You have to scroll all the way to the bottom of the page and click the link to request the desktop version of the site. For whatever reason the Mathjax stuff doesn't work in the mobile version which it serves mobile browsers by default. I learned that a few months ago from Paul, I think, when I was working on my metallic MOS page.Dave Keenan wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:47 am I see lots of "[math]...[/math]" when I view it using Chrome on my Android phone, but it looks great when I view it with Firefox or Chrome on my Windows machine.
Oh right! Yes.We still need to add a list of ratios with their N2D3P9 (and perhaps their rank according to N2D3P9 and their archive rank and votes). And perhaps a graph or two.
- I can get the table of top 5-rough ratios up there. I agree that including ranks will good, including as an illustration of the fractional ranking scheme. What do you think – should I include long ASCII forms of symbols in Sagittal JI notation?
- I think your graph of N2D3P9 against actual Scala stats graph would be nice. You have an N2D3P1 vs the stats graph here and then N2D3P9 but w/ the axes switched and on a logarithmic scale here. It would be nice to see the 4%-fewer-on-average effect visualized, more like the full version of the graph here.
- Maybe a histogram of the Scala stats, showing votes per ratio (maybe not all 820 of them... just the first 100 or something), so you can visualize the Zipf's law effect.
- The charts you produced for the individual weightings of primes were really interesting but they may be a bit tangential to the final results for the Wiki page... but let me know if you think otherwise.
If you want access to your old account, you might want to ping Mike. I'm pretty sure he's an admin and might be able to help.I think I will need to re-register to be able to edit on the Wiki. My existing account, if it still exists, will only have my old email address which I no longer have access to. I will investigate when I have time.
Agreed and updated.We need to change "The 5-rough-ratio notational popularity ranking function that had been used by the creators of Sagittal was sopfr" to "An earlier 5-rough-ratio notational popularity ranking function that had been used by the creators of Sagittal was sopfr".
And I suggest changing "a single figure obtained for each 5-rough ratio (representing the class)" to "a single figure obtained for each 5-rough superunison ratio (representing the class)".
Good point. Yes, I was just thinking about this the other night. Were Sagittal nothing but a JI notation, we'd be done. But Sagittal aspires to notate pitch systems with fifths other than exactly 3/2 which is why we care about apotome slope. What I was wondering to myself was whether we should factor limma slope into the comma-no-pop-rank too, or if we need to factor them in differently depending on the symbol. But of course I'm teetering dangerously on the precipice of working on the comma-no-pop-rank metric here... which I'm not... supposed... to do yet...I think it would be good to announce it on the Microtonal Theory facebook group, when we both agree it is ready. I think the comma-no-pop-rank will be of even less general interest (even more specific to Sagittal notation design).
FWIW, a couple of my coworkers did in fact think it was somewhat cool that I had helped develop a way to estimate the popularity of a musical pitch ratio. It's certainly at least a concept whose value can be easily explained to someone with little interest in composing or helping to compose microtonal music.