|WikiProject Tunings, Temperaments, and Scales|
As I understand it, the story of the different spellings is as follows:
Helmholtz's original German book used the term "schismatische Verwechslung". I probably got that wrong, but it would naturally fit "schismatic temperament" in English.
Ellis translated it as "skhismatic" using a more modern Greek transliteration.
Other writers (dunno who) called it "schismatic" which is already an English word (a heretical movement that breaks off from the One True Church or somesuch) and consistent with "schism".
John Chalmers used the word "skhismic" to show its Greek roots, leave out the "at" which doesn't mean anything, and avoid unfortunate associations with heretical movements.
I then have to take the blame for introducing a third variant, because there wasn't an established standard, and I wanted a simple, familiar spelling. I don't think this action really deserves to be recorded in the first paragraph of the actual article. Whatever spelling you use here will become the standard, no need for apologies.
X31eq 12:56, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
lack of examples with frequency-ratios
I find this article really hard to understand, and i think this happens because of the lack of examples. Does a typical schismatic temperament consist of 12 or 24 or 36 tones per octave? Is there a typical example in the first place? And if there is no typical example, what would just some example be like? i would appreciate the addition of one or two examples to this article by some knowing person very much. 126.96.36.199 23:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
- There are no frequency ratios because schismatic temperament is a temperament, not just intonation, so the intervals don't correspond exactly to rational numbers. There is only one schismatic temperament, and it extends infinitely in both directions. Since there is only one schismatic temperament, it doesn't make sense to provide "examples". Nevertheless, I'll try to improve the article according to your suggestion. —Keenan Pepper 00:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the fast answer! With frequency ratios i mean in this case an actual rational number or something like 2^(1/12) as a factor between frequencies. But you are right, an irrational ratio is not really a ratio. So what i meant is something like a relative frequency table. So it's your point. Concerning the examples, i still think that a range of the infinitely extending temperament is still an example for a temperament. In my opinion a temperament is something that can be seen on real instruments. But one could argue that an infinitely extending temperament is more something like a temperament, because it's more abstract. 188.8.131.52 11:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
"If spelled according to their construction in the tuning" How? And why?
- An advantage of meantone over schismatic tunings is that in meantone, the interval ratios of 5:4 and 6:5 are represented by the major third and minor third, respectively. In schismatic tunings, they're represented by the diminished fourth and augmented second (if spelled according to their construction in the tuning).
This needs explanation. Why would they be spelled differently? How do you spell "according to their construction" (it's not clear how the conventional ABCDEFG sequence is necessarily specific to Pythagorean/meantone tunings). Why couldn't people dodge the whole issue by spelling notes according to the meantone notes they are closest to? — Gwalla | Talk 01:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)