Talk:Schismatic family

This page also contains archived Wikispaces discussion.

Move to "Schismic family"

-ismatic is non-standard for temperaments -- VectorGraphics (talk) 07:18, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

It's schismic that's non-standard. – Sintel🎏 (talk) 18:45, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Schismic is systematic though, and much more common. We don't say "ragismatic" or "kleismatic". And for the family of temperaments (which is only a modern xen concept derived from the historical concept of schismatic temperament), it makes sense to use the systematic name. -- VectorGraphics (talk) 21:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

It's a Greek third declension noun. This pattern is pretty common: dogma - dogmatic, drama - dramatic, trauma - traumatic. I don't care what happens with neologisms like ragismic. "Much more common" no it's not. A quick look at some literature makes this pretty clear. – Sintel🎏 (talk) 13:16, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Oh, and how could I forget: chroma - chromatic! – Sintel🎏 (talk)

AFAIK neither is more correct than the other. E.g. Systematic & systemic both exist. FloraC (talk) 13:22, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm in favor of the move btw. —FloraC (talk) 10:44, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

About maqamschismic

assuming that this temperament(Maqamschismic) is meant to explain how to tune Arabic Maqam, and according to the work of Erv Wilson of analysing Jins Rast and Bayati and [1]this website, a neutral third in the Jins Rast might be 27/22 and tuned a comma lower than 5/4, gives us this temperament within 2.3.5.11 subgroup. i didn't know the point of omitting 7 in this temperament, i cannot prove it but it's obvious that Jins Hijaz finds 16/15~15/14 as a augmented unison, and 7/6 as a doubly diminished fourth. Combining both gives us the tempering property exactly identical as Cassandra. And i didn't know the point of 2.3.5.11.13 Maqamschimic too. -FilterNashi (talk) 13:14, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

ok so the point is tempering 352/351 in somewhere like Jins Rast will give us more aesthetically and theoretically correct tuning, and I'm agree with that. -FilterNashi (talk) 16:17, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

I chose the name "maqamschismic" because it is based on a chain of fifths, is supported by edos approved by maqam theorists, because it is schismic, and because I like the name. I named it a 2.3.5.13 subgroup because the schismic chain of fifths can be very easily be extended to the 2.3.5.13, so well in fact that Pythagorean tuning can be used. It is where 53edo truly shines. --Eufalesio (talk) 18:59, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Nevermind, I reserved maqamschismic for the 2.3.5.11.13 subgroup. Tridecaschismic it is! Either way, maqamschismic is not the best schismic tuning for maqāmāt, but it is the simplest. And for that, I think it deserves a spot.

i actually found an extremely similar temperament before the conversation, only difference is i set 11/8 as a free generator, and it found 7 similar to garibaldi at 7-limit. then i noticed tempering out 352/351 tend to get a slightly larger fifth, and that's not so compatible with the fifth of schismatic close to just. so i gave up. -FilterNashi (talk) 02:39, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't see a point for either 2.3.5.11.13 or 2.3.5.13. They are but restrictions of cassandra and they don't get much more accurate than cassandra by removing the 7. —FloraC (talk) 10:44, 23 January 2026 (UTC)