OK, I fudged. I have kept at it. I also reviewed my previous posts and found a glaring error I shall now correct. I meant to say 10th of a second for recognition with the available equipment that day. I apologise for my typing error.

I also started fresh in the method of chord tone delivery to eliminate mental bias.

Now, to some gross test results -

Method: I chose a Martin Backpacker 6 string (steel, medium gauge) for my chord delivery. I captured the following chords: Amajor, Am, Adim and a "power" E chord. I plucked each chord several times and let it ring til the decay was evident (I was not timing the attack, sustain or decay).

I captured the waveforms into SoundForge 4.5 through a SONY ECM-56F microphone after using a three second pre-roll. I was after a gross test value only, so I was not concerned with the exact time of the events or the SPL or dB levels or ambient noise levels in the environment.

After capture, I then chose a chord form and enlarged the waveform view to include 100th's of seconds and played increasingly smaller segments from the beginning of each chord sample at a comfortable output (~ 30 dB +/- 3dB).

Briefly: In each case, I was able to recognize the nature of the chord type down to a degree of three one-hundredths of a second.

Notes: If I strip an electronic tri-tone series with the same chords down to the bare minimum required to maintain the integrity of the tonality, will the result be familiar with the gross test results arrived at with the acoustic instrument used in the previous test?

At what dB/SPL will this event fail?

Proceedings Future: Claim the gross test results as a baseline? Attach several "non-recognizable" samples from the recorded forms and test for tonal cohesion? Re-record and re-test with electronic means. Re-test at low and high SPL/dB. Identify the substantive elements of the structures that remained and were "identified as chords" in the gross test results. Correlate new data with sample recognition of previous test for interrupt recognition? New test subject for control purposes

Visibility: I will, by request, place my test samples as waveforms into email for examination. The samples will not be identified as Major, Minor, Diminished, or "Power" in distribution to allow individual examination at arms length. A full and complete waveform capture can be sent after each participant has had time to make assessments on their personal time using any available means and methods at their disposal. (But remember, this was a "trial run" to see if things worked at all.)

Direction: This gross test confirms my auditory abilities to a minor degree only. Next I need to set up a more controlled testing environment and place strict guidelines around which to refer and maintain the search for two things (a mistake in many cases): 1. The loss of chordal identity on the practical level and the mathematical level 2.Chordal recohesion from lost "parts" (for want of a better phrase because my musical nature demands the search).

Note to the above: How to assemble the parts - rules?

Sub to the above: Are the parts really lost? Is it a chord is a chord is a chord (fractal logic) or/and Heisenberg enters when EXACTLY. Can I hear the entry? (If ya didn't smile at that, ya must be tired)