Talk:3645/3584: Difference between revisions

No edit summary
Godtone (talk | contribs)
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)
Return to "3645/3584" page.