Browse Groups

• On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 12:56 AM, genewardsmith ... a) I thought the zeta tuning involved taking the integral between two zeros? b) I also thought the zeta
Message 1 of 9 , Mar 2, 2011
View Source
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 12:56 AM, genewardsmith
<genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 12:40 AM, genewardsmith
> > <genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> > For example, one of the entries on the list is 7-equal. Is it actually
> > 7-equal, though, or is that rounded? Is the actual number closer to
> > 7.2, for instance? If so, that's the porcupine generator.
>
> I consider the canonical zeta tuning to be at the local maxima or minima, or in other words at the corresponding zero of Z'(t). Which means, it would be some number near to 7, but not 7; kind of like a TOP/TE tuning, only without specifying a prime limit.

a) I thought the zeta tuning involved taking the integral between two zeros?
b) I also thought the zeta tuning involved doing (t+s)/2, where t and
s are two successive renormalized zeroes?
c) Is there any way, if you ever have a sec, I could get a list of the
first few zeta zeroes unrounded? I'd appreciate it and it would be
useful for me to figure out what the heck is going on.

-Mike
• ... That seems to be the zeta goodness figure which works the best. ... That can also be done, and is a lot easier. ... I ll email it. Do you want the actual
Message 1 of 9 , Mar 2, 2011
View Source
--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:

> a) I thought the zeta tuning involved taking the integral between two zeros?

That seems to be the zeta goodness figure which works the best.

> b) I also thought the zeta tuning involved doing (t+s)/2, where t and
> s are two successive renormalized zeroes?

That can also be done, and is a lot easier.

> c) Is there any way, if you ever have a sec, I could get a list of the
> first few zeta zeroes unrounded? I'd appreciate it and it would be
> useful for me to figure out what the heck is going on.

I'll email it. Do you want the actual zeros, or the zeros normalized so as to correspond to equal divisions?
• On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:28 AM, genewardsmith ... But now you re saying we just take the location of the minimum or maximum? ... Can you send the normalized
Message 1 of 9 , Mar 2, 2011
View Source
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:28 AM, genewardsmith
<genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:
>
> > a) I thought the zeta tuning involved taking the integral between two zeros?
>
> That seems to be the zeta goodness figure which works the best.

But now you're saying we just take the location of the minimum or maximum?

> > c) Is there any way, if you ever have a sec, I could get a list of the
> > first few zeta zeroes unrounded? I'd appreciate it and it would be
> > useful for me to figure out what the heck is going on.
>
> I'll email it. Do you want the actual zeros, or the zeros normalized so as to correspond to equal divisions?

Can you send the normalized ones for equal divisions, just unrounded?
I'd much appreciate it.

-Mike
• ... Computing a figure of merit and computing an octave retuning are two completely different problems. For the latter, there s another method which is
Message 1 of 9 , Mar 3, 2011
View Source
--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@...> wrote:

> But now you're saying we just take the location of the minimum or maximum?

Computing a figure of merit and computing an octave retuning are two completely different problems. For the latter, there's another method which is lightening fast but which isn't as easy to justify, by the way.
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
• Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
• Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer. We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.