back to list

A clipper comma list

🔗Gene Ward Smith <gwsmith@svpal.org>

8/29/2004 2:30:16 AM

"Clipper comma" seems like a better name than "true". Each of the
(7-limit) commas on this list carves out its own domain of influence,
in the sense that it is the smallest comma in operation in the genus
of the odd height of the comma. 126/125, for example, while clearly a
comma of significance, is upstaged by 225/224 within its own domain,
as defined by the genus of the odd height. It doesn't get to be a
clipper comma, since 225/224 clips it.

Clipper commas:

[4/3, 5/4, 8/7, 9/8, 35/32, 16/15, 135/128, 256/243, 21/20, 256/245,
25/24, 16807/16384, 525/512, 128/125, 49/48, 50/49, 3125/3072, 64/63,
81/80, 2048/2025, 245/243, 2109375/2097152, 1029/1024, 15625/15552,
225/224, 3136/3125, 5120/5103, 6144/6125, 2100875/2097152,
5250987/5242880, 65625/65536, 32805/32768, 703125/702464, 2401/2400,
4375/4374, 250047/250000]

🔗monz <monz@attglobal.net>

8/29/2004 8:29:48 AM

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
wrote:

> "Clipper comma" seems like a better name than "true".
> Each of the (7-limit) commas on this list carves out its
> own domain of influence, in the sense that it is the
> smallest comma in operation in the genus of the
> odd height of the comma. 126/125, for example, while
> clearly a comma of significance, is upstaged by 225/224
> within its own domain, as defined by the genus of the
> odd height. It doesn't get to be a clipper comma, since
> 225/224 clips it.

"clipper comma" has a nice ring to it, and for someone
who's used to thinking of this stuff geometrically,
in terms of lattices and periodicity-blocks, it immediately
gives a good visual image of what's going on.

but ... as i've said before, i don't like to contribute
to the trend of using the word "comma" in this more
general meaning, preferring to limit "comma" to something
in the 12-to-35-cent range.

oh well ...

-monz

🔗Gene Ward Smith <gwsmith@svpal.org>

8/29/2004 10:41:58 AM

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:

> but ... as i've said before, i don't like to contribute
> to the trend of using the word "comma" in this more
> general meaning, preferring to limit "comma" to something
> in the 12-to-35-cent range.

Now is your chance to suggest another name.