Re: why not ED2?

Joe,

Thanks for tracing the history of EDO.

<<

EDO = equally-divided "octave" ex: equal temperaments
UDO = unequally-divided "octave" ex: meantones
EDNO = equally-divided non-"octave" ex: BP; 88-cet
UDNO = unequally-divided non-"octave" ex: stretch tunings
In a message dated 5/17/01 5:41:13 AM, joemonz@yahoo.com writes:
>>

you wrote:

<< The purely mathematical description may be the most
flexible and descriptive of all. >>

No disagreement there, but as you also know, it's not economical to type, and
it doesn't have the relative ease of verbal use that an acronym does. If I
understand you correctly, this is why the mathematical notation was not
preferred. My argument against EDO and relatives is just the O part.

<<I thought i was
integer, >>

"i" means "imaginary number", or the square root of -1. The set of integers
contains the set of natural numbers, zero, and the negative numbers. Since
we don't want negatuves or zero; we want only the positive integers. These
are the natural numbers, which can use a variety of letters, avoiding letters
like e and i.

Reading through your response, it seemed more clear that 144-ED2 would be a
good compromise between math and words since it's an acronym that doesn't
contain the term "octave" (which we have to apologise for) and it's not a
_completely abstract generalisation, which (though I prefer math myself) is
more cryptic in a verbal context. All the acronyms could be simplified:

ED2 = equally-divided "octave" ex: equal temperaments
UD2 = unequally-divided "octave" ex: meantones
EDk = equally-divided non-"octave" ex: BP; 88-cet
UDk = unequally-divided non-"octave" ex: stretch tunings

k doesn't have to be a whole number, so it can be things like pi and phi, etc.

Yours,
Aaron

Aaron & Monz,

Aaron, I agree with you that it is a pain. And I don't
like EDO & EDNO so much because the extra special
attention it affords the O. I like your solution too.

This is what I will do, here's an example:

Hi, let me tell you about 91^(1/251) tuning. The 251st
root of 91 is the One True Tuning. Blah blah blah. etc.
91d251 is the answer to the world's crises and blah blah
blah etc. This fantastic 251ED91 allows expressions and
intervals no one has ever seen before blah blah blah etc.

As far as i goes, it is used is computer programming all
the time as an ITERATOR, hence the name. Some write it
'ii' to make it easier to search for. In doubly nested
loops, usually go to j or jj, j not meaning anything.

In non-computer math, i is almost always the root of -1,
though it is also used as a subscript index, though that
is usually clear from the formatting.

If trying to mean an integer in ASCII, I would use n. k is
fine too. Or WHATEVER you want if you specify it, which
you should do anyway.

Ex: "x = pi^(n/5), where n is a positive integer"

- Jeff

Just a quick extra note,

[I said:]
> Hi, let me tell you about 91^(1/251) tuning. The 251st
> root of 91 is the One True Tuning. Blah blah blah. etc.
> 91d251 is the answer to the world's crises and blah blah
> blah etc. This fantastic 251ED91 allows expressions and
> intervals no one has ever seen before blah blah blah etc.

I think it would be **extremely helpful** to also refer to
this at some point as "31.1130cET (cents equal
temperament)", which tells me all I need to know.

- Jeff

--- In tuning@y..., "X. J. Scott" <xjscott@e...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_23016.html#23018

> Aaron & Monz,
>
> Aaron, I agree with you that it is a pain. And I don't
> like EDO & EDNO so much because the extra special
> attention it affords the O. I like your solution too.
>
> This is what I will do, here's an example:
>
> Hi, let me tell you about 91^(1/251) tuning. The 251st
> root of 91 is the One True Tuning. Blah blah blah. etc.
> 91d251 is the answer to the world's crises and blah blah
> blah etc. This fantastic 251ED91 allows expressions and
> intervals no one has ever seen before blah blah blah etc.
>

Pretty funny, Jeff!

________ _____ ______
Joseph Pehrson

On 5/20/01 9:20 AM, "jpehrson@rcn.com" <jpehrson@rcn.com> wrote:

>> Hi, let me tell you about 91^(1/251) tuning. The 251st
>> root of 91 is the One True Tuning. Blah blah blah. etc.
>> 91d251 is the answer to the world's crises and blah blah
>> blah etc. This fantastic 251ED91 allows expressions and
>> intervals no one has ever seen before blah blah blah etc.
>>
>
> Pretty funny, Jeff!

Yeah this is great. It's somewhere between 38 and 39,
I suppose it's like using 2/77 as a generator.
I'm not sure what to put on the B-side of the board.
I suppose a 2/79 generator...