Except that if you use a frequency ratio of sin(x)+sin(2.01 x), which is really very close to an octave and really sounds just as consonant as an octave to almo

Except that if you use a frequency ratio of sin(x)+sin(2.01 x), which is really very close to an octave and really sounds just as consonant as an octave to almost all people, you almost the same "dissonant" picture: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%7B+x+%3D+sin%28t%29%3B+y+%3D+sin%282.01+*+t%29+%7D+t+%3D+0+to+1000 https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%7B+x+%3D+sin%28t%29%3... The strange thing is, none of these "simple ratio" theories account for the fact that our brains allow a lot of "fuzziness" around these simple ratios, so much that you can't really call them simple ratios as they encompass a whole bunch of not-simple ratios as well.