This is an
**
Opt In Archive
.
**
We would like to hear from you if you want your posts included. For the contact address see
About this archive. All posts are copyright (c).

5000
5050
5100
5150
5200
5250
5300
5350
5400
5450
5500
5550
5600
**5650**
5700
5750
5800
5850
5900
5950

5650 -
**5675 -**

Message: 5675 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 00:16:21 Subject: Re: Even more ridiculous 5-comma list From: wallyesterpaulrus --- In tuning-math@y..., "Paul G Hjelmstad" <paul.hjelmstad@u...> wrote:> > Thanks. Now just one more question: How do you calculate the second > generator (e.g. 162.9960265 in "porcupine")? I get slightly different > values, ones that still work, but I am wondering why they are different > from your's. Makes me wonder if I am simplifying something incorrectly. For > example, in "kleismic" I just use ln(6/5)/ln(2) * 1200, which is 315.641287 > instead of 317.079753. > > Paullooks like you're just using the pure minor third for kleismic. maybe you're using minimax optimization instead of rms?

Message: 5677 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:25:29 Subject: Some 17-limit basis stuff From: Gene W Smith I was looking at what turns up when we take six successive 17-limit superparticular commas, and it turns out that 72 is an outlier, in the sense that it gets created ten times in this way; its nearest competition is 764, which appears four times. We get 72 from any successive six commas in this list [385/384, 441/440, 442/441, 540/539, 561/560, 595/594, 625/624, 676/675] or this list [625/624, 676/675, 715/714, 729/728, 833/832, 936/935, 1001/1000, 1089/1088] or this list: [1089/1088, 1156/1155, 1225/1224, 1275/1274, 1701/1700, 1716/1715, 2058/2057] The TM basis is this: [169/168, 221/220, 225/224, 243/242, 273/272, 325/324] We also have an interesting situation with 46, where two versions of the 46 et appear. We have h46+v17: [46, 73, 107, 129, 159, 170, 189] This is defined by six contiguous commas in the list [325/324, 351/350, 352/351, 364/363, 375/374, 385/384, 441/440] and has basis [52/51, 91/90, 121/119, 126/125, 169/168, 176/175] We also have h46: [46, 73, 107, 129, 159, 170, 188] This is defined by six contiguous commas of the list [256/255, 273/272, 289/288, 325/324, 351/350, 352/351, 364/363] or by the six commas [2601/2600, 3025/3024, 4096/4095, 4225/4224, 4375/4374, 4914/4913] It has basis [91/90, 121/120, 126/125, 136/135, 154/153, 169/168]

Message: 5678 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 22:05:03 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: wallyesterpaulrus --- In tuning-math@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:> Not that any list is really ultimate, but with rms error < 40, >geometric complexity < 500,i'll stick with <100; apologies are still due pierre :)> and badness < 3500, it covers a lot of >ground. > > 27/25 3.739252 35.60924 1861.731473if i recall correctly, this gave some kind of 8-equal monster . . . bug> 135/128 4.132031 18.077734 1275.36536 pelogic > 256/243 5.493061 12.759741 2114.877638 blackwood > 25/24 3.025593 28.851897 799.108711 dicot > 648/625 6.437752 11.06006 2950.938432 diminished > 16875/16384 8.17255 5.942563 3243.743713 negri > 250/243 5.948286 7.975801 1678.609846 porcupine > 128/125 4.828314 9.677666 1089.323984 augmented > 3125/3072 7.741412 4.569472 2119.95499 magic > 20000/19683 9.785568 2.504205 2346.540676 tetracot > 531441/524288 13.183347 1.382394 3167.444999 aristoxenean > 81/80 4.132031 4.217731 297.556531 meantone > 2048/2025 6.271199 2.612822 644.408867 diaschismic > 67108864/66430125 15.510107 .905187 3377.402314carl seems to have missed this before. misty.> 78732/78125 12.192182 1.157498 2097.802867 semisixths > 393216/390625 12.543123 1.07195 2115.395301 wuerschmidt > 2109375/2097152 12.772341 .80041 1667.723301 orwell > 4294967296/4271484375 18.573955 .483108 3095.692488this one also seems to have escaped carl's notice. escapade.> 15625/15552 9.338935 1.029625 838.631548 kleismic > 1600000/1594323 13.7942 .383104 1005.555381 AMT > (2)^8*(3)^14/(5)^13 21.322672 .276603 2681.521263 parakleismic > (2)^24*(5)^4/(3)^21 21.733049 .153767 1578.433204 vulture > (2)^23*(3)^6/(5)^14 21.207625 .194018 1850.624306 semisuper > (5)^19/(2)^14/(3)^19 30.57932 .104784 2996.244873 enneadecal > (3)^18*(5)^17/(2)^68 38.845486 .058853 3449.774562 vavoom > (2)^39*(5)^3/(3)^29 30.550812 .057500 1639.59615 tricot > (3)^8*(5)/(2)^15 9.459948 .161693 136.885775 schismic > (3)^45/(2)^69/(5) 48.911647 .026391 3088.065497 turkey > (2)^38/(3)^2/(5)^15 24.977022 .060822 947.732642 semithirds > (3)^35/(2)^16/(5)^17 38.845486 .025466 1492.763207 minortone > (2)*(5)^18/(3)^27 33.653272 .025593 975.428947 ennealimmal > (2)^91/(3)^12/(5)^31 55.785793 .014993 2602.883149 astro > (3)^10*(5)^16/(2)^53 31.255737 .017725 541.228379 crazy > (2)^37*(3)^25/(5)^33 50.788153 .012388 1622.898233 whoosh > (5)^51/(2)^36/(3)^52 82.462759 .004660 2613.109284 egads > (2)^54*(5)^2/(3)^37 39.665603 .005738 358.1255 monzismic > (3)^47*(5)^14/(2)^107 62.992219 .003542 885.454661 fortune > (2)^144/(3)^22/(5)^47 86.914326 .002842 1866.076786 gross > (3)^62/(2)^17/(5)^35 72.066208 .003022 1131.212237 senior > (5)^49/(2)^90/(3)^15 74.858154 .000761 319.341867 piratei'll produce the next set of dualzoomers in accordance with this list.

Message: 5679 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 23:18:08 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: Gene Ward Smith --- In tuning-math@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...> wrote:>> 27/25 3.739252 35.60924 1861.731473> if i recall correctly, this gave some kind of 8-equal monster . . . > bugI called it limmal. Why bug?>> 1600000/1594323 13.7942 .383104 1005.555381 > AMT Amity?>> (2)^24*(5)^4/(3)^21 21.733049 .153767 1578.433204 > vulture>> (3)^45/(2)^69/(5) 48.911647 .026391 3088.065497 > turkeyI suppose this makes 53-et the turkey vulture, though putting these two together actually leads to 3-torsion, so maybe not. Turkey is interesting in that it says 5 ~ 2^(-69) 3^45 = 2^(-24) (3/2)^45. This means that like meantone and schismic, it has a generator of a fifth.>> (3)^10*(5)^16/(2)^53 31.255737 .017725 541.228379 > crazy Kwasi.>> (5)^49/(2)^90/(3)^15 74.858154 .000761 319.341867 > pirateWhen *I* tried to name it everyone booed. :( This is one of the two 4296-et power commas; the other is viking: 2^161 * 3^(-15) * 5^49 Also of note is raider = pirate * viking = 2^71 * 3^(-99) * 5^33 The TM basis for 4296 is <pirate, raider>.

Message: 5680 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 23:33:14 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: wallyesterpaulrus --- In tuning-math@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:> --- In tuning-math@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...> wrote: >>>> 27/25 3.739252 35.60924 1861.731473>> if i recall correctly, this gave some kind of 8-equalmonster . . .>> bug >> I called it limmal.too many definitions of limma -- see The Proxomitron Reveals... * [with cont.] (Wayb.) arts.org/dict/limma.htm> Why bug?a simple, undistinguished animal :)>>> 1600000/1594323 13.7942 .383104 1005.555381 >> AMT > > Amity? OK.>>> (2)^24*(5)^4/(3)^21 21.733049 .153767 1578.433204 >> vulture >>>> (3)^45/(2)^69/(5) 48.911647 .026391 3088.065497 >> turkey >> I suppose this makes 53-et the turkey vulture, though putting these >two together actually leads to 3-torsion, so maybe not.a 159-tone periodicity block? for the birds! :)> Turkey is interesting in that it says 5 ~ 2^(-69) 3^45 = > 2^(-24) (3/2)^45. This means that like meantone and schismic, ithas a generator of a fifth.>>>> (3)^10*(5)^16/(2)^53 31.255737 .017725 541.228379 >> crazy > > Kwasi.oh yeah, kwazy.>>> (5)^49/(2)^90/(3)^15 74.858154 .000761 319.341867 >> pirate >> When *I* tried to name it everyone booed. :(so sorry :( :( :(> This is one of the two 4296-et power commas; the other is viking: > > 2^161 * 3^(-15) * 5^49 > > Also of note is raider = pirate * viking = > > 2^71 * 3^(-99) * 5^33 > > The TM basis for 4296 is <pirate, raider>.u got it. i will up the complexity limit, if that gets these in there . . .

Message: 5681 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 23:37:44 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: wallyesterpaulrus --- In tuning-math@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:> This is one of the two 4296-et power commas; the other is viking: > > 2^161 * 3^(-15) * 5^49 > > Also of note is raider = pirate * viking = > > 2^71 * 3^(-99) * 5^33 > > The TM basis for 4296 is <pirate, raider>.if i raise my complexity limit anywhere from 5 to 43 points, i'd be adding these two and only these two to my list. seems like a sensible place to stop, at least until our next fit of mathematical irrelevance! :)

Message: 5682 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 23:50:58 Subject: Re: A Property of MOS/DE Scales From: Kalle Aho Paul wrote on tuning-list: "sorry i got confused on this matter! but the main thrust of my reply was to suggest to you that we have more sophisticated tools at our disposal now than i did when i wrote that paper. we should not be restricted to an ET conception. each MOS/DE scale can be defined independently in terms of its own generator, in cents; and period of repetition, in 1/octaves. by restricting ourselves to ETs and their best approximations to consonant intervals, we may miss some interesting and wonderful possibilities. it might be a good idea to follow up to tuning-math, where the "searchers" may be more willing to publically help." I am aware of these more sophisticated (and also more elegant) tools and possibilities. So if anyone is interested please read the thread in tuning list and continue on tuning-math. Kalle

Message: 5683 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 18:49:30 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: wallyesterpaulrus --- In tuning-math@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:> Viking [161, -84, -12] .015361 centsthis is the difference between 11 pythagorean commas and 12 syntonic commas. i'm going to call it "atomic" instead, unless someone comes up with a better name . . .

Message: 5684 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 20:45:49 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: wallyesterpaulrus what if we pushed up the badness limit until ampersand made it in? the 5-limit comma does have a name, so it must be of some use . . . --- In tuning-math@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:> Not that any list is really ultimate, but with rms error < 40,geometric complexity < 500, and badness < 3500, it covers a lot of ground.> > 27/25 3.739252 35.60924 1861.731473 > > 135/128 4.132031 18.077734 1275.36536 > > 256/243 5.493061 12.759741 2114.877638 > > 25/24 3.025593 28.851897 799.108711 > > 648/625 6.437752 11.06006 2950.938432 > > 16875/16384 8.17255 5.942563 3243.743713 > > 250/243 5.948286 7.975801 1678.609846 > > 128/125 4.828314 9.677666 1089.323984 > > 3125/3072 7.741412 4.569472 2119.95499 > > 20000/19683 9.785568 2.504205 2346.540676 > > 531441/524288 13.183347 1.382394 3167.444999 > > 81/80 4.132031 4.217731 297.556531 > > 2048/2025 6.271199 2.612822 644.408867 > > 67108864/66430125 15.510107 .905187 3377.402314 > > 78732/78125 12.192182 1.157498 2097.802867 > > 393216/390625 12.543123 1.07195 2115.395301 > > 2109375/2097152 12.772341 .80041 1667.723301 > > 4294967296/4271484375 18.573955 .483108 3095.692488 > > 15625/15552 9.338935 1.029625 838.631548 > > 1600000/1594323 13.7942 .383104 1005.555381 > > (2)^8*(3)^14/(5)^13 21.322672 .276603 2681.521263 > > (2)^24*(5)^4/(3)^21 21.733049 .153767 1578.433204 > > (2)^23*(3)^6/(5)^14 21.207625 .194018 1850.624306 > > (5)^19/(2)^14/(3)^19 30.57932 .104784 2996.244873 > > (3)^18*(5)^17/(2)^68 38.845486 .058853 3449.774562 > > (2)^39*(5)^3/(3)^29 30.550812 .057500 1639.59615 > > (3)^8*(5)/(2)^15 9.459948 .161693 136.885775 > > (3)^45/(2)^69/(5) 48.911647 .026391 3088.065497 > > (2)^38/(3)^2/(5)^15 24.977022 .060822 947.732642 > > (3)^35/(2)^16/(5)^17 38.845486 .025466 1492.763207 > > (2)*(5)^18/(3)^27 33.653272 .025593 975.428947 > > (2)^91/(3)^12/(5)^31 55.785793 .014993 2602.883149 > > (3)^10*(5)^16/(2)^53 31.255737 .017725 541.228379 > > (2)^37*(3)^25/(5)^33 50.788153 .012388 1622.898233 > > (5)^51/(2)^36/(3)^52 82.462759 .004660 2613.109284 > > (2)^54*(5)^2/(3)^37 39.665603 .005738 358.1255 > > (3)^47*(5)^14/(2)^107 62.992219 .003542 885.454661 > > (2)^144/(3)^22/(5)^47 86.914326 .002842 1866.076786 > > (3)^62/(2)^17/(5)^35 72.066208 .003022 1131.212237 > > (5)^86/(2)^19/(3)^114 151.69169 .000751 2621.929721 > > (3)^54*(5)^110/(2)^341 205.015253 .000385 3314.979642 > > (2)^232*(5)^25/(3)^183 191.093312 .000319 2223.857514 > > (2)^71*(5)^37/(3)^99 104.66308 .000511 586.422003 > > (5)^49/(2)^90/(3)^15 74.858154 .000761 319.341867 > > (3)^69*(5)^61/(2)^251 143.055244 .000194 566.898668 > > (3)^153*(5)^73/(2)^412 235.664038 5.224825e-05 683.835625 > > (2)^161/(3)^84/(5)^12 100.527798 .000120 121.841527 > > (2)^734/(3)^321/(5)^97 431.645735 3.225337e-05 2593.925421 > > (2)^21*(3)^290/(5)^207 374.22268 2.495356e-05 1307.744113 > > (2)^140*(5)^195/(3)^374 423.433817 2.263360e-05 1718.344823 > > (3)^237*(5)^85/(2)^573 332.899311 5.681549e-06 209.60684

Message: 5685 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 21:51:19 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: Gene Ward Smith --- In tuning-math@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...> wrote:> --- In tuning-math@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote: >>> Viking [161, -84, -12] .015361 cents> this is the difference between 11 pythagorean commas and 12 syntonic > commas. i'm going to call it "atomic" instead, unless someone comes > up with a better name . . .Then shouldn't pirate and raider be electron and proton? Good spot, by the way.

Message: 5686 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 22:22:56 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: wallyesterpaulrus --- In tuning-math@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:> --- In tuning-math@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...> wrote:>> --- In tuning-math@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote: >>>>> Viking [161, -84, -12] .015361 cents >>> this is the difference between 11 pythagorean commas and 12 syntonic >> commas. i'm going to call it "atomic" instead, unless someone comes >> up with a better name . . . >> Then shouldn't pirate and raider be electron and proton?if you say so, but which is which? then again, speaking of "electronic music" might get confusing . . .

Message: 5688 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 00:22:07 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: wallyesterpaulrus --- In tuning-math@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...> wrote:> --- In tuning-math@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote: >>> This is one of the two 4296-et power commas; the other is viking: >> >> 2^161 * 3^(-15) * 5^49 >> >> Also of note is raider = pirate * viking = >> >> 2^71 * 3^(-99) * 5^33 >> >> The TM basis for 4296 is <pirate, raider>. >> if i raise my complexity limit anywhere from 5 to 43 points, i'd be > adding these two and only these two to my list. seems like a sensible > place to stop, at least until our next fit of mathematical > irrelevance! :)wait a minute. i went back to your list with only the 2s exponent and looked up the complexity based on that. but something's wrong. 2^161 * 3^(-15) * 5^49 = 301200.046966396 cents 2^71 * 3^(-99) * 5^33 = -11145.1925281338 cents what are they really supposed to be, and what is the geometric complexity of them?

Message: 5690 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 04:24:09 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: Gene Ward Smith --- In tuning-math@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...> wrote:>> This is one of the two 4296-et power commas; the other is viking: >> >> 2^161 * 3^(-15) * 5^49 >> >> Also of note is raider = pirate * viking = >> >> 2^71 * 3^(-99) * 5^33 >> >> The TM basis for 4296 is <pirate, raider>. >> u got it. i will up the complexity limit, if that gets these in > there . . .4296 is certainly a logical stopping point; all you need to do is up the limit to 105. Viking is 100.53, and raider is 104.66.

Message: 5692 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 04:31:52 Subject: Re: Ultimate 5-limit comma list From: Gene Ward Smith --- In tuning-math@y..., "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...> wrote:> 2^161 * 3^(-15) * 5^49 = 301200.046966396 cents > 2^71 * 3^(-99) * 5^33 = -11145.1925281338 centsPirate [-90, -15, 49] .046966 cents Raider [71, -99, 37] .062327 cents Viking [161, -84, -12] .015361 cents

Message: 5696 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 05:14:59 Subject: 25/24, 49/48, 50/49 From: Gene Ward Smith "Standard" ets for which h(25/24)=0, h(49/48)=1 7,17 h(25/24)=1 h(49/48)=0 5,9,15,19,25,29 h(50/49)=0 h(25/24)=1 2,12,16,18,22,26,32 Linear temperaments with 25/24 a comma and geometric badness below 5000: 25/24 [0, 0, 4, 9, -6, 0] [[4, 6, 9, 0], [0, 0, 0, 1]] complexity 6.647907 rms 63.402645 badness 2802.058941 generators [300.0000000, 3306.069668] [0, 0, 7, 16, -11, 0] [[7, 11, 16, 0], [0, 0, 0, 1]] complexity 11.633838 rms 25.354978 badness 3431.699321 generators [171.4285715, 3348.926812] [2, 1, -4, -12, 12, -3] [[1, 1, 2, 4], [0, 2, 1, -4]] complexity 9.849244 rms 25.068246 badness 2431.810367 generators [1200., 358.0334333] [0, 0, 3, 7, -5, 0] [[3, 5, 7, 0], [0, 0, 0, 1]] complexity 4.985930 rms 61.312549 badness 1524.199406 generators [400.0000000, 3406.069668] [4, 2, 2, -1, 8, -6] [[2, 0, 3, 4], [0, 2, 1, 1]] complexity 10.574200 rms 23.945252 badness 2677.407574 generators [600.0000000, 950.9775006] [2, 1, 6, 11, -4, -3] [[1, 1, 2, 1], [0, 2, 1, 6]] complexity 9.849244 rms 26.099830 badness 2531.881840 generators [1200., 360.2272895] [2, 1, 3, 4, 1, -3] [[1, 1, 2, 2], [0, 2, 1, 3]] complexity 6.245166 rms 48.926006 badness 1908.216791 generators [1200., 322.2119006] [2, 1, -1, -5, 7, -3] [[1, 1, 2, 3], [0, 2, 1, -1]] complexity 6.245166 rms 53.747748 badness 2096.274853 generators [1200., 318.5700997] Ditto with 49/48: [4, 2, 2, -1, 8, -6] [[2, 0, 3, 4], [0, 2, 1, 1]] complexity 10.574200 rms 23.945252 badness 2677.407574 generators [600.0000000, 950.9775006] [6, 5, 3, -7, 12, -6] [[1, 0, 1, 2], [0, 6, 5, 3]] complexity 16.383068 rms 12.273810 badness 3294.350648 generators [1200., 316.6640534] [4, -3, 2, 13, 8, -14] [[1, 2, 2, 3], [0, 4, -3, 2]] complexity 14.729697 rms 12.188571 badness 2644.480844 generators [1200., -125.4687958] [2, 3, 1, -6, 4, 0] [[1, 0, 0, 2], [0, 2, 3, 1]] complexity 6.691597 rms 34.566097 badness 1547.782446 generators [1200., 929.2070233] [6, 0, 3, 7, 12, -14] [[3, 0, 7, 6], [0, 2, 0, 1]] complexity 17.012788 rms 16.786584 badness 4858.624067 generators [400.0000000, 956.3327071] [0, 5, 0, -14, 0, 8] [[5, 8, 0, 14], [0, 0, 1, 0]] complexity 10.254281 rms 15.815352 badness 1662.988582 generators [240.0000000, 2789.386744] [2, 8, 1, -20, 4, 8] [[1, 0, -4, 2], [0, 2, 8, 1]] complexity 15.298626 rms 12.690078 badness 2970.086938 generators [1200., 947.2576877] [2, -6, 1, 19, 4, -14] [[1, 0, 7, 2], [0, 2, -6, 1]] complexity 15.298626 rms 18.261110 badness 4273.975544 generators [1200., 939.2948284] Ditto with 50/49: [4, 4, 4, -2, 5, -3] [[4, 0, 3, 5], [0, 1, 1, 1]] complexity 11.405897 rms 19.136993 badness 2489.617178 generators [300.0000000, 1885.698206] [0, 2, 2, -1, -3, 3] [[2, 3, 0, 1], [0, 0, 1, 1]] complexity 4.275602 rms 59.723378 badness 1091.789278 generators [600.0000000, 2726.592310] [6, -2, -2, 1, 20, -17] [[2, 2, 5, 6], [0, 3, -1, -1]] complexity 19.126831 rms 11.798337 badness 4316.252447 generators [600.0000000, 231.2978354] [2, -4, -4, 2, 12, -11] [[2, 0, 11, 12], [0, 1, -2, -2]] complexity 11.925109 rms 10.903178 badness 1550.521640 generators [600.0000000, 1908.814331] [2, 6, 6, -3, -4, 5] [[2, 0, -5, -4], [0, 1, 3, 3]] complexity 11.925109 rms 18.863889 badness 2682.600333 generators [600.0000000, 1928.512337] [2, 8, 8, -4, -7, 8] [[2, 0, -8, -7], [0, 1, 4, 4]] complexity 15.871133 rms 11.218941 badness 2825.971103 generators [600.0000000, 1893.651026] [8, 6, 6, -3, 13, -9] [[2, 1, 3, 4], [0, 4, 3, 3]] complexity 21.576275 rms 10.132266 badness 4716.930929 generators [600.0000000, 325.6113679] [4, 2, 2, -1, 8, -6] [[2, 0, 3, 4], [0, 2, 1, 1]] complexity 10.574200 rms 23.945252 badness 2677.407574 generators [600.0000000, 950.9775006]

Message: 5697 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 03:44:07 Subject: Re: 25/24, 49/48, 50/49 From: wallyesterpaulrus i don't know if the usual badness measure was appropriate in this case -- see my results and then you might get a better feel for it. the first key to interpreting this is to note that the chromatic unison vector's size in generators will equal the cardinality of the scale (per period) . . . let's cap the rms error at 20-22 cents . . .> Ditto with 49/48: > > [6, 5, 3, -7, 12, -6] [[1, 0, 1, 2], [0, 6, 5, 3]] > complexity 16.383068 rms 12.273810 badness 3294.350648 > generators [1200., 316.6640534]25:24 chroma = 10 - 4 = 7 generators -> 4 note scale graham complexity = 6 X> [4, -3, 2, 13, 8, -14] [[1, 2, 2, 3], [0, 4, -3, 2]] > complexity 14.729697 rms 12.188571 badness 2644.480844 > generators [1200., -125.4687958]25:24 chroma = -6 - 4 = -10 generators -> 10 note scale graham complexity = 7 -> 6 tetrads> [6, 0, 3, 7, 12, -14] [[3, 0, 7, 6], [0, 2, 0, 1]] > complexity 17.012788 rms 16.786584 badness 4858.624067 > generators [400.0000000, 956.3327071]25:24 chroma = 0 - 2 = -2 generators -> 6 note scale graham complexity = 2*3=6 X> [0, 5, 0, -14, 0, 8] [[5, 8, 0, 14], [0, 0, 1, 0]] > complexity 10.254281 rms 15.815352 badness 1662.988582 > generators [240.0000000, 2789.386744] blackwood-1025:24 chroma = 2 - 0 = 2 generators -> 10 note scale graham complexity = 1*5=5 -> 10 tetrads> [2, 8, 1, -20, 4, 8] [[1, 0, -4, 2], [0, 2, 8, 1]] > complexity 15.298626 rms 12.690078 badness 2970.086938 > generators [1200., 947.2576877]25:24 chroma = 16 - 2 = 14 generators -> 14 note scale graham complexity = 8 -> 12 tetrads> [2, -6, 1, 19, 4, -14] [[1, 0, 7, 2], [0, 2, -6, 1]] > complexity 15.298626 rms 18.261110 badness 4273.975544 > generators [1200., 939.2948284]25:24 chroma = -12 - 2 = -14 generators -> 14 note scale graham complexity = 8 -> 12 tetrads> Ditto with 50/49: > > [4, 4, 4, -2, 5, -3] [[4, 0, 3, 5], [0, 1, 1, 1]] > complexity 11.405897 rms 19.136993 badness 2489.617178 > generators [300.0000000, 1885.698206]25:24 chroma = 2 - 1 = 1 generator -> 4 note scale graham complexity = 1*4 = 4 X> [6, -2, -2, 1, 20, -17] [[2, 2, 5, 6], [0, 3, -1, -1]] > complexity 19.126831 rms 11.798337 badness 4316.252447 > generators [600.0000000, 231.2978354]25:24 chroma = -2 - 3 = 5 generators -> 10 note scale graham complexity = 8 -> 4 tetrads> [2, -4, -4, 2, 12, -11] [[2, 0, 11, 12], [0, 1, -2, -2]] > complexity 11.925109 rms 10.903178 badness 1550.521640 > generators [600.0000000, 1908.814331] pajara-1025:24 chroma = -4 - 1 = 5 generators -> 10 note scale graham complexity = 3*2 = 6 -> 8 tetrads> [2, 6, 6, -3, -4, 5] [[2, 0, -5, -4], [0, 1, 3, 3]] > complexity 11.925109 rms 18.863889 badness 2682.600333 > generators [600.0000000, 1928.512337]25:24 chroma = 6 - 1 = 5 generators -> 10 note scale graham complexity = 3*2 = 6 -> 8 tetrads> [2, 8, 8, -4, -7, 8] [[2, 0, -8, -7], [0, 1, 4, 4]] > complexity 15.871133 rms 11.218941 badness 2825.971103 > generators [600.0000000, 1893.651026] injera-1425:24 chroma = 8 - 1 = 7 generators -> 14 note scale graham complexity = 4*2 = 8 -> 12 tetrads> [8, 6, 6, -3, 13, -9] [[2, 1, 3, 4], [0, 4, 3, 3]] > complexity 21.576275 rms 10.132266 badness 4716.930929 > generators [600.0000000, 325.6113679]25:24 chroma = 6 - 4 = 2 generators -> 4 note scale graham complexity = 4*2 = 8 X p.s. note that this one:> [4, 2, 2, -1, 8, -6] [[2, 0, 3, 4], [0, 2, 1, 1]] > complexity 10.574200 rms 23.945252 badness 2677.407574 > generators [600.0000000, 950.9775006]appeared in all three lists . . .

Message: 5698 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 11:23:21 Subject: Re: 25/24, 49/48, 50/49 From: Kalle Aho Thank you, Gene and Paul! Great job! How is complexity calculated and why? Badness is somewhere around complexity^2*rms, what's the idea behind this? I guess everything is in the archives, any old messages you'd like me to read? Kalle

Message: 5699 - Contents - Hide Contents Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 20:04:26 Subject: Re: 25/24, 49/48, 50/49 From: Gene Ward Smith --- In tuning-math@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxx "Kalle Aho <kalleaho@m...>" <kalleaho@m...> wrote:> How is complexity calculated and why?I calculated complexity using a rather complicated formula, but Paul tells me that Graham complexity would have been better; evidentally you are interested only in complete tetrads. It is easy to compute: take the range in generator steps of the representations of {1,3,5,7,5/3,7/3,7/5} and multiply by the number of periods in an octave. Badness is somewhere around> complexity^2*rms, what's the idea behind this?It makes the badness measure "log-flat", roughly meaning about as many temperaments appear in one size range as in another.

5000
5050
5100
5150
5200
5250
5300
5350
5400
5450
5500
5550
5600
**5650**
5700
5750
5800
5850
5900
5950

5650 -
**5675 -**