Excerpts from fons's message of 2010-07-22 23:13:45 +0200: > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:50:58PM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > > > We may be comparing the wrong thing when we compare with the size of > > objects to loudness. > > Indeed. I did not mention the visual analogy to suggest > that the two domains are similar - rather to point out > they are not. Something that works for one of them does > not for the other.
What I tried to say is that there might be different cases in each domain, some of which may be similar to a case in another domain. > > I wonder how well we can judge something like twice the > > brightness. > > Same problem. I gues we can't. Or that whatever value > of 'double' we arrive at will be without meaning. > > My guess so far, but I have *NO* scientific evidence at > all to support it, just some intuition, is that human > perception of loudness of a sound is somehow related to > the extent that a particular sound does prevent us to > detect other known sounds, i.e. to masking effects. > > CIao, Interesting idea. From the little I read about masking it is a complex thing as well, frequency, SPL, time between sounds, all that and possibly more matters. We could think about what makes judging twice the loudness more difficult and maybe find a relation to another phenomenon this way. The limits of hearing apply to everything, but what about factors like the time between two sounds or the length of the sounds? -- Regards, Philipp -- "Wir stehen selbst enttäuscht und sehn betroffen / Den Vorhang zu und alle Fragen offen." Bertolt Brecht, Der gute Mensch von Sezuan _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev