Re: generalized microtonal nomenclatures...

Hi David,

I 'came up' with the EDO acronym mainly because of A: (as you said) "the
problems of vagueness and inappropriateness..." and B: (to paraphrase
something else that you said) The paradigms where more often than not, not
representing a tempering of previously recognized sets of intervals...

But I never much liked the EDO acronym itself, and never really much
followed up on thinking it through to anything any better... However I
really do like your generalized EDI proposal (and specifically the idea of
a more generalized - and more specific - microtonal nomenclature). Here are
a couple of off-the-cuff thoughts and comments -- I think that perhaps both
the "D" and the "I" of the EDI may be unnecessary, as I think a designation
on the order of say: "n"e, could (as much by default as anything else....)
always be understood to say: "The 2:1 equally divided by n..." and then
your other examples could perhaps be pared down to something on the order
of say:

12e
19e-3 (or 19e-3:1)
7e-3:2
31e-pi
e-88c

Dan