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:First off, I think chroma is the "C-ness" or "D-ness" of some noise or note.
I agree completely. More specifically, however, "tone height" can refer to several different things:lorelei wrote:Also, I have always thought of height as register or octave.
* 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.)
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!