Apparently I wasn't as clear as I thought. Please reread Charles comments prior to the 135* comment, they are MUCH more significant than the 135* issue that was singled out here. It's almost a shame he even mentioned the 135* scale, as it has detracted completely from the real problems with his tuning. No graphs are needed to see it.
Right on..thats what 'they' attacked out of his post however. Thats what Im pointing out. Nothing else. An attempt to detract from what was said before that. Then made a big deal about the 135°. Changing that for safety has its merits too, afaic.
Last edited: