RE: [tuning] Tetrads :) Do you promote dualism ?

Pierre wrote,

>I don't have time to deepen now. The following is only a remark. Although
>starting point seems harmonic series, according to your comments, I
>could'nt find better example of dualism than your list of 34 tetrads ranked
>by harmonic entropy sum on six dyadic components. (Obviously, reason is in
>dyadic approach, but other ways are yet speculation).

The only difference is that I've produced numbers for the dyadic case but
not the chordal case. If I give you some numbers, will you reconsider
dualism? Everyone, listen to the experiment Joseph Pehrson put up. Who
thinks 1/7:1/6:1/5:1/4 and 4:5:6:7 are equally consonant?

I will neglect to go into the rankings I posted and which you co-opted since
they fail significantly to agree with my judgment on overall consonance --
true chordal harmonic entropy is needed, and Setheres, Hemholtz, and Plomp
simply fail to account for musical experience. See Parncutt's book _Harmony
-- A Psychoacostic Approach_ (Springer-Verlag) for a taste of where I'm
coming from.

>I use incremental generator value abc-d in first column for chords
>comparaison. It's not a deep theoritical concept, it's only useful.

I'll have to look at this later.