Talk:3645/3584: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
m reply |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
=== Tritonic diesis === | === Tritonic diesis === | ||
I don't buy this, and can't imagine why, while ''septimal tritonic diesis'' on the whole refers to another interval, removing ''septimal'' should make it refer to this interval despite both are septimal. Iow if this interval was called ''tritonic diesis'', this would make it ''septimal tritonic diesis'', overloading the term itself. In fact, if you track the history of 50/49, it was originally just ''tritonic diesis''; the ''septimal'' modifier was only added later to explicitly mark that it was 7-limit. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:34, 27 July 2026 (UTC) | I don't buy this, and can't imagine why, while ''septimal tritonic diesis'' on the whole refers to another interval, removing ''septimal'' should make it refer to this interval despite both are septimal. Iow if this interval was called ''tritonic diesis'', this would make it ''septimal tritonic diesis'', overloading the term itself. In fact, if you track the history of 50/49, it was originally just ''tritonic diesis''; the ''septimal'' modifier was only added later to explicitly mark that it was 7-limit. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:34, 27 July 2026 (UTC) | ||
: Hmm, it feels to me much more obvious and natural a name than "schismean comma". I strongly dislike the latter name. Do you have a better suggestion as to what the diesis-sized comma between (9/8)<sup>3</sup> and the tritone-sized LCJI interval 7/5 should be called? And either way, I'd be curious if anyone else objects to this name... --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 16:14, 27 July 2026 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:14, 27 July 2026
Rename
It's too confusing. This is a kind of opposite to 5120/5103 so something along the line of counterargentismic/counteraberschismic could work. —FloraC (talk) 12:45, 22 January 2026 (UTC)
Tritonic diesis
I don't buy this, and can't imagine why, while septimal tritonic diesis on the whole refers to another interval, removing septimal should make it refer to this interval despite both are septimal. Iow if this interval was called tritonic diesis, this would make it septimal tritonic diesis, overloading the term itself. In fact, if you track the history of 50/49, it was originally just tritonic diesis; the septimal modifier was only added later to explicitly mark that it was 7-limit. —FloraC (talk) 11:34, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
- Hmm, it feels to me much more obvious and natural a name than "schismean comma". I strongly dislike the latter name. Do you have a better suggestion as to what the diesis-sized comma between (9/8)3 and the tritone-sized LCJI interval 7/5 should be called? And either way, I'd be curious if anyone else objects to this name... --Godtone (talk) 16:14, 27 July 2026 (UTC)