Gearslutz.com - View Single Post

naethoven · 14th June 2009

Thanks Wes. I know you say the mode calc doesn't show all, but that Bonello on 1.28:1.66 was the smoothest curve I've seen. Is it really that smooth or am I seeing a weakness of the mode calc?

Also, here again, I'm debating greater volume vs better ratio...I could have 1900+/- cuft if I didn't care about the ratios, but having a good ratio, good intervals, and a good graph puts me at around 1600 cuft...thoughts?

P.S. Why does 1:1.25:1.75 look so bad on the calc? Fails a Walter, bad Bonello. I thought it should be good because all three relationships are good, aren't they? Isn't 1.25:1.75 a diminished 5th? With all three being good, I don't understand why the calc isn't perfect.

14th June 2009	#110
naethoven Gear addict Joined: Jul 2007 Posts: 337 Thread Starter	Thanks Wes. I know you say the mode calc doesn't show all, but that Bonello on 1.28:1.66 was the smoothest curve I've seen. Is it really that smooth or am I seeing a weakness of the mode calc? Also, here again, I'm debating greater volume vs better ratio...I could have 1900+/- cuft if I didn't care about the ratios, but having a good ratio, good intervals, and a good graph puts me at around 1600 cuft...thoughts? P.S. Why does 1:1.25:1.75 look so bad on the calc? Fails a Walter, bad Bonello. I thought it should be good because all three relationships are good, aren't they? Isn't 1.25:1.75 a diminished 5th? With all three being good, I don't understand why the calc isn't perfect.