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)

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

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

Comments

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)

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)

---

Closing. —FloraC (talk) 02:06, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

---

Should we make garischisma a co-official name or should it be deprecated? hotcrystal0 16:42, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Is there a reason to dual-name this? Like references or existing music written in it? If not, I don't see why we can't interpret the result at face value. There's not many votes cuz not many ppl care. —FloraC (talk) 06:28, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

My main reason is that barely anybody voiced their opinions here, and because of that I don't see it as representative of the community as a whole, so for now I do not support deprecating garischisma/mic. hotcrystal0 14:16, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I'd like to note generally that I'm against renames if there isn't actually a reason for the rename as per Temperament naming#Contemporary rules, as the names only serve to be convenient shorthands for referring to mappings ultimately. If you decide to keep the new name, can we rename Fokkertone to smth else? (It was formerly called tridecimal meantone, but I do agree it's not the canonical extension of undecimal meantone, but I'm gonna be honest and say I don't like using this name aesthetically, and this seems (in a sense) to be an aesthetical rename too so...) --Godtone (talk) 14:14, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

I'll cite the following rule for the rename of this comma, in which regard the new name demonstrates clear improvement:

> The [new] name has reasoning behind it that identifies it as appropriate at least insofar as it identifies the comma as unique within reason.

—FloraC (talk) 14:47, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

If you wondering why I still disagree with the rename, it’s because it was done under the request of one user, and only 3 users actually voted in the community vote. Aberschismic was fine, because that received near-universal community concensus, but this was done by the request of just a few people. hotcrystal0 21:43, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

I do actually like the name if I'm being honest but I share the same concern. --Godtone (talk) 23:41, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

I think it'd be fairer if you said this with evidence that the absent extra voices actually existed. At this point you're just hypothesising. —FloraC (talk) 08:23, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Fair, but often when I've tried to bring up these kinds of concerns in the past I've got the impression that for stuff like this ppl add their 2 cents and don't actually feel strongly on doing anything (though notably this has been true more generally too in my experience (as in regardless of the topic), which I find very frustrating, which is also why I've been trying to be clearer on where I disagree with your changes). --Godtone (talk) 20:06, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Why are we even debating this anymore? Just mark garischisma/mic as an alternative name and wait a year or so. If the community sticks to septischisma/mic then it’s safe to deprecate garischisma/mic and make septischisma/mic the sole official name. hotcrystal0 11:50, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

The poll is about exactly the sole official name, so your suggestion directly challenges it, which brings us back to everything said before, that it's best of you to provide some solid basis for your argument. —FloraC (talk) 14:54, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

The poll did no help, because it was started after the command and temp were renamed, so I don’t think it’s an accurate reflection. My concern isn’t the results of the poll, but the fact that it was hastily renamed unlike aberschismic. hotcrystal0 21:12, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Wild guesses on the poll's accuracy will not help. In case it's unclear, the poll was closed after 7 days since the 3rd vote, which is how we always did it. There's no precedent of a necessary further delay. —FloraC (talk) 03:06, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

---

By the way, for the record, I do not disagree with the new name, but rather the process used to decide that new name. hotcrystal0 19:44, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

The poll is official. Please do not move it. Feel free to submit an alternative process if you can't agree on this one. —FloraC (talk) 21:15, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Protect

Can we protect this page until additional discussion about this temp family other than its name warrants? At this point further discussion is like beating a dead horse. With enough time everyone will use septischismic and garischismic will be a distant memory. hotcrystal0 19:36, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Discussion about this temp family other than its name did happen, tho not on the wiki. During the last couple of days, Eufalesio and I were talking about some of the add-17 add-29 and add-31 extensions and how each of them maps to an isomorphic keyboard. You're welcome to join a Discord server or two to find out. Protection will hinder development around this temp family so I'm not gonna do it. —FloraC (talk) 21:15, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Rename androschismic?

The old names of some of the temps in this family listed followed a clear corresponsence with temps in the garibaldi family, specifically:

garischismic (former name of septischismic) ~ garibaldi
cassaschismic (now canonical extension of septischismic) ~ cassandra
androschismic (not renamed) ~ andromeda

So, should we rename androschismic to disassociate with andromeda to maintain consistency, or perhaps another reason? hotcrystal0 22:04, 22 September 2026 (UTC)