Strange9

On Dave's web page is a discussion of "Strange9"

http://dkeenan.com/Music/Strange9.htm

This is either Pajara, Pajara[10], or both. Dave wanted to beat Paul's
Pajara[10] tuned to 22-equal, and ended up detempering it, though not
on purpose. Paul came up with "Pajara" as a name for the temperament;
I'm wondering if Dave was proposing "Strange" or "Strange9" for it.

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
wrote:
> On Dave's web page is a discussion of "Strange9"
>
> http://dkeenan.com/Music/Strange9.htm
>
> This is either Pajara, Pajara[10], or both.

How can it be Pajara. It is planar. Pajara is linear. How can it be
any [10]? It has 12 notes.

> Dave wanted to beat Paul's
> Pajara[10] tuned to 22-equal, and ended up detempering it, though not
> on purpose. Paul came up with "Pajara" as a name for the temperament;
> I'm wondering if Dave was proposing "Strange" or "Strange9" for it.

I used "Strange9" for the article, but had no thoughts of any wider
context, such as catalogs of temperaments, at the time.

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Keenan" <d.keenan@b...>
wrote:
> --- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
> wrote:
> > On Dave's web page is a discussion of "Strange9"
> >
> > http://dkeenan.com/Music/Strange9.htm
> >
> > This is either Pajara, Pajara[10], or both.
>
> How can it be Pajara. It is planar.

What you describe on your website is not planar, since you show it as
equating things 50/49, 64/63 and 225/224 apart.

Pajara is linear. How can it be
> any [10]? It has 12 notes.

Sorry, Pajara[12].

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
wrote:
> --- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Keenan" <d.keenan@b...>
> wrote:
> > --- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
> > wrote:
> > > On Dave's web page is a discussion of "Strange9"
> > >
> > > http://dkeenan.com/Music/Strange9.htm
> > >
> > > This is either Pajara, Pajara[10], or both.
> >
> > How can it be Pajara. It is planar.
>
> What you describe on your website is not planar, since you show it as
> equating things 50/49, 64/63 and 225/224 apart.

Hmm. Then I'd like to understand what's going on. Because it relies on
having two different sizes of fifth. i.e. it has two generators in
addition to the half-octave period.

You can see its error minimum on the charts, in a valley going off at
right angles to the Pajara line (where both fifth sizes are the same).

Did I make a mistake with the rationalisations, or am I using an
inconsistent mapping?