name?

Is there a name for the 5-limit interval [-30 13], or the
temperament which removes it?

-Carl

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:

> Is there a name for the 5-limit interval [-30 13], or the
> temperament which removes it?
>
> -Carl

I doubt it. The interval in question is either

160000000000000
--------------- = -436.57 cents
205891132094649

or

320000000000000
--------------- = 763.43 cents
205891132094649

. . .

>> Is there a name for the 5-limit interval [-30 13], or the
>> temperament which removes it?
>>
>> -Carl
>
>I doubt it. The interval in question is either
>
>160000000000000
>--------------- = -436.57 cents
>205891132094649
>
>or
>
>320000000000000
>--------------- = 763.43 cents
>205891132094649
>
>. . .

That's funny, it's supposed to be 222 cents. Crap, so sorry,
it should have been [-30 0 13].

-Carl

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> >> Is there a name for the 5-limit interval [-30 13], or the
> >> temperament which removes it?
> >>
> >> -Carl
> >
> >I doubt it. The interval in question is either
> >
> >160000000000000
> >--------------- = -436.57 cents
> >205891132094649
> >
> >or
> >
> >320000000000000
> >--------------- = 763.43 cents
> >205891132094649
> >
> >. . .
>
> That's funny, it's supposed to be 222 cents.

Well, then I still doubt it.

> Crap, so sorry,
> it should have been [-30 0 13].

Oh so you're thinking about 13-equal.

>Oh so you're thinking about 13-equal.

Yup. And I think only multiples of 13 do the job?

-Carl

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> >Oh so you're thinking about 13-equal.
>
> Yup. And I think only multiples of 13 do the job?
>
> -Carl

don't get your question . . .

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:

> That's funny, it's supposed to be 222 cents. Crap, so sorry,
> it should have been [-30 0 13].

Here we see the advantage of leaving the 2s in.

>> >Oh so you're thinking about 13-equal.
>>
>> Yup. And I think only multiples of 13 do the job?
>>
>> -Carl
>
>don't get your question . . .

Which ETs temper this comma out?

-Carl

>> That's funny, it's supposed to be 222 cents. Crap, so sorry,
>> it should have been [-30 0 13].
>
>Here we see the advantage of leaving the 2s in.

Or in my case, not failing to leave in the 3s!

-Carl

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:
> >> >Oh so you're thinking about 13-equal.
> >>
> >> Yup. And I think only multiples of 13 do the job?
> >>
> >> -Carl
> >
> >don't get your question . . .
>
> Which ETs temper this comma out?
>
> -Carl

Yes, as long as 4/13 oct. remains your operative (by being 'best' or
whatever rule you base your mapping on) approximation of 5:4.