n in T[n]

Gene, et al;

So MOS aren't the only good n. Did we ever get a method
for defining all the "good" n? Paul, how does Miracle[22]
compare to Blackjack?

-Carl

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> Gene, et al;
>
> So MOS aren't the only good n. Did we ever get a method
> for defining all the "good" n? Paul, how does Miracle[22]
> compare to Blackjack?
>
> -Carl

it has one more note :) seriously, it's not a CS, so i thought
blackjack would make a better keyboard mapping for joseph who wanted
like intervals to appear as like intervals on the keyboard.

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> Gene, et al;
>
> So MOS aren't the only good n. Did we ever get a method
> for defining all the "good" n? Paul, how does Miracle[22]
> compare to Blackjack?

Miracle[22] is a 2MOS, but the interesting thing is that there are
regular, "good" scales which aren't either MOS or NMOS. I don't have a
theory for them.

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
wrote:
> --- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> > Gene, et al;
> >
> > So MOS aren't the only good n. Did we ever get a method
> > for defining all the "good" n? Paul, how does Miracle[22]
> > compare to Blackjack?
>
> Miracle[22] is a 2MOS, but the interesting thing is that there are
> regular, "good" scales which aren't either MOS or NMOS. I don't
have a
> theory for them.

regular in what sense? good in what sense?