeksma" is rather well known among the Japanese-speaking members of the Xenharmonic community. Perhaps we should create a corresponding page on 676/675 for the Japanese version of this Wiki- or at least talk to one of the users who can. --Aura (talk) 20:07, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Interesting. But I'm not sure if we will find someone who is able to start this Japanese page who is currently active. Did you think of User:Triethylamine? --Xenwolf (talk) 20:18, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, and I am in fact trying to message them. However, it seems Triethylamine doesn't understand English- so I used Google translate to translate my messages to them. --Aura (talk) 20:21, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Since we seem to be on the subject of translating stuff to other languages, do you think we could work together to translate some of my stuff in to German as well? --Aura (talk) 20:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

We could try. I think you should also have a look on DeepL (a Germany-based service that turned out to be really good for translating between German and English and vice versa). The question is what would be the best place for the German translations. Maybe the German Xenwiki? If you register there, I'll approve the account. --Xenwolf (talk) 20:44, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Truth be told, I don't know much German at all, so even though the German Xenwiki is the best place for this information, we'll have to talk through the text we want to put there. --Aura (talk) 20:59, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

I've made the application there. --Aura (talk) 21:05, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

I didn't follow the link in time to get confirmed as I needed to translate. Sorry about that. --Aura (talk) 21:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

When I try to follow the link, it now says: "Invalid confirmation code. The confirmation period may have passed. Please try to repeat the confirmation." --Aura (talk) 21:12, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

In German, the page says: "Ungültiger Bestätigungscode. Möglicherweise ist der Bestätigungszeitraum verstrichen. Versuche bitte, die Bestätigung zu wiederholen." --Aura (talk) 21:14, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Not sure, what happened, I accepted the account request. Please try again! --Xenwolf (talk) 21:24, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

You may try the same name, don't forget to add a valid email address. --Xenwolf (talk) 21:27, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay, so that's fixed, now I seem to have mistyped my password for the German Xenwiki and I now need to get it corrected. --Aura (talk) 21:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Please try again. Your account is (again) de:User:Aura --Xenwolf (talk) 21:32, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I'm in. I guess I have to be careful how I type. --Aura (talk) 21:34, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm curious now. How do I provide an interwiki link between my user pages? --Aura (talk) 21:36, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Interwiki links are made by adding the language prefix [[en:User:Aura]] or [[de:User:Aura]] (these are shown outside the content area) and normal links [[:en:User:Aura]] or [[:de:User:Aura]] --Xenwolf (talk) 21:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay, so, since we're both on both Wikis I need to know how to properly apply what you're saying here. --Aura (talk) 23:52, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

The only thing I could think of to do was to copy the interwiki code from your user page to mine. I hope you don't mind. --Aura (talk) 23:59, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Concept translations from English to German

Hey, Xenwolf, it looks like we've managed to translate "Antitonic" in to German as "Antitonika". I hope we can get to some of these other concepts of mine soon. --Aura (talk) 23:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, I'm not totally sure if this is the exact translation. But let's see... --Xenwolf (talk) 23:50, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, according to what I'm seeing, the Tonic is either 1) the first note of a diatonic scale; the keynote, or 2) the triad built on the tonic note, while "Tonika" is the name for the root note of a scale and the triad on this first level. Since notes that I'm calling "Antitonics" are notes that harmonically oppose the Tonic due to being in the vicinity of 600 cents away from the Tonic (hence the "anti-" prefix), and the various types of chords that I'm referring to as "Antitonic chords" are those that are built on Antitonic notes, it really does make sense to translate "Antitonic" as "Antitonika". That said, "Antitonika" is likely a new term for German- you won't find it elsewhere with comparable meaning since it's used to translate "Antitonic", and I can't even find the musical sense of that English term on Wiktionary- it is likely that I actually coined the term "Antitonic" in English as far as any sort of musical sense goes. --Aura (talk) 00:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

As to some of the other terms, I can only assume that "Contralead", and "Contramediant" best translate into German as "Kontraleitton", a "Kontramediante" respectively on the basis of "Lead" and "Mediant" translating to "Leitton" and "Mediante" respectively. However, although the term "Subdominant" from traditional music theory translates to "Subdominante", the idea of Treble-Down tonality forces a terminological shift- while the traditional term "Subdominant" translates to "Subdominante", the fact that the corresponding function occurs on the note above the Dominant ("Dominante" in German) in Treble-Down tonality means this perfect fourth scale degree has to be renamed- thus, "Serviant", which is my new term for the perfect fourth scale degree, translates to "Serviante" in German. While "Doppeldominante" from German translates to English as "Supertonic" in traditional music theory, and "Doppelsubdominante" likewise translates to "Subtonic", the problems are twofold- in English, "Supertonic" refers to the note located a whole tone above the Tonic, while "Subtonic" refers to the note located a whole tone below the Tonic, and simultaneously, the term "Doppelsubdominante" needs to be replaced by the term "Doppelserviante" due to the existence of Treble-Down tonality. Therefore, in Treble-Down tonality, "Supertonic" translates to "Doppelserviante" and "Subtonic" translates to "Doppeldominante". As to the terms "Varicant" and "Contravaricant"- which you seem to have taken a fancy to- those terms would most likely translate into German as "Varicante" and "Kontravaricante". Similarly, "Semiserviant" and "Semidominant" translate to "Semiserviante" and "Semidominante" respectively. --Aura (talk) 01:06, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

6250/6237

I can't find the name of this comma in the Huygens-Fokker Foundation's list of intervals. I think we need to come up with a name for it. --Aura (talk) 23:36, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, seems so. But have you an idea what 6250/6237 means, how is it tempered out, if it is even relevant? --Xenwolf (talk) 23:48, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay, let me look at this comma some and see what I can find out. I already can tell that this comma is relevant considering that it involves the whole 11-limit. --Aura (talk) 16:20, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

So, I just ran the numbers through Wolfram Alpha, and it seems that 6250/6237 is tempered out by both 53edo and 159edo despite their differing patent vals for both 7 and 11. It also seems that 6250/6237 is only slightly smaller than Mercator's comma at 3.60472 cents. It appears that when this comma is tempered out, 160/77- which is the difference between 5/2 and 77/64- is equated with a stack of four 6/5 minor thirds, and a stack of five 5/4 major thirds is equated with a stack consisting of an octave plus 81/64 plus 77/64. Upon further calculations, it appears that 6250/6237 is also the difference between the keenanisma and the kleisma, as well as the difference between the keenanisma and the undecimal hemifourths comma (160083/160000; needs a better name). Moreover, I've found that 6250/6237 is also the difference between the amity comma and the symbiotic comma, as well as the sum of the lehmerisma and the wizardharry comma (4000/3993). --Aura (talk) 18:27, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Let's also run this by Flora and see what she thinks. --Aura (talk) 18:11, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey, Xenwolf, I hope you like the name "liganellus comma" for 6250/6237. I know that Flora doesn't like me attaching the "-ma" suffix to the "u" in words like "nexuma" and "liganelluma", but as I told her, "sm" clusters are sometimes prone to becoming pronounced like "spm", and this is even true for words like "small"- which I'm liable to pronounce as [ˈspmɑɫ]- and I don't want to end up pronouncing "nexma" as [ˈnæ̠kspmə]. Meanwhile, I don't know of a single case in Latin where a double "l" is followed directly by an "m". I hope that makes sense for why I pick some of the names I pick for commas. --Aura (talk) 20:10, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

I think the name is okay. But I think the argument to prevent the possibility of mispronunciation is rather weak in a global community. The question for me would be how to correctly build English names from liganellus, for example why not liganellic? --Xenwolf (talk) 20:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, it is what it is. As to how to correctly build English names from words like "nexus" and "liganellus", "liganellic" makes sense for a good adjective corresponding to "liganellus", but the right adjective for "nexus" would be "nexal"- yes, "nexal" is a word in English that means "relating to a nexus". --Aura (talk) 21:46, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Anyway, should I change "nexuma" and "liganelluma" to something else, and move the "nexuma" page accordingly? I know we can keep the names "nexus comma" and "liganellus comma", but still. --Aura (talk) 21:53, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hmm... would "nexisma" be a good replacement for "nexuma"? --Aura (talk) 21:57, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

I just realized something- although the argument to prevent the possibility of mispronunciation may be rather weak in a global community on account of the need for translingual names, it is not entirely without merits, as language-specific names for certain intervals are known to exist. Therfore, the name "nexuma" doesn't have to be replaced- rather, it can be noted in the article as purely an English-exclusive alternate name. --Aura (talk) 18:24, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Comma Tables on 53edo and 159edo pages

Hey, Xenwolf, I've been trying to go through the list of commas to find out which commas are tempered out by 53edo and 159edo, and I'm starting to think that a comma table would be useful for both pages. --Aura (talk) 16:18, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

625/624

Hey, Xenwolf, I've found another comma that seems to need a name- 625/624. This comma seems to be like the liganellus comma in that it binds well-known temperaments together- in this case, Catakleismic, Tritikleismic, Quadritikleismic, Octoid, Benediction, Sqrtphi, Ekadash, Countercata, Widefourth, Portentious, Yajna, Enlil, Hanuman, Marvel and Agni. Since this comma seems to be used so much, so on one hand, I could see the name reflecting its usage in extensions. On the other hand, I do see that tempering out this comma not only equates 25/24 with 26/25, splitting 13/12 in half and going part of the way towards splitting the 9/8 whole tone into three (the other comma needing to be tempered in order to finish the job being 676/675), but also equates 39/32 with the interval that results from stacking four 5/4 major thirds then octave-reducing. With all this in mind, perhaps we should call this comma the "vinctrias comma". Any thoughts? --Aura (talk) 23:33, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Never mind, it Looks like 625/624 is already called the "tunbarsma". Talk about an embarassing case of "open mouth and insert foot". I still like the name "vinctrias" though, so perhaps that name can be given to the temperament that tempers out 625/624 and 676/675. Sorry about all of this mess. --Aura (talk) 23:56, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

936/935

Hey, Xenwolf, I now know that all 13-limit superparticular commas have been named, but is the same thing true with all the 17-limit superparticulars? If not, I'm thinking 936/935 needs a name. --Aura (talk) 15:52, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't see an urgent need (compare Special:WhatLinksHere/936/935). If you really find names that clarify things, there will be nobody to disagree. In other words, I find it rather boring and also not very purposeful to discuss mediocre names. --Xenwolf (talk) 19:27, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Telicity

Hey, Xenwolf, I'm trying to iron out the kinks in my concept of "telicity", and I'm wondering if we should actually make an article on it. So far, here's what I have:

Telicity is a property of EDOs, which involves the given EDO being able to stack a number of instances of a given prime's patent interval to connect with an interval belonging to a chain created by lower prime's patent interval without either accumulating 50% relative error or more at any point in the process on the part of either prime's interval chain, or, creating as mismatch in results between the direct mapping and the more complicated traditional mapping for any interval along the chain. Furthermore, since the 2-prime simply results in manifestations of the unison at different registers, thus leading to things like octave reduction, the 2-prime is not a factor that affects what qualifies as telicity unless an interval in 2-prime chain itself serves as the target of a higher prime's interval chain.

Given this definition, two things are immediately evident. Firstly, any sort of telicity involving the 2-prime cannot afford to temper out commas greater than half an EDO-step in size due to the unison being such a foundational interval to both EDOs and JI, and, the resultant inability to temper out commas greater than half a step in size without exceeding the 50% relative error threshold. Secondly, the only type of telicity available to the 3-prime is 3-to-2 telicity, as 2 is the only positive prime lower than 3, and since octave equivalency renders the unison as the only available target, that means that the 3-prime requires a complete circle of fifths without accumulating 50% relative error or more. However, higher primes have more options for achieving a form of telicity as there are multiple lower primes to chose from to potentially connect with, For instance, the 5-prime has both 5-to-3 and 5-to-2 telicity available to it.

Combinations of primes are more complicated, but it's safe to say that there are more types of telicity available in such cases- namely "full telicity" and "partial telicity". Full telicity for combinations involving multiple primes occurs when the EDO in question is able to stack a number of instances of a given combination's patent interval to connect with an interval belonging to a chain created by the patent interval for a prime that is lower than the lowest prime in the initial combination after octave reduction is taken into account. In contrast, partial telicity for combinations involving multiple primes occurs when the EDO in question is able to stack a number of instances of a given combination's patent interval to connect with an interval belonging to a chain created by the patent interval for a prime that is lower than the highest prime in the initial combination after octave reduction is taken into account.

Given that different EDOs can temper out different commas to achieve the same type of telicity- for example, 12edo tempers out the Pythagorean comma to achieve 3-to-2 telicity, while 53edo tempers out Mercator's comma to achieve 3-to-2 telicity- it can thus be argued that sequences of different EDOs demonstrating one or more types of telicity can be compiled. For instance, the first seven EDOs to demonstrate 3-to-2 telicity specifically are 2, 5, 12, 24, 53, 106, 159.

Any thoughts? --Aura (talk) 17:46, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

I think it's best you just start the article and then we discuss any questions or issues that may arise together on its talk page. --Xenwolf (talk) 22:02, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I make a template compatible with tables?

I just made the template User:FloraC/Collapsed box, but it breaks whenever a table is present. I suppose you know how to resolve it.

You might want to check my sandbox and comment on my latest tests. The template temperament data is something similar to infobox interval and et. The collapsed box is nothing but a general formatting device. Let me know if either of them makes anything better. FloraC (talk) 05:59, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

The problem occurs whenever pipe chars (|) are passed to a template. Replacing pipes by {{!}} each will solve the problem, see following example:

This, of course, defeats the idea of making collapsible content easier to write. If we'd automatically produce Approximate ratios from mapping and odd-limit, this could be solved by generating HTML tables with Lua. --Xenwolf (talk) 12:29, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Audio file types

I noticed that an internal link on the previously uploaded .mp3 file renders a nice player on the referencing page, which is often used on this site for presenting music pieces and illustrations.

What audio (or other media) file types are supported in the same way? I would mostly care about Opus in its own container. These days, the most usable Web standard is Opus, and it provides the best combination of compression, quality, and latency. MP3 is not open source and was rendered obsolete more than a decade ago. It can be clearly seen in the Web video.

And what about other types? — SA, Monday 2021 February 15, 18:23 UTC

If you go onto the upload page, you'll see a list of file types that are supported (png, gif, jpg, jpeg, webp, mid, mov, scl, mp3, mus2, ogg, pdf, rtf, svg, wav, wma, xlsx, zip, mscz, flac, mkv, mp4, oga, ogv, webm). I saw that Wikipedia (Commons) also has opus in this list, but did not find any example. So it's hard to see how a/the web player might look. Can you show a live example in some other wiki? --Xenwolf (talk) 08:00, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. The list of files is pretty good , but Opus is missing :-) It's very good that WebP and WebM are supported, they are currently the best and SVG is extremely important, I already knew it is supported well. No, I don't know examples on other Wiki, I only know how MP3 works. It's just I tried to ask instead of trying out. If referencing MP3 is rendered as a standard HTML5 audio element, it would be reasonable to expect that the same thing happens to, say, Ogg, but I cannot be quite sure. — SA, Wednesday 2021 February 17, 18:51 UTC

I requested the addition of opus to the list and it seems that this will be implemented soon. But it of course doesn't make much sense if nobody actually uses it. I expected you would already have some pieces to upload? --Xenwolf (talk) 08:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Cannot see watchlist notifications anymore

I used to have the notifications, but I found some latest updates on the pages I watch — they did not trigger the notifications. Could you point out what could be wrong? Thank you — SA, Monday 2021 February 15, 18:30 UTC

I think you are talking about email notifications about changes on pages you watch. A notification is sent with the first change only and then gets muted until you visit the page again. In the notification, there are two links: one showing the diff for the change itself, one for the diff between the state before that change and the current state. This is what I know about the mediawiki notification system. I personally don't use email notification on this wiki, maybe I should switch it on to see if there is an issue. --Xenwolf (talk) 07:34, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

As I see now, there is no switch about email notifications in the preferences? Do you actually receive email notifications? --Xenwolf (talk) 08:05, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, not recently. For example, I did not receive a notification on your post to this section. — SA, Wednesday 2021 February 17, 17:03 UTC

As I found out, there was no email notification. It is due to limitations of the email service being used. You may consider to use Atom for this which is available for recent changes, and watchlist and some other pages. --Xenwolf (talk) 08:39, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Request to review my improvement on a template

I made a version of Template:Wedgie currently as User:FloraC/Multival, with the inclusion of legend and selection of number of bracket pairs as in User:Arseniiv/Val'. I hope this will make for a fair replacement. Just make sure there's no overlooked aspects.

Btw shall we deprecate Template:OEIS since "OEIS" is a valid interwiki prefix? FloraC (talk) 04:00, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

The template looks quite okay whereas I suggest to implement the number of brackets by a named parameter, something like brackets=3 or levels=3 or pairs=3. This way nobody will be confused about the order of parameters. I observe that 1 to 4 pairs are supported. Since I still don't understand wedgies and multivals: comes this limitation with the concept itself or is it due to the template? As a side note, the need of such paired switch statements in the template is the exact purpose for having modules enabled in this wiki... --Xenwolf (talk) 08:07, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

I'll make it a rank=3. I think not supporting more pairs beyond four is due to both the definition of the wedgie and the implementation of the template. More pairs are reasonable through logical extrapolation, but practically it looks rather unwieldy (proportionally to the template itself), and I believe some alternative notations should come to help in those cases. FloraC (talk) 12:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

I doubt they'll become practical any time soon but higher-dimensional wedgies are in principle possible (for rank 5 and higher temperaments). Inthar (talk) 15:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

I think Template:OEIS is fine as it has prefix with the link to clarify what OEIS means. So I'd not recommend to deprecate one of the two ways to link to sequences. --Xenwolf (talk) 08:07, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Let's integrate the interwiki link into the OEIS template. FloraC (talk) 12:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

That's a good idea. --Xenwolf (talk) 19:47, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

May I request a new username?

Can I create a new account that I can name more "accessibly" (like "User:Inthar") instead of the current abstruse one? Inthar (talk) 23:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

In fact I already thought about exactly that. It should be possible. I'll read a bit about it first, and after that, do it. Do you know that this will be result in a redirect from the old name to the new one (which I find makes sense)? --Xenwolf (talk) 05:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that would be okay. Inthar (talk) 05:57, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

All should be done now (including renaming of pages and talk in the user namespace). :) --Xenwolf (talk) 06:07, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Inthar (talk) 06:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Comma Names, and a Preexisting Chart

Hey, Xenwolf, I haven't been able to get in touch with Spt3125, and they seem to be the one to have first documented the existence Nexus comma, the Alpharabian comma and the Betarabian comma, even though they didn't name said commas. I don't know if this person is on Facebook or what. --Aura (talk) 01:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm hoping that Sept3125 doesn't mind me naming the commas as I did in their absence... --Aura (talk) 01:49, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you are using the wrong user name, try User:Spt3125 instead. However, I don't think there will be any problem with the naming of commas. Let's just see how it plays out, it is a wiki after all. :) Best regards --Xenwolf (talk) 07:02, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction! --Aura (talk) 16:08, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

You should be able to contact Spt3125 via wikimail, did you already try this? --Xenwolf (talk) 09:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! Done. --Aura (talk) 14:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Proposal: prefer rewording to adding redirects

I'm deleting meantone-family since I've reworded the article so that it no longer involves the hyphen. I don't reckon Wikipedia would add a redirect whenever there's such a phrase to be linked, so we perhaps should follow. FloraC (talk) 14:04, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I agree with you. --Xenwolf (talk) 16:29, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

11- and 13-limit coditone temperament

I revised technical data for 11- and 13-limit coditone temperament. The coditone temperament can be described as 50&53 temperament for 7, 11, and 13 prime limits, tempering out 225/224, 351/350, 385/384, and 847/845 in the 13-limit (with wedgie of ⟨⟨ 13 2 30 -19 -5 … ]] on 13-limit). I get information of coditone temperament from List of temperaments in Scala and 13-limit Coditone in Temperament finding scripts. I renamed "coditonic" for 11-limit 3de&53 and 13-limit 3def&53 temperaments (with wedgie of ⟨⟨ 13 2 30 34 48 … ]] on 13-limit) on 10 June 2021. Deal? --Xenllium (talk) 10:50, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Xenllium,

I'm afraid I can't help you in this matter.

My problem is based on the way mathematicians use (their) language: Brevity they perceive as supreme and as pure beauty. But exactly this point leads into a disastrous didactics: between "initiates" and "novices" there is a huge gap that can only be overcome with pain (and most of this pain is endured by the novices).

I've been successful in programming for about 3 decades now, and in a wide variety of languages, most of which take up much more space than mathematical notation (yes, I've also tried Haskell, which seemed to me a promising contribution to the fusion of the two worlds, but unfortunately also takes a bit more time than I've - so far - been able to spend on it).

So, conversely, I would be grateful if you could pass on to me some of the mathematical knowledge you clearly have. My services in return could be in the areas of MediaWikis (syntax, templates) and Lua modules.

I think with your current problem Flora could help you or Mike Battaglia or Cmloegcmluin, maybe also Inthar or Aura. --Xenwolf (talk) 14:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I think 11-limit coditone was meant to be 50 & 53, as in the temperament finder. The original data on this wiki could be a mistake. FloraC (talk) 05:55, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Discord link should be on sidebar

I think the Discord would probably be a more useful resource than the currently inactive IRC chat. Inthar (talk) 19:02, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable, what is this link? You know than I'm not on Discord. I'll be now, again, away for a couple of hours, you may add it to Category:User on Discord or ask FloraC to add it to MediaWiki:Sidebar (maybe between FB and IRC). --Xenwolf (talk) 22:26, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

https://discord.com/invite/FSF5JFT is the discord link, FloraC wasn't authorized to make the edit. --Xenoindex (talk) 12:12, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

I see, thanks Xenoindex for letting me know. What would you suggest as text? What's the group name? --Xenwolf (talk) 12:30, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

"XA Discord" would be perfect. --Xenoindex (talk) 12:38, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, done. Let me know if there are any problems. --Xenwolf (talk) 12:44, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

We got a problem, the link doesn't show on the main page for logged out users. But, it does show on some special pages for some reason. --Xenoindex (talk) 13:43, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

FloraC is currently working on it. --Xenwolf (talk) 15:21, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

We've figured out what the problem was, the wiki caches need to be purged as they are loading older versions of pages. I managed to do this on the main page by appending "?action=purge" to the URL and clicking the purge button but many other pages remain without the discord link unless someone purges or edits them. A mass-purge of all caches explained here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Interface/Sidebar#Troubleshooting should resolve the problem completely. --Xenoindex (talk) 08:16, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, so a temporary problem. Please give me an example where the sidebar is the old one. To me, all seem to be correct (I tried Random page which is also part of the sidebar). Maybe it's just your browser cache? --Xenwolf (talk) 11:20, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

18edo, 14/9, and 21/16 each have the old sidebar as of writing this message, they may appear correct if any of the pages have since been edited. I found these particular examples by hitting random page while logged out. Be sure to check while logged out, all sidebars appear correct to users who are logged in for some reason. Also, I know it's not my browser cache because I get the same result on an alternate browser I don't use. --Xenoindex (talk) 11:54, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Please try the following on one of them: click on edit, then save it without doing an actual change. If the sidebar was incorrect before, is it correct after? --Xenwolf (talk) 12:07, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Saving a change without changing anything doesn't register as an actual change so I made a small change to 14/9 and yes it did correct it. --Xenoindex (talk) 13:48, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

What do you mean by “register as”? Pressing "Save changes" without changing anything is possible, I just tried it. That an actual change causes a purge was expected. Please try it again. --Xenwolf (talk) 14:36, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Just tried it again on 21/16 and it didn't appear to correct the sidebar, and by register I meant that it doesn't show up in recent changes or otherwise appear to do anything. --Xenoindex (talk) 14:41, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

I see, thanks for testing. So we must wait for User:Tyler Henthorn to fix it. I already informed him via E-Mail about the issue. --Xenwolf (talk) 15:11, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

After hitting random page a couple hundred times while logged out I can't seem to find any pages with old sidebars. Not sure what happened back there but I'm calling this problem solved. Thank you for all your help, XA Discord will be happy about this. --Xenoindex (talk) 15:27, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

This is what Tyler told me: “I deleted and rebuilt the file cache as a quick fix.” I think that's what worked in the end. --Xenwolf (talk) 16:11, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

PS: FloraC now has the required privileges. --Xenwolf (talk) 12:46, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

EDO vs. edo (and MOS vs. mos)

Hey Xenwolf. Last week, I added a topic on Xenharmonic Wiki talk: Conventions and I thought you might be interested to have a look, since it is related to some page renaming you did the week before. If you'd like, we can discuss over there. --Fredg999 (talk) 03:34, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

I think that this is not only a matter of taste and easy writing. I'll come back to this topic soon. Meanwhile I'm not forcing any of the directions but sticking to the old Nedo format will obviously do no harm. --Xenwolf (talk) 05:30, 12 July 2021 (UTC) PS: please sign your contributions on talk pages with --~~~~ this automatically adds your name and a timestamp

I'm not very happy with the combination of both discussions. I'd tend to do discuss it term by term. I'll add some thoughts concerning EDO vs. edo in Xenharmonic Wiki talk:Conventions #EDO vs. edo (and MOS vs. mos) but don't know if some of them can be extrapolated to MOS vs. mos. --Xenwolf (talk) 16:31, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

My Second System for 159edo Notation

Hey, Xenwolf, have you seen the accidentals I finally came up with for Quartertones, Rastmas and Syntonic Commas? --Aura (talk) 16:49, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

I saw it right now. Looks interesting but a lot of symbols and combinations to learn. I think I would not be able to keep all of them in mind. --Xenwolf (talk) 20:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm afraid some of that's unavoidable due to the size of 159edo and the need for accessibility by those not familiar with 53edo. That said, it's still a huge improvement over my first proposed system, as there's only sixteen additional symbols besides the traditional natural, sharp, flat, double sharp and double flat, as opposed to the multiple dozen additional symbols from the first round. --Aura (talk) 20:24, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Regular Temperament Sections Disappearing

For some reason, I can't see the regular temperament sections of the pages when I'm logged out, and Shift-Refresh doesn't seem to be helping. --Aura (talk) 13:56, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Beyond that, I just added another comma to the list of commas tempered out by 159edo, and I can't see that comma on the list after logging out either, and again Shift-Refresh doesn't seem to be helping. --Aura (talk) 14:35, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I tried to open some pages in Edge and observe that parts of pages don't appear (marked with cut) while on some other pages all seem to be correct (marked by okay):
157edo cut, 28edo okay, 103edo cut, 104edo okay, 176edo cut.
Can you confirm the observations for this list? --Xenwolf (talk) 14:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I can confirm your observations for 157edo, and 176edo easily, though I've noticed that after logging in on Edge, all the parts of the pages seem to be present, while things are missing from these pages after logging out even using Google Chrome. I'm not quite sure what's missing from 103edo after logging out since I'm not quite as familiar with the contents of that page, but both of the pages that you've marked "okay" pages seem to be fine after logging out. I've also noticed that the list of prime harmonics on the 159edo page is in the wrong place after logging out- it's on the page, but in a different spot. --Aura (talk) 15:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

It looks like a cache issue. Pages of the article namespace (also called (main)) are not showing additions after 13:06, 5 July 2021. There are some exceptions for moved or newly created pages which I don't understand right now. I think that's something that should be reported to User:Tyler Henthorn. Unfortunately I have currently not the time to do it... --Xenwolf (talk) 15:50, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I now reported the issue via PM to Tyler. --Xenwolf (talk) 21:25, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Suggested change to edo pages: odd harmonics instead of primes in edo approximation tables

Hello Xenwolf,

We (including User:SupahstarSaga, User:Fredg999 and I) would like to resurrect an old suggestion of mine, namely using odds instead of primes. This is because odd mappings give more information at a glance than primes: odd harmonic mappings don't always correspond to prime mappings (for example, a stack of two best 3's don't always make the best 9), and subgroup interpretations can sometimes care about ratios between odds harmonics, for example, 7/5 and 11/5. I made a template implementing this suggestion here: User:Inthar/Template:Harmonics_in_edo. We also want to do this with other equal-step tunings such as 13edt. Tom Price also suggested an additional visual idea I really like. We could try implementing that with Lua, but in the meantime I think this will do.

I'd just like to reopen the discussion about this suggested change. Please let me know on the relevant discussion page if you have any concerns.

Inthar (talk) 21:15, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Organization of music references

After cleaning up (or setting up) the Music sections in a few edo pages (0edo through 6edo so far), I've started to think that maintaining lists like these manually is probably the reason why they end up outdated most of the time. I thought, maybe a xenharmonic music database would be better suited for that, in which each piece could be tagged with its tuning(s), scale(s) if applicable, etc. And then I noted that the Wiki is basically a database of pages and other stuff, and that using the Wiki could be an option. Of course, music will have to be added manually, but that's the price for having a platform-independent database; the advantage to be able to filter by genre or by tuning seems to be worth the effort to me.

So I was wondering, are there technical issues that would arise if we were to create individual pages for each track instead of building large tables spread over multiple pages as we currently do? It seems to me that there are already a lot of pages because of all these intervals and scales having individual pages, so I don't see what sort of problem could arise, but I'm asking in case I'm missing something. Also, if you're aware of automating tools that could be helpful in setting up multiple pages (e.g. reading from a .csv file and creating pages in bulk), that could be handy as well. Fredg999 (talk) 03:23, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

UPDATE: After discussing with xenoindex, we agreed that having single pages for each song would clutter the search results in the search bar. I came up with the idea to set up a parallel wiki, something like music.xen.wiki, which could store those pages while avoiding the aforementioned problem. It would be easy to bridge those pages with the main wiki, although I guess that assumes linking to the English wiki only.

Also, I want to clarify that I'm not sure whether or not I will have a lot of time to spend on this project, especially since there are other things I want to work on as well. For now I'm just asking to know how it works in case I want to start. There is already one other user from XA Discord who mentioned being interested to contribute if we started though, so I wouldn't be alone. --Fredg999 (talk) 15:56, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

UPDATE 2: After discussing with HEHEHE I AM A SUPAHSTAR SAGA, maybe another wiki isn't necessary, but otherwise we agreed on the other core ideas. --Fredg999 (talk) 15:28, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Request for help on a new microtonal theory

Xenwolf, I know that you have much more experience in microtones than I do, so I would like you to take a look at my new microtonal theory, Intervallic Polarity. This is something that I think has useful implications, but right now, its definition is a bit shaky and also quite subjective. If you are willing, I would really appreciate it if you could give me your thoughts on this theory or maybe even help me refine and expand upon its definition. Best regards, Userminusone (talk) 21:54, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for my late response. I meanwhile tried twice to get an overview of your ideas and kept it on my todo list. Now I have to admit that I'm probably not able to contribute to this theory. --Xenwolf (talk) 13:19, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

A clue on the telephone numbers problem

Looking forward to your comment on User talk:KingHyperio #Telephone numbers problem. FloraC (talk) 19:11, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

I just read about it (and already responded there). --Xenwolf (talk) 13:15, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Leantone Temperament

I saw that you were the last to edit a couple of the Leantone scale pages, and I wanted to ask if Leantone, as a 2.9.5.7.11 temperament, is meant to reach the 11 in 3 generators or 9? I’m likely going to add something on the subgroup temperaments page for it so I wanted to check. KingHyperio (talk) 16:07, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Or if it does in some other number of generators KingHyperio (talk) 16:12, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, but I have to admit that I have only made formal changes to these pages and have no experience with the actual content. --Xenwolf (talk) 16:32, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thanks anyways KingHyperio (talk) 16:36, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

From my understanding, the tempered 11th harmonic is reached in 3 periods (~1200¢ each) and 3 generators (~192.5¢ each). If you look at the reduced mapping on x31eq (http://x31eq.com/cgi-bin/rt.cgi?limit=2_9_5_7_11&ets=6_7d), the last column of the matrix will give you that information (the top "3" is the number of periods, the bottom "3" is the number of generators). This implies that 11/8 is mapped to 3 generators, for example. I hope this helps! --Fredg999 (talk) 18:32, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

311 EDO huge table

311 EDO is a one-of-a-kind extremely consistent system to the point it can be said to be the first true melodic model of the harmonic series itself. Therefore to understand the structure of the harmonic series (at least in the 41-limit add-73) without making it impractical, it would be useful to use 311 EDO, and 311 EDO is a great alternative to cents for this reason (which requires smaller numbers and only round numbers) because of being distinctly consistent in the 23-odd-limit and consistent in the 41-prime-limited 77-odd-limit with prime harmonic 73 included as the only prime over 41 and under 81 which is more in tune than out of tune (which is to say its step error is less than a quarter), but furthermore, because of it fitting the way 311 EDO maps the harmonic series by filling a gap and because of it being an odd prime with less error than all previous primes. 311 EDO is therefore a natural system to inspect when looking at ways of modelling higher-limit systems and has important connections with many simpler systems. Just one example would be Superlimmal, the 29-limit 80&311 temperament. Another reason it is a one-of-a-kind system is that in terms of having rooted harmonics with less than 25% error each, I did a search before in Python 3 and there is nothing that beats it until over 20 thousand, meaning it is simultaneously the first and last EDO to truly approximate the harmonic series, and the fact it does it up to a very large subset of the 77-odd-limit makes it worth inspecting the structure of for anyone wishing to learn medium-to-high-complexity tempered JI/odd-limits. Sorry if I've overstressed my point. Also the other table has been there for as long as I remember, and I felt it was both incomplete and messy so I wanted a table from a more systematic approach. --Godtone (talk) 23:17, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh one other thing, feel free to suggest ways of making the table prettier. For example, I was initially only putting the intervals of the form a/b for a>b and for a and b from 39 to 78 (not including primes >41 other than 73 and corresponding thusly to the 41-prime-limited add-73 77-odd-limit) but then I noticed the end of the table was sparse and some intervals were missing, so instead I put the octave-complement of each such interval too, but this made the organisation messier. It does mean however that the interval table could potentially have its size halved without any loss of information and with the only caveat that you'd have to calculate octave-complements of intervals yourself (both in terms of number of steps and in terms of JI intervals). I think my former method which lead to a more orderly organisation of odd-limit intervals per interval of 311 EDO was maybe better especially considering it lead to simpler code too. Once I or others decide which is the better method I may start hand-prettifying the table by adding consistently-mapped odd-limit intervals or commas for empty intervals of 311 EDO in the table. One example could be that 9801/9800, 441/440 and 385/384 are all mapped to 1\311, although my concern for giving interpretations like that is there is a gargantuan number of intervals that are mapped to one or two steps of 311 EDO, so maybe leaving them blank is more elegant. --Godtone (talk) 23:26, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Categorization of redirects

I see it fit to categorize temperament redirects cuz they're eventually to be expanded to full articles. For ratios redirecting to interval names, I'm not sure. They're essentially the same concept and will never be distinct articles. So the categories are duplicate, and the maintenance load also doubles. What's your take on this? FloraC (talk) 12:52, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

I find it generally useful to also make alternative names findable in categories (they are italicized to distinguish them). In the index of a book, there are sometimes short references instead of page numbers (I consider the categorization of redirects to be the wiki equivalent of this). But I'm not sure the categories are useful overall. Personally, I see them more as "fire stairs" to articles. --Xenwolf (talk) 18:22, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Step ratio terms in other languages

Kite has brought up what he sees as a possible issue in hard vs. soft terms (here) when translated to European languages. Looking at the Wikipedia page he's linking to, there seems to be no conflict in Romance languages at least, and from my German knowledge there is no conflict between hart/weich and Dur/moll. There could be other reasons literal translations of hard and soft are unsuitable, though (I don't know what your comment on the German article for step ratio was pointing at). My suggestion would be to create a page for translating TAMNAMS hard and soft terms, specifically, and patiently wait for native speaker input. Inthar (talk) 14:52, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Concur. --Godtone (talk) 19:30, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I replied in Talk:TAMNAMS#Hard and soft in French, German, etc.. --Xenwolf (talk) 20:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Maintenance bot

Hi Xenwolf, I notice that we sometimes do manual cleaning which could be automated by bots, such as fixing double redirects. I stumbled upon this yesterday: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Pywikibot/redirect.py

Do you think there's a chance it could be installed on this wiki? Unless there's already something similar available that I don't know of yet? --Fredg999 (talk) 16:11, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't think anything like this exists yet. The person who takes care of the server side installation is Tyler Henthorn, maybe you can share your ideas with him. --Xenwolf (talk) 21:06, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

In-browser sound generation

Hi Xenwolf!

My in-browser sound generation project (User:Plumtree/Sound) is essentially ready. Could you review User:Plumtree/common.js and User:Plumtree/common.css and, if there're no issues, include those globally?

The best option would've been mw:Extension:Gadgets for JS and mw:Extension:TemplateStyles for CSS. Alas, they aren't installed. I've asked User:Tyler Henthorn for them but his last edit was more than a year ago and it's unlikely he'll answer any time soon.

What does JS do?

• It reacts to clicks on HTML elements with class sequence-audio. When one is clicked, it reads its data-sequence attribute and plays the encoded pattern.
• If data-lock attribute is set, it also adds the sequence-audio-playing class and ignores further clicks for the duration of the sequence.
• Timbres defined by their harmonic spectra are supported. Builtins are sine, semisine, flute, violin; you can supply custom ones using data-timbre-X attributes.
• A sequence consists of the following elements, separated by whitespaces:
  • wait:DURATION - adds DURATION ms to the global time shift, which starts at 0.
  • FREQUENCY:DURATION:GAIN:SHIFT:INSTRUMENT - plays FREQUENCY for DURATION ms with GAIN with timbre specified with INSTRUMENT. It starts at global shift + SHIFT ms, and global shift isn't modified. INSTRUMENT's default is sine; SHIFT's default is 0.
• For example, sequences used for interval demonstration look like this: 440:1000:0.1 660:1000:0.1:500 wait:2000 660:1000:0.1 440:1000:0.1:500 wait:2000 440:1000:0.1 660:1000:0.1.
• Modern browsers support Web Audio API quite well and I don't expect any compatibility issues.

What does CSS handle?

• Background colour of .sequence-audio-button elements depending on their state.
• Cursor styles upon .sequence-audio-button elements so that they're interpreted as interactive.
• Additionally, .white-key and .black-key elements have the corresponding colours. Those may be used to build interactive keyboards for ETs.

Examples (all require User:Plumtree/common.js and User:Plumtree/common.css to be properly viewed):

• User:Plumtree/Sound - mostly tests of intervals.
• User:Plumtree/Sandbox/Interval - actually tests of intervals as they're going to be included into Template:Infobox Interval.
• User:Plumtree/Audio - the template which is currently the main interface for this JS.

Plumtree (talk) 17:52, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for reconstructing my diagram on 10648/10647

Thank you, Xenwolf, for reconstructing my diagram on the harmonisma, 10648/10647, and your helpful hint on formatting monospaced text for alignment.

Your reformatting gave me the opportunity to spot and correct my mistakes in the original diagram, which were of course my own responsibility. Thanks to your help, the corrected diagram should hopefully help readers to visualize the relationship between the 10648/10647 and the 352/351 and 364/363. Mschulter1325 19:38, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome, it was a pleasure to help. Shouldn't the chart be placed on page 10648/10647 itself after the corrections are made? --Xenwolf (talk) 10:03, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it's corrected, and I just put some final touches on tidying up the alignment, so it should be ready to go on the article's page. Many thanks for your assistance! Mschulter1325 04:20, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Add HEJI font to CSS

Hi Xenwolf,

I'd like to add a bit of code to MediaWiki:Common.css so that we can use the HEJI2Text font on the wiki (instead of relying on a bunch of SVG images, namely), but I don't have admin access so I can't do it myself. Do you think you could add it?

/* use HEJI2Text font if class="heji" */
@font-face {
   font-family: HEJI2Text;
   src: url(https://plainsound.org/fonts/HEJI2Text.otf);
}
.heji {
   font-family: HEJI2Text;
}

--Fredg999 (talk) 07:49, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Fredg999, would you please try the additions needed within your personal common.css and prepare or collect some representative examples (maybe just links to pages)? This would also be a good basis to better understand the impact of this proposal on the site and for discussing individual points with other users. Best regards --Xenwolf (talk) 18:06, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

I added a few examples to my personal Sandbox page. Here is a screenshot of the result: https://drive.google.com/file/d/10ZLax9RYqQg3-mQtV9YeKPC--2VmvR43/view?usp=sharing

The main use case I have in mind is the Helmholtz-Ellis notation page, where we could improve the reference tables and give more examples efficiently using the HEJI font. I was thinking of adding a table that shows all symbols (a bit like the HEJI notation palette on Plainsound's HS CALC), but also shows the character mapping, so that readers can learn to use the font more easily on the wiki and elsewhere.

Most symbols from the Alternative symbols for ups and downs notation could also be written using the HEJI font, since it provides symbols for each combination of the standard chromatic accidentals with one, two or three up or down arrows.

Many other pages about just intonation could benefit from HEJI symbols as well, such as interval tables on various EDO pages (for easy up/down symbols as a complement to their "text" version; e.g. 22edo#Intervals), as well as the Overtone scale page, where notation would be another representation of the JI scales, alongside the solfege notations already present, for example.

--Fredg999 (talk) 03:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I added the font to MediaWiki:Common.css. --Xenwolf (talk) 06:52, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! --Fredg999 (talk) 07:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)