Talk:Magic temperament

3:1 & 2:1

I'm a little confused. This article seems to claim that the Magic temperament exactly hits a 3:1 ratio. How is it possible that this has a "period" of an octave? The Bohlen–Pierce scale article seems to claim that any equal temperament with an exact 3:1 ratio cannot ever hit an octave (2:1) exactly. --68.0.120.35 00:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 3:1 is in general not exact in a Magic temperament. So the article should be changed to make that clear. (Maybe I have a conflict of interest so I won't do it myself.)

Furthermore, Magic is not an equal temperament so it can have both 2:1 and 3:1 exact. That would be a viable tuning but not a typical one. Going the other way, the 2:1 needn't be exact either, so the period being an octave only means the period approximates 2:1.

X31eq (talk) 03:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, right

References other than a dead link, please. This is obviously "original research" of some kind, rather embarrassing really. Frank Zamjatin (talk) 13:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Milne, Andrew; William A. Sethares and James Plamondon. "Tuning Continua and Keyboard Layouts", Journal of Mathematics and Music vol. 1 no., spring 2008, pp. 1–15

X31eq (talk) 23:46, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added citation, deleted section on relation to BP scale. (magic temperament dosen't have a period of 3/1, therefore it is NOT related to the bohlen pierce scale) (Kratanuva2 (talk) 18:16, 28 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

History of the Magic Temperament

When was the magic temperament invented? Who invented it? When? (Kratanuva2 (talk) 18:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]