Talk:Septischismic family

Extension renaming

I don't like Cassaschismic's name. It's almost Cassa(ndra), but definitely not schismic. Since it adds 5 and 13 to Gary, I propose Willy, since it also tempers out the wilschisma conecting 5 and 13, and since it kinda goes with proper name temperaments. And it's kinda cute.

Now that I'm at it, I might as well propose Androschismic Andy instead, but that's a worse temp. --Eufalesio (talk) 16:30, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

This isn't a problem unique to cassaschismic. It's right there in garischismic, which you can say is almost garibaldi but definitely not schismic. It would have been better if garischismic was never proposed and we called it septischismic instead.

By proposing willy you're aware that this temperament is a strong extension of the 2.3.5.13-subgroup temp named will? I'm thinking about the possibility of making this temperament the canonical extension, in which case we'll change will to willy as well. As an alternative it can also be the canonical extension of garischismic, hence getting rid of its distinct name.

—FloraC (talk) 16:49, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

On the garischismic stuff you're right; we could pull a 180 and call [25 -14 0 -1⟩ garyma or garisma, freeing ourselves of the "schismic" association. Now that you mention it, we could have gary for 2.3.7/2.3.7.11, garic for 7-limit and 11-limit, willy for 2.3.5.13(.19), and some portmanteau for the rank-3 that has all. Wilgar? Possibly something new like Erin? --Eufalesio (talk) 17:18, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I wouldn’t want to rename a temperament based on one person’s opinions alone. We need to hold some sort of community vote or something. Plus, if we’re disassociating non-schismic commas/temperaments from schismic, then what about the syntonoschisma, slendroschisma, and possibly ones I don’t even know about? hotcrystal0 17:27, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Let it be held then. I will say however, I don't really care about people changing temps of names if as there's a good reason to change it, like dissociation from a very common temp (like schismic or slendric) or following standard patterns. --Eufalesio (talk) 17:57, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I don't think garisma fixes it as it's still associated with garibaldi. We have many -schismic names so I don't think that alone constitutes a problem either. I'm in principle not against renaming cassaschismic but I'm only willing to consider canonicalizing it w.r.t. one of the temps I mentioned above (including dual-naming). —FloraC (talk) 18:31, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I should add I prefer septischisma or even septigarysma to garischisma, like what we have as ennealimma–septiennealimma. —FloraC (talk) 07:16, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

I agree with FloraC here. It’s not much of a problem. hotcrystal0 19:03, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

So Eufalesio and I came to the agreement that the names of this family of temps need another round of assessment.

I maintain that septischisma is the ideal name for the comma. The derived temp name septischismic mirrors aberschismic and orthoschismic. However, this poses the problem of how to name the 2.3.7-subgroup temp. (As a rule, we don't apply the first declension to -schisma, resulting in -schic.) Not changing gary is an option, but ideally we'd want a name that rivals the monumentality of schismic.

Alternatively, septigarisma captures the nature that this is the 2.3.7 comma tempered out in garibaldi, and provides the names septigarismic and septigaric for the 2.3.5.7 and 2.3.7 temps.

Garisma, as I said, doesn't fix any problem, tho its derived temp names garismic and garic are neat.

Then we have cassaschismic, and the question of whether it's canonical w.r.t. garischismic or will. It looks like will and cassachismic aren't as closely related as garischismic and cassaschismic are. I'd say it's best to treat will and cassaschismic as separate temps, so renaming cassaschismic based on will is off the table.

Eufalesio proposes ultimate. I'm afraid this creates ambiguities as ultimate describes a subjective quality that will mean differently to different ppl. In the spirit that rename should demonstrate clear benefits, I think there are only two options for this: either we make it canonical, adopting the changed name of garischismic, or we don't change anything.

—FloraC (talk) 14:25, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

I don’t think ultimate is a good name, but septischisma/septimal schisma could work (though I don’t fully support renaming this temp yet). hotcrystal0 15:56, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Septigaric is good for the 2.3.7 version, possibly septigar and have the comma be the septigarsma or septigar comma. But how do you call the 2.3.7.11 version? Undegaric? Garylympian?

Septigarismic/septigaric follows through with the established patterns, but I'd leave that only for the 7-limit version. For 11-limit and above, garylympic is a better fit, useful all the way to the 19-limit version.

As for Ultimate, I make a case that a rename to this demonstrates clear benefits, beyond subjectivity, measured and compared with other alternative sequences that make fierce competition. The rename is an advertisement for what this temperament represents: a detemperament sequence's practical end. --Eufalesio (talk) 16:48, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

in my DMs with Eufalesio I stated that the only the higher-limit version should be called ultimate. The 7-limit or 2.3.7 version can keep its current name or get renamed. hotcrystal0 18:06, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Well you can't think inside others' minds and say it's the ultimate temp beyond subjectivity. Ultimate is so much of an everyday word that ppl will always use it their own ways. If you had a more literary way to express the idea, that would be much better.

Coming back to the septi- names, I don't think it needs to be changed for extensions beyond the 7-limit if they are canonical, which means you just refer to it by undecimal septischismic/septigarismic. But is the 11-limit extension is canonical? I've heard some in the community argue that cassandra should be dual-named as undecimal garibaldi, thus setting it canonical, which would imply that cassaschismic should prolly be also. I don't feel strongly about this and would be okay either way (plus the possibility of dual-naming); arguably the quality of the names matters more.

—FloraC (talk) 18:51, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

The ultimate temp is obviously 7-limit marvel. (Semi-serious. Other candidates appear increasingly subjective, for example the ultimate rank 1 temp appears to be 31et in the 11-limit as a system with primarily 7-limit focus.) In regards to the name, I don't see why the name needs to be changed tbh? I'm quite used to it. What's the issue with the current name? --Godtone (talk) 16:26, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

It's not a problematic name, just suboptimal. Is there a sign in the combination of garibaldi and schisma that points to the 2.3.7 subgroup? There is not. So what I'm gonna do is to replace gari- with septi-, reflecting its nature as the schisma of 2.3.7. Specifically:

• Garischisma → septischisma
• Garischismic → septischismic
• Cassaschismic → (undecimal) septischismic

I think I'll leave gary unchanged, until someone has an idea.

—FloraC (talk) 16:57, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

I would rather have more community members share their opinions before a temp is renamed. hotcrystal0 23:32, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

We'll do it thru a poll then. —FloraC (talk) 10:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Poll

Sign your name with ~~~~. You may vote for multiple candidates. You may add your own proposals.

Septischisma – septischismic (full 7-limit temp), gary comma – gary (no-5 7-limit temp)

FloraC (talk) 10:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

--Eufalesio (talk) 10:14, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Septischisma/septischismic should be the main name, but garischisma/mic should be a co-official name instead of a deprecated name. hotcrystal0 15:01, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Garischisma – garyschismic (full 7-limit temp), gary comma – gary (no-5 7-limit temp)

FloraC (talk) 10:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

--Godtone (talk) 13:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

[see explanation of my vote]

I'd like to vote for whichever name is behind by more than 1 vote, to discourage arbitrary decisions based on extremely small margins. --Godtone (talk) 13:19, 16 August 2026 (UTC)