# Synesthetic Explorations: An Autoethnographic Study on Music, Color, and Creativity/Pitch Summary
## Battery Tests Results - Summary

**Battery Tests Results** :
| | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Raw Color Counts (Uncorrected) | Z-score Corrected Target Color | Z-score Corrected Target Color | Z-score Corrected Target Color | Z-score Corrected Target Color | Z-score Corrected Target Color |
| Pitch | Red | Red-Orange | Orange | Yellow-Orange | Yellow | Yellow-Green | Green | Blue-Green | Blue | Blue-Violet | Violet | Red-Violet | Pink | Total (n) | R | G | B | Color Name | Margin of Error |
| A | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 153 | 246 | 11 | YELLOW-GREEN | 6.03% |
| As | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 13 | 0 | 18 | 237 | 32 | 172 | RED-VIOLET | 4.66% |
| B | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 34 | 224 | 148 | BLUE-GREEN | 7.11% |
| C | 14 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 245 | 23 | 10 | RED | 2.88% |
| Cs | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 67 | 171 | 136 | BLUE-GREEN | 11.94% |
| D | 0 | 0 | 2 | 9 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 18 | 219 | 186 | 22 | YELLOW-ORANGE | 4.94% |
| Ds | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 12 | 2 | 0 | 18 | 215 | 43 | 181 | RED-VIOLET | 9.08% |
| E | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 18 | 116 | 246 | 10 | YELLOW-GREEN | 4.93% |
| F | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 13 | 0 | 18 | 218 | 9 | 123 | RED-VIOLET | 4.82% |
| Fs | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 40 | 138 | 77 | GREEN | 7.81% |
| G | 0 | 1 | 9 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 232 | 121 | 15 | RED-ORANGE | 3.98% |
| Gs | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 64 | 7 | 248 | BLUE | 2.48% |
| Battery Tests Results - Summary |
| hiC | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 18 | 249 | 104 | 98 | PINK | 6.00% |
| Total | 19 | 4 | 11 | 18 | 9 | 51 | 14 | 17 | 20 | 2 | 24 | 30 | 14 | |
**Synesthetic Consistency Table based on Margin of Errors** :
| Tier | Pitch | Shades of Colors | Number of Occurrences (n=18) | Margin of Error |
| 1 | Gs | Blue | 17 occurrences of Blue | 2.48% |
| 1 | C | Red | 14 occurrences of Red, 3 of Red-Orange | 2.88% |
| 1 | G | Orange, Red-Orange, Yellow-Orange | 9 occurrences of Orange, 6 of Red-Orange, 3 of Yellow-Orange | 3.98% |
| 2 | As | Red-Violet, Blue-Violet | 13 occurrences of Red-Violet, 4 of Blue-Violet | 4.66% |
| 2 | E | Yellow-Green | 16 occurrences of Yellow-Green | 4.93% |
| 2 | F | Red-Violet, Violet | 13 occurrences of Red-Violet, 4 of Violet | 4.82% |
| 2 | D | Yellow-Orange, Yellow-Green | 9 occurrences of Yellow-Orange, 5 of Yellow-Green | 4.94% |
| 2 | hiC | Pink, Red | 14 occurrences of Pink, 4 of Red | 6.00% |
| 3 | A | Yellow-Green, Yellow, Red-Violet | 12 occurrences of Yellow-Green, 4 of Yellow, 2 of Red-Violet | 6.03% |
| 3 | B | Yellow-Green, Blue-Green, Red | 12 occurrences of Yellow-Green, 3 of Blue-Green, 1 of Red | 7.11% |
| 3 | Fs | Green, Blue-Green | 12 occurrences of Green, 3 of Blue-Green | 7.81% |
| 3 | Ds | Red-Violet, Blue-Violet | 12 occurrences of Red-Violet, 3 of Blue-Violet | 9.08% |
| 3 | Cs | Blue-Green, Yellow-Green | 13 occurrences of Blue-Green, 4 of Yellow-Green | 11.94% |
* Synesthetic Explorations by Arnaud Quercy - Tests sorted by Margin of Errors (Fig. 1)

### Battery Tests Results - Geometric distance method

**Battery Test Results Based on Geometric Distances** :
| Battery | A | As | B | C | Cs | D | Ds | E | F | Fs | G | Gs | hiC | Average |
| Battery 1 | 1.4 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.9 | PASS |
| Battery 2 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 3.5 | 1.5 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 1.4 | 1.1 | FAILED |
| Battery 3 | 4.0 | 0.8 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 3.6 | 2.7 | 3.8 | 4.0 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 4.2 | 4.5 | 0.7 | 2.8 | FAILED |
| Battery 4 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 1.4 | 0.7 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 2.3 | 0.9 | PASS |
| Battery 5 | 1.8 | 1.5 | 0.7 | 1.3 | 3.5 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 3.2 | 2.8 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 1.4 | FAILED |
| Battery 6 | 1.2 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.5 | PASS |
| **Success Rate** | 33% | 67% | 33% | 67% | 17% | 33% | 83% | 17% | 83% | 100% | 67% | 83% | 50% | 50% |
* Synesthetic Explorations by Arnaud Quercy - Battery Test Results
**Consistency Score – Geometric Distances** :
| Test | A | As | B | C | Cs | D | Ds | E | F | Fs | G | Gs | hiC |
| 1 | 0.54 | 0.18 | 0.87 | 0.14 | 0.43 | 0.39 | 1.58 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.14 | 0.25 | 0.96 |
| 2 | 0.39 | 0.33 | 0.47 | 0.13 | 0.51 | 0.52 | 0.04 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.11 | 0.24 | 0.23 | 0.74 |
| 3 | 0.56 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.16 | 0.25 | 0.31 | 0.31 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.46 | 0.33 | 0.14 | 0.29 |
| 4 | 0.42 | 0.29 | 0.62 | 0.04 | 1.36 | 0.36 | 1.45 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.64 | 0.26 | 0.12 | 0.35 |
| 5 | 0.13 | 0.09 | 0.32 | 0.18 | 1.20 | 0.57 | 0.33 | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.05 | 0.22 | 0.31 | 0.05 |
| 6 | 0.08 | 0.05 | 0.65 | 0.24 | 1.10 | 0.37 | 0.13 | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.19 | 0.53 | 0.25 | 0.66 |
| 7 | 0.41 | 0.43 | 0.52 | 0.06 | 0.96 | 0.50 | 0.33 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.40 | 2.37 | 0.16 | 0.12 |
| 8 | 1.91 | 0.24 | 0.27 | 0.10 | 1.43 | 0.36 | 0.19 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 0.20 | 2.08 | 0.05 | 0.11 |
| 9 | 0.16 | 0.33 | 1.40 | 1.98 | 1.66 | 1.02 | 1.79 | 1.98 | 1.98 | 0.26 | 1.61 | 2.21 | 0.37 |
| 10 | 1.35 | 0.40 | 1.52 | 2.05 | 0.89 | 1.49 | 2.29 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.65 | 1.84 | 2.14 | 1.11 |
| 11 | 0.15 | 0.16 | 0.59 | 0.14 | 0.48 | 0.70 | 0.32 | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.30 | 0.12 | 0.08 | 1.09 |
| 12 | 0.14 | 0.10 | 0.16 | 0.29 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.10 | 0.68 | 0.68 | 0.24 | 0.21 | 0.07 | 0.13 |
| 13 | 0.84 | 0.53 | 0.77 | 0.18 | 0.09 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 1.29 | 1.29 | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.15 | 0.05 |
| 14 | 0.28 | 0.69 | 0.34 | 0.27 | 1.71 | 0.28 | 0.33 | 1.42 | 1.42 | 0.09 | 0.20 | 0.12 | 0.11 |
| 15 | 0.60 | 0.23 | 0.24 | 0.51 | 1.71 | 0.12 | 0.27 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 1.37 | 0.09 | 0.19 | 0.07 |
| 16 | 0.25 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.43 | 0.13 | 0.24 | 0.29 | 0.54 | 0.54 | 1.39 | 0.09 | 0.28 | 0.16 |
| 17 | 0.30 | 0.04 | 0.15 | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.10 | 0.16 | 0.42 | 0.42 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.13 | 0.05 |
| 18 | 0.31 | 0.10 | 0.19 | 0.08 | 0.05 | 0.11 | 0.33 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.12 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.11 |
| **AVG** | 0.49 | 0.26 | 0.54 | 0.39 | 0.78 | 0.43 | 0.58 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.38 | 0.59 | 0.38 | 0.36 |
| **MIN** | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.15 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.04 | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.05 |
| **MAX** | 1.91 | 0.69 | 1.52 | 2.05 | 1.71 | 1.49 | 2.29 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 1.39 | 2.37 | 2.21 | 1.11 |
| Synesthetic Explorations by Arnaud Quercy - Consistency Score | Synesthetic Explorations by Arnaud Quercy - Consistency Score - AVG |

### Battery Tests Results - Z-score

**Maximum RGB Absolute Z-Score per Pitch** :
| Test | A | As | B | C | Cs | D | Ds | E | F | Fs | G | Gs | hiC | Nb Outliers | % Outliers |
| 1 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.3 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 1.6 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 2.4 | 0.6 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 2 | 11.11% |
| 2 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 1.9 | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 0.4 | 1.5 | 0.7 | 2.0 | 0.3 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 0.4 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 1 | 5.56% |
| 4 | 0.3 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 1.6 | 0 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 0.4 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 0 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 0.1 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.2 | 1.4 | 2.1 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 1.8 | 1.6 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 1 | 5.56% |
| 7 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 1.9 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.8 | 3.5 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 1 | 5.56% |
| 8 | 2.9 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 1.5 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 3.2 | 0.8 | 2.0 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 1.8 | 3 | 16.67% |
| 9 | 2.6 | 0.9 | 2.7 | 3.8 | 1.5 | 3.5 | 2.8 | 1.1 | 1.6 | 1.9 | 2.7 | 4.0 | 1.1 | 7 | 38.89% |
| 10 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 1.1 | 2.2 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 2.0 | 2 | 11.11% |
| 11 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 2.1 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 1 | 5.56% |
| 12 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 1.9 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 1.5 | 0 | 0.00% |
| 13 | 1.9 | 3.6 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 2 | 11.11% |
| 14 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 2.1 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.6 | 1 | 5.56% |
| 15 | 1.1 | 1.8 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 3.8 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 1 | 5.56% |
| 16 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 1.1 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 0 | 0.00% |
| 17 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 0 | 0.00% |
| 18 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 0 | 0.00% |
| Nb outliers | 2.0 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 22 | 9.40% |
| % outliers | 11% | 6% | 17% | 6% | 6% | 17% | 11% | 11% | 6% | 11% | 11% | 6% | 6% |
* Synesthetic Explorations by Arnaud Quercy – Max Z-Score per Pitch
**Total Absolute Deviation Score (TADS) – Corrected Excluding Outliers** :
| Test | A | As | B | C | Cs | D | Ds | E | F | Fs | G | Gs | hiC |
| 1 | 1.1 | 1.0 | | 0.6 | 1.5 | 2.3 | 4.0 | 0.9 | 0.6 | | 1.5 | 2.5 | 4.9 |
| 2 | 1.1 | 3.4 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 3.0 | 2.1 | 3.9 | 1.0 | 1.4 | 3.9 | 2.1 | 0.8 | 0.4 |
| 3 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 2.7 | 0.9 | 2.6 | 1.4 | | 0.7 | 2.0 | 4.1 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 2.1 |
| 4 | 0.6 | 3.7 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 3.4 | 3.6 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 3.2 |
| 5 | 0.5 | 3.3 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 2.5 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 4.5 |
| 6 | 0.2 | 3.0 | 2.4 | 0.5 | 3.5 | | 2.1 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.9 |
| 7 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 1.7 | 0.8 | 3.2 | 1.3 | 0.8 | 1.4 | 3.0 | 4.7 | | 1.6 | 1.8 |
| 8 | | 1.7 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 3.4 | 1.4 | 0.7 | | 1.6 | | 1.1 | 1.3 | 2.0 |
| 9 | | 1.6 | | | 3.0 | | | 1.4 | 3.2 | 3.5 | | | 2.5 |
| 10 | 2.2 | 2.6 | 2.4 | 1.4 | 1.7 | | 2.6 | 2.3 | 1.6 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.7 | |
| 11 | 1.7 | 2.1 | | 0.8 | 2.0 | 1.3 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 2.3 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.9 |
| 12 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 3.3 | 1.6 | 1.9 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 2.5 | 1.4 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 0.7 | 2.9 |
| 13 | 2.8 | | 1.7 | 1.6 | 2.0 | 2.3 | 1.5 | | 1.9 | 2.0 | 1.8 | 1.7 | 2.5 |
| 14 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.7 | | 0.6 | 2.5 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 1.6 | 0.9 | 1.0 |
| 15 | 1.9 | 3.2 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.1 | | 1.3 | 1.1 | 0.2 | 2.0 |
| 16 | 1.4 | 1.6 | 2.9 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 1.6 | 2.4 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 1.5 | 2.9 |
| 17 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 1.7 | 1.4 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 1.1 | 0.6 | 2.9 |
| 18 | 2.4 | 1.7 | 1.7 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 1.3 |
| Mean | 1.5 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 1.1 | 2.3 | 1.6 | 1.9 | 1.4 | 1.8 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 2.3 |
**Total Absolute Deviation Score (TADS) – Outliers** :
| Test | A | As | B | C | Cs | D | Ds | E | F | Fs | G | Gs | hiC |
| 1 | | | 3.2 | | | | | | | 3.3 | | | |
| 2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 3 | | | | | | 4.8 | | | | | | | |
| 4 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 5 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 6 | | | | | | 2.3 | | | | | | | |
| 7 | | | | | | | | | | | 8.4 | | |
| 8 | 6.4 | | | | | | | 7.2 | | 4.3 | | | |
| 9 | 6.3 | | 5.8 | 11.2 | | 7.4 | 6.6 | | | 6.2 | 10.6 | |
| 10 | | | | | | | 4.1 | | | | | 4.1 | |
| 11 | | | 4.1 | | | | | | | | | | |
| 12 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 13 | | 5.8 | | | | | 6.4 | | | | | | |
| 14 | | | | 4.3 | | | | | | | | | |
| 15 | | | | | | | | | 7.4 | | | | |
| 16 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 17 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 18 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Mean | 6.4 | 5.8 | 4.4 | 11.2 | 4.3 | 4.6 | 5.7 | 6.8 | 7.4 | 3.8 | 7.3 | 10.6 | 4.1 |
* Synesthetic Explorations by Arnaud Quercy – TADS Outlier vs Inliers

### Explanation of Table

- **RGB Value**:
- **Margin of Error (R, G, B)**:
- **Color Columns**:

## Analytical Summary: Cross-Pitch Synesthetic Patterns and Sensory Overlaps

This section integrates detailed empirical findings from each pitch, providing an interpretive overview of color associations, consistency patterns, and perceptual trends observed across the pitch spectrum.

### 1. High Consistency and Stability in Core Color Associations

Dominant Colors: For most pitches, specific colors consistently emerged, such as red-violet for D# and F, blue for G#, and pink for High C. These dominant associations appeared stable across batteries, reflecting strong sensory connections between certain pitches and their synesthetic color mappings.
Consistency Scores: Pitches A, A#, D, F, and High C demonstrated high inlier percentages, often above 90%, indicating robust alignment in color perception. These high consistency scores suggest a stable cross-sensory mapping for pitches where color is more universally perceived, potentially indicating that certain pitches naturally evoke stronger color responses.

### 2. Pitch-Specific Variability and Outlier Patterns

Pitches with Higher Variability: Pitches B, C#, and G showed more variability in their color mappings, with noticeable standard deviations in RGB values, especially in the red and blue channels. These findings may imply a more flexible or context-dependent perception of these pitches, where individual differences in synesthetic experiences could play a greater role.
Outliers: Outliers appeared prominently in pitches such as F# (yellow-green shifts) and G (blue-violet shifts). These deviations could indicate perceptual or cognitive shifts tied to the pitch’s auditory qualities or pitch proximity effects, where certain pitches might blur sensory boundaries and evoke alternative colors in specific contexts.

### 3. Patterns of Sensory Overlap and Common Color Mappings

Shared Color Hues Across Pitches: Some color hues recur across multiple pitches. For example, red-violet appears as a dominant or secondary color for several pitches (e.g., D#, F, High C), which might reflect a common auditory-to-visual translation within this tonal range.
Blue and Green Associations: Pitches in the G to F# range showed a tendency for blue or green hues, possibly indicating that lower frequencies in this range stimulate cooler colors in synesthetic perception. This pattern aligns with general synesthetic theories suggesting that pitch frequency might influence color warmth or coolness.

### 4. Interpretive Trends and Theoretical Implications

Pitch Proximity Effects: The variability and outlier shifts in pitches close to each other (e.g., F and F# or C# and D) suggest a phenomenon where slight tonal changes might affect color perception consistency. This could support the idea of a perceptual “bleed,” where adjacent pitches influence each other’s color associations.
Cognitive and Contextual Influences: The stability in primary color associations for certain pitches, such as A and High C, hints at potential innate perceptual anchors. In contrast, more variable pitches, such as C# and G, might be more influenced by cognitive or contextual factors, suggesting that not all synesthetic associations are fixed and may adapt depending on situational cues.

### 5. Cross-Pitch Observations and Synthesis

Overall Cohesion in Synesthetic Mappings: Despite some variability, the overarching trend is one of stable color associations, with high consistency in dominant hues across the pitch spectrum. This cohesion suggests a structured sensory mapping system, where specific pitches reliably evoke particular colors.
Implications for Synesthetic Theory: The high consistency in certain pitches supports the theory of cross-modal correspondences, where specific auditory stimuli consistently link to specific visual experiences. Meanwhile, the noted variability in other pitches could provide a foundation for exploring flexible or context-sensitive models of synesthetic perception.