I would not see much point in a separate article on this. It is not a rigorous standard, as people have been saying, just a de facto acknowledgement of the fact that if you want to make pipes that are in tune with most other sets, then that is about the pitch you need. So there is very little published that is usefully citable.
The term is mentioned and defined adequately in the only contexts where it is useful, the NSP and related articles. John ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matthew Boris [[email protected]] Sent: 10 February 2011 05:59 To: [email protected] Subject: [NSP] Started Wikipedia article "F+ (pitch)" Given that the vagaries of NSP tuning take some explaining, and are briefly mentioned in the NSP article on Wikipedia, I turned the term "F+" into a wikilink and started a new article for it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%2B_%28pitch%29 If anyone has any _footnoted_ material they'd like to add, from a reputable published source or musical journal, it'd be good to flesh it out a little bit. I just ask that we try to footnote data vice putting in personal knowledge; the goal is to compile existing published info vice our own research (though in fairness plenty of folks on this list know as much as anyone can on the subject). To add a footnote on wiki you just type your citation between the terms <ref> and </ref> and it will automatically number itself and list itself at the bottom of the page. Any particular heartburn with the title? "F+" seems to be as close to a standard way to say "a little sharp of modern Concert F as NSP tend to be" as there is. And though I realise 20c isn't a rock-solid standard, it does seem to be a common working number. Thanks for any edits or suggestions. -Matthew -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
