RE: [harmonic_entropy] RE: RE: [tuning] Dan, Dave, experience, en tropy

>Neat... I thought 9:11 was the simplest example that falls in 'the
>ambiguous zone' that is both sweet and distinct, i.e., not an "out of
>tune" 5:6 or a 4:5, and yet has a comparatively (and problematically)
>high product.

Yet the harmonic entropy model claims that, for this level of s, you have a
rather low probability of hearing 9:11 as the 9th and 11th harmonics of a
fundamental -- the reason that it's comparitavely concordant seems to be
that the confusion is mainly restricted to a confusion between two ratios,
5:6 and 4:5, while, for example, 7:9 involves confusion with 4:5, 3:4, and
11:14; and 8:11 involves confusion with 3:4, 5:7, and 11:15.

>BTW, why do you have the harmonic entropy archive "private"? It's a
>pain in the ass to have to sign in to access it every time...

Well I never consciously decided to make it private . . . I'll see if I can
change that . . .