Talk:256/255

Comma name proposal: "charisma"

What about "charisma" from "char"+"isma"? Suggested by Starshine on XA Discord. In programming, a char is, in modern usage, practically almost always an 8-bit byte. Therefore 2^8 = 256 is the number of values it can hold and 255 is the maximum (unsigned) integer value, hence 256/255. "bytisma" was suggested by Fumica to avoid naming conflict with the temperament of the same name "Charisma" in the magic family, which has an extension named "Charismic". However, the name "Charisma" for a temperament defies the intuitive implicit rule that something ending in "-isma" must be a comma and they seem to me to be very low-accuracy temperaments anyways so seem not to be of note/significance as temperaments as opposed to as scale blueprint patterns (as exotemperaments do have legitimate serious uses, just not insomuch for convincing harmony, but rather as interesting mappings). Therefore we also propose renaming "Charisma" and "Charismic" to something else. --Godtone (talk) 15:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I want to add that "diasemisma" is also, IMO, a slightly confusing name as 289/288 which also seems to have claim to the same name reasoning is called the "semitonisma", except in the case of 289/288 the corresponding whole tone is 9/8 but here it is 17/15. Also, associating the terms "charisma" and "charismic" with Harry Potter seems very unnecessary to me. --Godtone (talk) 22:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I second this. "Char" is a recognizable programming term and "-isma" is a common postfix for commas not temperaments. --Frostburn (talk) 05:26, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I also agree. But there need to be new names for Charisma and Charismic before doing this. I don't have ideas myself, other than calling Charisma the cookie-cutter "Undecimal horcrux". CompactStar (talk) 09:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

In that case, I propose "tridecimal horcrux" and "septendecimal horcrux" for 13-limit and 17-limit charisma respectively, and "horcruxic" for "charismic". This also has the advantage of being very straightforward and easy to memorise without undermining the naming theme. --Godtone (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I concur with the cookie-cutter names, but "charmstone" seems to be available if we wish to preserve a passing resemblance to "charisma" or "charismic". --Frostburn (talk) 20:51, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I prefer the cookie-cutter names for their simplicity and avoidance of introducing new names but if people prefer charmstone and charmstonic I don't really mind all that much, because "charm" does seem different enough from "charisma"/"charismic" and seems more specifically related to magic too (so potentially more fitting). Also, not sure where to put this but it's maybe worth noting that this comma is very important in srutal archagall as that temperament can equivalently (and very notably from the perspective of S-expressions) be described as "semitonic charismic". --Godtone (talk) 00:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I’m usually not a part of comma process but I very much find this a cool name. --Arseniiv (talk) 11:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Yet another reason to rename: this sort of clarification should not be needed and it would avoid such a confusing usage of terms: "it is unrelated to the diasem scale structure." --Godtone (talk) 18:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

A point of consideration: would the 2.3.5.17-subgroup temperament tempering only 256/255 be "charismic"? If so what would the full 17-limit temperament be? "charismaic"? Or alternatively, and maybe more sensically, have the 2.3.5.17 temperament be "charic" and the 17-limit be "charismic". But I prefer to reserve "charismic" for the 2.3.5.17-subgroup rank 3 temperament if possible. --Godtone (talk) 00:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I never liked the thing where, for commas that are in a subgroup, the full-prime limit version gets the normal "-ismic" and the subgroup one gets "-ic" instead. The full prime-limit temperaments are hardly practical. For example, for the semitonisma and centisma, the full-prime limit temperament is RANK 6 (I have seldom seen anything above rank-3) and the subgroup temperaments are rank-2 (so definitely deserve the "normal" name). That being said, that naming looks like something of a convention now (discussion about changing it is off-topic here), so the 2.3.5.17 rank-3 temperament should probably be charic. CompactStar (talk) 03:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I answered this in Discord once. If you start with 17-limit JI, which is rank-7, it makes sense to reduce its rank from there by tempering out only the necessary commas that are pumped. Another good reason for such an approach is that it frees you from dealing with numerous uninteroperable subgroups. FloraC (talk) 14:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I discussed this with Fumica before at length in favour of using some sort of modifier for if you want the version which corresponds to the full-prime-limit rather than only the minimal prime subgroup necessary. The conclusion and compromise was that the convention should be "ismic" for the full-prime-limit version. The subgroup version, while it doesn't get the privilege of the slightly more normal-sounding name, does get the privilege of the shorter name suffix, "-ic". Hence "semitonismic" vs "semitonic" and "charismic" vs "charic". I'm fine with "charismic" for full-subgroup and "charic" for 2.3.5.17 as it emphasizes/puts focus on the word "char" as significant/important. To me, the best argument for the full-prime-limit option is that it allows a natural temperament to speak of if you are interested in demonstrating comma pumps of only one comma, in which case you want to tune everything as purely as possible and have as many options as possible for making the comma pump pretty. I think it is very important going forward though that the minimal prime subgroup version is always included. --Godtone (talk) 16:50, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

While y'all are talking over it, I should notify you that "charisma" was from Graham Breed in 2011: Yahoo! Tuning Group | A rose by any other name . . .. FloraC (talk) 14:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

An extra point in favour of the name change: currently the 2.3.5.17-subgroup rank 3 temperament associated with 256/255 has not been named, but presumably would be called "diasemic" under the current naming, causing yet more potential confusion with diasem. --Godtone (talk) 17:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I did a poll in the XA Discord server for those not on the wiki. Excluding me, 6 in favour 1 against. Seems fairly uncontroversial/unanimous as such proposals go. --Godtone (talk) 02:21, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Note: I did this poll a few days ago, it hasn't changed for a few days so I thought I should post it here. (I did draw people's attention to the poll within reason I think.) --Godtone (talk) 02:25, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

"Charisma" is already used for the name of temperament, a 13-limit extension of the horcrux (3def & 19). I disagree this proposal for avoiding an extra confusion. Instead, I have proposed an alternative name for 256/255: "diasemitonisma". By tempering out both 256/255 and 289/288 derives a 2.3.5.17 extension of the 5-limit srutal (12 & 34), member of the diaschismic family. "Diasemitonisma" is a contraction of "diatonic", "semitone" and "diaschisma" into a single word, and also from "dia-" (diatonic) + "semitonisma". --Xenllium (talk) 11:50, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I already answered this above; I have reduplicated it below. But importantly, these temperaments already have to be renamed because they are inconsistent with the "-isma" suffix being used for commas and "-ismic" for full-prime-limit temperaments and "-ic" for minimal prime subgroup temperaments. There is other reasonings for renaming these temperaments too, such as that they are not very accurate and so harmonically would mainly make sense as a mapping scheme underlying an AGS scale, but also that it seems absurd to associate the English words "charisma" and "charismic" to Harry Potter of all things. But I don't want to repeat everything above so if you want more reasonings please read fully. --Godtone (talk) 16:16, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

In that case, I propose "tridecimal horcrux" and "septendecimal horcrux" for 13-limit and 17-limit charisma respectively, and "horcruxic" for "charismic". This also has the advantage of being very straightforward and easy to memorise without undermining the naming theme. --Godtone (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I concur with the cookie-cutter names, but "charmstone" seems to be available if we wish to preserve a passing resemblance to "charisma" or "charismic". --Frostburn (talk) 20:51, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I prefer the cookie-cutter names for their simplicity and avoidance of introducing new names but if people prefer charmstone and charmstonic I don't really mind all that much, because "charm" does seem different enough from "charisma"/"charismic" and seems more specifically related to magic too (so potentially more fitting). Also, not sure where to put this but it's maybe worth noting that this comma is very important in srutal archagall as that temperament can equivalently (and very notably from the perspective of S-expressions) be described as "semitonic charismic". --Godtone (talk) 00:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Also, in regards to the alternative name "diasemitonisma", it strikes me as a bit cumbersome to describe the 2.3.5.17[12 & 22] temperament as "diasemitonic semitonic". It's not a bad name per se but what's wrong with the name change proposal? Charisma and Charismic already need renaming anyways and there are two fairly obvious options that seem fine and clearly related for what to change them to. --Godtone (talk) 16:16, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Also, it still might give the impression of being related to diasem. --Godtone (talk) 01:10, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

I should also add: The poll that was done on the XA Discord server did include renaming the temps currently named Charisma and Charismic too! (For the various reasons stated.) --Godtone (talk) 18:38, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

For avoiding confusion of temperament names, I have proposed more alternative names for 256/255: "char comma", "charic comma", and "charsma" (no-i spelling). Then, 2.3.5.17 rank-3 temperament associated by this comma should be named "charic" and associated full 17-limit rank-6 temperament "charsmic" or "char". --Xenllium (talk) 05:06, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't suppose there's confusion as the temperaments are also being renamed. No one is known to have used them. You can see what Graham has to say here.

For that reason and for the reason that charisma is a real word and that -ismic and -ic are standard naming patterns now, I suggest we settle at charisma/charismic/charic.

I personally am not fond of diasemisma/diasemismic/diasemic since 17/16 isn't universally accepted as a diatonic semitone, but I'm okay with this group of names due to their mnemonic nature. It doesn't harm by keeping them.

FloraC (talk) 08:56, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Firstly, it is not my name proposal; I mentioned that it was proposed by Starshine on the XA Discord, I merely championed the name. Secondly, please do not add your modified versions of the proposal to the pages given neither I nor anyone else have touched the page up until this point with regards to the proposal and given you have not waited for a consensus for the proposal and given I have taken every liberty I can of waiting for consensus and the full range of reasonings/opinions to come in. While I am not entirely against "charsmic" instead of "charismic", as Fumica said it defies the -isma -ic -ismic convention and even from an aesthetic point of view to me it is unfavourable to have "rsm" in a name especially given it generates confusion with the standard. --Godtone (talk) 16:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Apologies, I didn't realize someone had changed the Horcrux names already so what I said is not fully true. I also want to make clear that I do appreciate your consideration. I think much of this would go more smoothly if there was a more official/standard process for names and the occasional renames. I am working on that right now. I would be grateful if anyone wants to improve what I will add. Ideally though, if it is not a convention that will likely be taken as uncontroversial, then discuss it first in the corresponding talk page. Kind regards, --Godtone (talk) 18:01, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

While it is not quite finished yet (EG it is pending contribution and opinions of more users plus I have yet to reread it in its entirety one last time and see if anything else comes to mind in the way of missing points or rewordings for clarity), please take a look at what I have so far here: Temperament naming #Temperament/comma (re)naming conventions. I've vetted a simplified version of it with FloraC and Fredg999. Note also that almost every point for renaming applies to the situation for 256/255; it got me thinking about that there ought to be a set of conventions by which renames can be judged as not inherently controversial, especially if there are many points in favour of them. --Godtone (talk) 19:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

The suffix "-isma" sometimes appears its no-i form, "-sma" (eg. breedsma), as well as its adjectival form "-ismic" (sometimes "-smic"). It is within the convention of the naming of commas and associated temperaments, not an exception. The word "charisma" originally means personal charm or the ability to influence without logic, so it is unlikely to understand referring to char (8-bit byte). For clarification, the interval 256/255 should be called "char comma" or "charsma", and its associated rank-6 temperament "char temperament" or "charsmic". --Xenllium (talk) 13:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Good point, I've added it to the temperament and comma naming conventions (relevant diff here), but in this case it ruins the pun with the English words "charisma" and "charismic" (which was one of the motivations of the proposal). --Godtone (talk) 14:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Just in case, I added Not to be confused with Horcrux to 256/255 too. --Godtone (talk) 14:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)