>>4453088As far as I understand there is a dichotomy between JI and ET. Simply because numbers can only be rational or irrational.
In JI the numbers are rational. Any musical system that has rational numbers is by definition rational.
In ET the tones are expressed in terms of irrational numbers. There is no inbetween here, its either just or equal.
>There are lots and lots of other options that are a much better compromiseI recognize that compromises exist. Like I have heard of mean tone pianos and such. If you want a compromise then you have options, but, I just dont see the value in ET at all. So I dont see the point of compromise.
>>4453092Yes, I agree.
>>4453094>Are you a numerologist?Arent those those people who think there is some superstitious quality to numbers?
No, I am not a numerologist.
> Something off by less than 5 cents might as well be in tune, and there are plenty of options that offer that or better.In the TET the greatest deviation is like, 30 cents I think. When you make chords by things even slightly out of tune the deviance stacks up. For example, if your 3/2 is 2 cents out of tune, and your 5/4 is 7 cents out of tune, then the chord with 3/2 and 5/4 is more out of tune than the sum of its parts.
I guess I am pickier. 5 cents is too big. G is out of tune by 2 cents, and I can hear that. I am not bragging or anything, we can all hear that if we pay attention. You could argue 2 cents doesnt matter, and, I would agree under some conditions. It doesnt matter if you just want to express a melody or a rhythm.
When you get into overtones and real heavy duty music academia stuff you might have a deviance of up to 70 cents. Which is absurd. That means you are in tune of totally different notes more than you are out of tune.