Talk:136/135

I don't find the name diatonisma relevant to to this comma. There's nothing in diatonic, Pythagorean tuning or even superpyth that clearly implies the prime 17.

I was recently made aware that there is just intonation musician who has used this comma in composition prior to the year 2023 but wishes to remain anonymous. They call it the "quiet comma" and I suggest renaming 136/135 based on precedence. --Frostburn (talk) 14:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I think superpyth implies a mapping of 17 due to its whole tone fitting ~17/15 very well, but calling it diatonisma for that reason is indeed quite a stretch. That said, we'd like to hear the work you mentioned. If it's not meant to be heard, the author not meant to be known and credited, then imo it's not a good source for the wiki. FloraC (talk) 14:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I asked them and they insist on anonymity. I guess we'll stick to diatonisma for now. --Frostburn (talk) 17:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Slight/mild rename proposal

There is one strong reason to rename this comma, which is the implied subgroup temperament would be called "diatonic", which seems confusing. Now, don't get me wrong, I actually think that bar this issue, the name is fine enough. There is some debate as to whether (9/8)/(19/17) = 153/152 could be confused, with a name like "diatonisma", however I think a more careful analysis favours (17/15)/(9/8) uniquely because it only requires adding one prime generator, 17/16, to the subgroup, as compared to 19/17, plus 153/152 is already named anyways.

It being rank 3 is not really an issue IMO as I think it is fair to call simple 5-limit harmonies "diatonic" in the broad sense, and 17/16 is given a nice mapping within the 5-limit as a result. Furthermore, the most natural extension of {S16, S17} (Srutal archagall), if you insist on a rank 2 connection for the term "diatonic" and the resulting temp makes 17/16 and 3/2 the generator (depending on whether you octave-reduce or period-reduce), which I'd say is about as diatonic as it gets, although note I am used to thinking of 1\2 = 600 ¢ as diatonic due to 12edo bias. There are beautiful and very diatonic-sounding 12:15:17 chords in the associated temperament for which one may optionally temper 17/12 to be equal to 1\2.

I wonder if a slight/mild rename would suffice? Otherwise we have too many things being connected to the term "diatonic" where it may start causing ambiguity and confusion and having to clarify which sense we mean seems undesirable. I think the spirit of the name is excellent, but others have also expressed concern about the name as is and the ambiguity of "diatonic" referring to a rank 3 2.3.5.17 temperament (although fairly elegant/convincing in its motivation IMO) is good motivation I think as it constitutes a strong reason as per the temperament and comma naming conventions, which I quote below:

The name should not cause potential confusion/ambiguity with other names. Note that an important exception to this rule is that closely related temperaments may have highly similar names; this is not uncommon.

Kind regards, --Godtone (talk) 22:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)