Hello! (My philosophy and introduction)

Anything that's nothing to do with music.
BigRed
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 11:04 pm

Post by BigRed » Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:28 pm

lorelei wrote:First off, I think chroma is the "C-ness" or "D-ness" of some noise or note.
I agree completely. However, there is still some disagreeement amongst the AP authorities, as to whether or not this "C-ness" or "D-ness" perception is merely a result of the fundamental tone, or overtones -- or a combination of both. Chris Aruffo advocates the fundamental, the last time I checked. David Lucas Burge and Bryce Alexander advocate the harmonics (which create the sensations of "twangyness", smooth, etc.) and thus equate timbre with chroma.
lorelei wrote:Also, I have always thought of height as register or octave.
I agree completely. More specifically, however, "tone height" can refer to several different things:

* Which ocatave the fundamental is in.
* Which specific octaves each harmonic is in.
* Possibly also the relative strength of the harmonics and/or sub-harmonics (though this may be better described as saturation.)
* etc.

NOTE: Saturation can actually mean the opposite thing to an audio/video engineer.

As you can see, because of the multiple, and occasionaly vague/contradictory, definitions of standard terminology (chroma, tone height, saturation, etc.), it's very difficult to come to a concensus on anything. No wonder it remains within the realm of the esoteric; confusion, ignorance, myths, and misconceptions reign supreme within the AP "industry". I'm sure many scam artists have profited from this fact.

NOTE: In case you're wondering, don't worry: Chris Aruffo is one of the good guys! :wink:

aruffo
Site Admin
Posts: 1694
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Evanston, IL

Post by aruffo » Wed Jun 16, 2010 4:00 pm

(Thanks for the nod!)

I seem to remember that I've written various things about timbre, and the one I come back to most pointedly is the observation that when constructed tones are played which have fundamental of tone X and timbre-harmonics of tone Y, absolute listeners identify tone X every time.

Although I hope Bryce shows some decent results, and I'm sure that what he advocates will improve listeners' musical hearing, I doubt that it will show anything more than anyone has ever done.

BigRed
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 11:04 pm

Post by BigRed » Wed Jun 16, 2010 8:47 pm

aruffo wrote:(Thanks for the nod!)...

...absolute listeners identify tone X [fundamental] every time.
Hey, Chris! No prob. 8)

* BTW, could you please give me urls?

(Or if they're posts on the forum, give me unique keywords which would be found in them, so I could attempt the dreaded "Forum Search"?)

I've read some of your posts on rotating tones, saturation, tone height, shepard tones, etc. In fact, I've read most of the posts on this forum, as well as a sizeable portion of your research pages (phases). But I might have missed a thing or two. So I'm just wondering:

* Would you agree/disagree with any of the things I stated above?

* Also, have you actually conducted any studies on this subject of fundamental vs. overtone?

* Come to think of it, have you performed any studies/surveys/experiments on APers?
Last edited by BigRed on Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

lorelei
Posts: 221
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:36 am

Post by lorelei » Fri Jun 18, 2010 9:23 am

BigRed wrote:As you can see, because of the multiple, and occasionaly vague/contradictory, definitions of standard terminology (chroma, tone height, saturation, etc.), it's very difficult to come to a concensus on anything. No wonder it remains within the realm of the esoteric; confusion, ignorance, myths, and misconceptions reign supreme within the AP "industry". I'm sure many scam artists have profited from this fact.
Yes, the multiple definitions are confusing, and I see how people can profit from this. In color, such confusions don't exist, partially (I believe) because nearly everyone has normal color vision and there are no "overtones". These definitions should be cleared up so that people can understand what the words mean better.
And yeah, Aruffo is one of the good guys, and freely admits to the confusion of these words' meanings and also admits that there is no easy way to learn AP.

Post Reply