Get Charlie off the MTA

Dear Tuning List Members:

BecauseI have taken a new job in Germany, I need to cancel my
"subscriptions" to my news lists.

In my efforts to un-subscribe from THIS list, I have sent (without result)
the following FOUR messages to listproc@eartha.mills.edu

UNSUBSCRIBE

UNSUBSCRIBE tuning

UNSUBSCRIBE *

UNSUBSCRIBE ALL


*** PLEASE educate me as to the correct way to unsubscribe from this list!
****

Thanks!

Bill Jones

Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Tue, 1 Jul 1997 14:27 +0200
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA07012; Tue, 1 Jul 1997 14:27:59 +0200
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 14:27:59 +0200
Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA07007
Received: (qmail 9722 invoked from network); 1 Jul 1997 12:27:45 -0000
Received: from localhost (HELO ella.mills.edu) (127.0.0.1)
by localhost with SMTP; 1 Jul 1997 12:27:45 -0000
Message-Id: <970701082427_-1092735142@emout15.mail.aol.com>
Errors-To: madole@mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu

On Tue, 1 Jul 1997 Mckyyy@aol.com typed:

>On octave invariance, it has just occurred to me that, in LCM
>terms, the octave has a property that no other ratio shares.
>That is two notes that differ only by octaves can be mixed
>without making the length of the resulting "interference" pattern
>longer than the waveform of the lowest note.

>If you mix two notes of wavelength 1 and 8, the wavelength of the
>resulting pattern is still 8, but if you mix two notes of
>wavelength 2 and 3, the resulting pattern has a wavelength of 6.

Marion, it is not so. You can equally well say that 1, 3 and 9 mix
without making the wavelength any longer but that putting a 2 in there
results in it being longer. It is the mix of primes that does.

I think that the reason that a ratio of 2 is more fundamental than any
other is that 2 is a smaller number than any other (OK 1 is better!).
In my opinion the simplicity of a prime ratio is inversely proportional
to p*ln(p) where p is the prime. For the first few primes this gives:

p 2 3 5 7 11 13
p*in(p) 1.386 3.296 8.047 13.621 26.376 33.344

Also, I think that a ratio of 1:12 is more concordant than one of 1:16.
So it is not totally correct to just cast out all the 2s and saying that
a D is a D and a G is a G. The octave is relevant.

>Aliquot parts are simply a list of all the possible numbers that
>can be derived by multiplying subsets of the prime factors of a
>given number. For example, here is a list of the aliquot parts
>of 2880:

Ah! My second most favourite number (after 34560).

-- Ray Tomes -- rtomes@kcbbs.gen.nz -- Harmonics Theory --
http://www.kcbbs.gen.nz/users/rtomes/rt-home.htm

Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Wed, 2 Jul 1997 16:09 +0200
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA10557; Wed, 2 Jul 1997 16:10:12 +0200
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 16:10:12 +0200
Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA10503
Received: (qmail 3737 invoked from network); 2 Jul 1997 14:09:16 -0000
Received: from localhost (HELO ella.mills.edu) (127.0.0.1)
by localhost with SMTP; 2 Jul 1997 14:09:16 -0000
Message-Id: <970702100521_-1494809854@emout17.mail.aol.com>
Errors-To: madole@mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu