On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 15:44 -0500, Charles Henry wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Ralf Mardorf
> wrote:
>
> > It's not impossible. I guess nobody is able to note, let's say, 10 000
> > pictures a second as single steps for a movie, of course you and I
> > aren't able to note it for just
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> It's not impossible. I guess nobody is able to note, let's say, 10 000
> pictures a second as single steps for a movie, of course you and I
> aren't able to note it for just 30 pictures a second. But I don't
> believe in digital audio math,
On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 14:26 -0500, Charles Henry wrote:
> To describe the things we can study ethically and scientifically, use
> numbers. For everything else, use words :)
... words? ... yes, but add music, paintings, dance etc. ;)
Full ACK :).
Btw. the NAZIs did unethical experiments, while E
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> Upgrade: You might be right, but ...
>
> with the exception for a non-life-threatening situation.
>
> Yes, one day some people would be able to do perfect 3D acoustics for
> music, but NOT FOR REPORTAGES. Imagine you are climbing an antenna m
On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 12:14 -0500, Charles Henry wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Ralf Mardorf
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 11:10 -0500, Charles Henry wrote:
>
> >> Because psychoacoustics just hasn't been defined in a way to make hard
> >> numbers stick. The tendency in psychoac
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 11:10 -0500, Charles Henry wrote:
>> Because psychoacoustics just hasn't been defined in a way to make hard
>> numbers stick. The tendency in psychoacoustic experimental design is
>> to use discrete conditions (which g
On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 11:10 -0500, Charles Henry wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Jens M Andreasen
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 14:24 +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> >
> >> It would be strange but funny if an estimate of sound A just about
> >> masking sound B would correspo
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Jens M Andreasen
wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 14:24 +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
>
>> It would be strange but funny if an estimate of sound A just about
>> masking sound B would correspond to 'twice as loud'.
>
> Masking appears somewhere in the 30 to 40dB
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 14:24 +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> It would be strange but funny if an estimate of sound A just about
> masking sound B would correspond to 'twice as loud'.
Masking appears somewhere in the 30 to 40dB range - which is way beyond
"twice as loud".
--
eins, zwei ... t
On July 25, 2010 06:43:17 am Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 12:32 +0200, lieven moors wrote:
> > On 07/25/2010 09:31 AM, Tim E. Real wrote:
> > > Hey, you know that little triangular flap of skin that almost
> > > covers the ear, just above the earlobe?
> > >
> > > Whaddya think if hu
Excerpts from fons's message of 2010-07-25 13:57:00 +0200:
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 01:32:01PM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
>
> > I had some more thoughts regarding masking.
> > If B masks A == B twice as loud?
> > Is it that simple?
>
> No :-(
>
> Masking depends on spectrum, timing, level
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 01:32:01PM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> I had some more thoughts regarding masking.
> If B masks A == B twice as loud?
> Is it that simple?
No :-(
Masking depends on spectrum, timing, level, and maybe other factors.
It's a complex thing and I don't think we have the
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 13:28 +0200, Robin Gareus wrote:
> On 07/25/2010 12:43 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> > Just one question. Am I the only one who received a mail similar to this
> > off-list:
> >
> >>> [ yet more irrelvant mindless crap! ]
> >>>
> >>> How does the external ear exactly work? Per
Excerpts from fons's message of 2010-07-23 12:13:32 +0200:
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 11:34:43AM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
>
> > > > We could think about what makes judging twice the
> > > > loudness more difficult and maybe find a relation to another phenomenon
> > > > this way. The limits
On 07/25/2010 12:43 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Just one question. Am I the only one who received a mail similar to this
> off-list:
>
>>> [ yet more irrelvant mindless crap! ]
>>>
>>> How does the external ear exactly work? Perhaps it's part of this
>>> function, to reflect sound.
>>
>> Absolutely
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 12:32 +0200, lieven moors wrote:
> On 07/25/2010 09:31 AM, Tim E. Real wrote:
> > Hey, you know that little triangular flap of skin that almost
> > covers the ear, just above the earlobe?
> >
> > Whaddya think if humans are (were?) to evolve that
> > little flap so it can b
On 07/25/2010 09:31 AM, Tim E. Real wrote:
> Hey, you know that little triangular flap of skin that almost
> covers the ear, just above the earlobe?
>
> Whaddya think if humans are (were?) to evolve that
> little flap so it can be completely and tightly pressed
> against the ear (like you can d
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 03:31 -0400, Tim E. Real wrote:
> Hey, you know that little triangular flap of skin that almost
> covers the ear, just above the earlobe?
>
> Whaddya think if humans are (were?) to evolve that
> little flap so it can be completely and tightly pressed
> against the ear (li
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 03:31 -0400, Tim E. Real wrote:
> Hey, you know that little triangular flap of skin that almost
> covers the ear, just above the earlobe?
>
> Whaddya think if humans are (were?) to evolve that
> little flap so it can be completely and tightly pressed
> against the ear (li
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 03:31 -0400, Tim E. Real wrote:
> Hey, you know that little triangular flap of skin that almost
> covers the ear, just above the earlobe?
>
> Whaddya think if humans are (were?) to evolve that
> little flap so it can be completely and tightly pressed
> against the ear (li
Hey, you know that little triangular flap of skin that almost
covers the ear, just above the earlobe?
Whaddya think if humans are (were?) to evolve that
little flap so it can be completely and tightly pressed
against the ear (like you can do now with your finger)
thus acting as an 'eyelid' fo
On 07/24/2010 10:31 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 02:58:36PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
>
>
>> On 07/23/2010 10:23 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 06:42:11PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
On 07/23/2010 06:29
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 22:31 +0200, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 02:58:36PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
>
> > On 07/23/2010 10:23 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 06:42:11PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> On 07/23/2010 06:29 PM,
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 02:58:36PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
> On 07/23/2010 10:23 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 06:42:11PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On 07/23/2010 06:29 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Transporting this to the au
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 12:33 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Saturday, July 24, 2010 12:31:32 pm Renato did opine:
>
> > On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 12:03:15 -0400
> >
> > Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > On Saturday, July 24, 2010 12:02:40 pm Ralf Mardorf did opine:
> > > > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:22 +0200, A
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 09:28 -0700, James Warden wrote:
> > Does my brain guess the loudness is or could be endless
> > high? Half of an
> > endless value would be anyway an endless value, right?
>
> by endless, you mean "infinite" ?
>
> J.
Yes ... translation is a PITA.
On Saturday, July 24, 2010 12:31:32 pm Renato did opine:
> On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 12:03:15 -0400
>
> Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 24, 2010 12:02:40 pm Ralf Mardorf did opine:
> > > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:22 +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
> > > > On Saturday 24 July 2010 16:22:29 Ralf Ma
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 18:16 +0200, Renato wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 12:03:15 -0400
> Gene Heskett wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, July 24, 2010 12:02:40 pm Ralf Mardorf did opine:
> >
> > > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:22 +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
> > > > On Saturday 24 July 2010 16:22:29 Ralf Mardor
> Does my brain guess the loudness is or could be endless
> high? Half of an
> endless value would be anyway an endless value, right?
by endless, you mean "infinite" ?
J.
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
ht
On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 12:03:15 -0400
Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Saturday, July 24, 2010 12:02:40 pm Ralf Mardorf did opine:
>
> > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:22 +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
> > > On Saturday 24 July 2010 16:22:29 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:07 -0400, Gene Hesket
On Saturday, July 24, 2010 12:02:40 pm Ralf Mardorf did opine:
> On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:22 +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
> > On Saturday 24 July 2010 16:22:29 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:07 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > I have gotten up and left many a night club becaus
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:46 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:44 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:22 +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
> > > On Saturday 24 July 2010 16:22:29 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:07 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:44 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:22 +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
> > On Saturday 24 July 2010 16:22:29 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:07 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > I have gotten up and left many a night club because the mus
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 17:22 +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
> On Saturday 24 July 2010 16:22:29 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:07 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > I have gotten up and left many a night club because the music was too
> > > loud.
> >
> > OT, but anyway: This is a big p
On Saturday 24 July 2010 16:22:29 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:07 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > I have gotten up and left many a night club because the music was too
> > loud.
>
> OT, but anyway: This is a big problem in Germany. I only visit night
> clubs when a girlfriend 'for
On Saturday, July 24, 2010 10:08:34 am Ralf Mardorf did opine:
> On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:52 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:37 +0200, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> > > On 07/22/2010 11:44 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> > > > Extrapolating a bit, that is one of the reasons
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:07 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I have gotten up and left many a night club because the music was too
> loud.
OT, but anyway: This is a big problem in Germany. I only visit night
clubs when a girlfriend 'force' me to do it and I always wear hearing
protection. Now it beco
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 11:25 +0200, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 10:58:44AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Apart from that studying this reveals a lot of how
> our hearing system might actually work, which is an
> interesting subject in itself.
That's true.
On Saturday, July 24, 2010 09:56:32 am Jörn Nettingsmeier did opine:
> On 07/22/2010 11:44 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> > Extrapolating a bit, that is one of the reasons why an
> > unamplified singer in an opera theatre can have a dramatic
> > effect that is much stronger than someone yelling
On 07/23/2010 10:23 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 06:42:11PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
>
>
>> On 07/23/2010 06:29 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Transporting this to the audio domain, given two similar
>>> sounds A and B with a B having a higher level
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 10:58:44AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> I know it's idiotic, OTOH when do we ever wish to have knowledge about
> objective 'twice as loud'? Did anybody ever thought 'shit, I need to mix
> the snare objectively half as loud, but I don't know what's the correct
> level'?
You
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:52 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:37 +0200, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> > On 07/22/2010 11:44 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> >
> > > Extrapolating a bit, that is one of the reasons why an
> > > unamplified singer in an opera theatre can have a dra
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 10:37 +0200, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> On 07/22/2010 11:44 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
>
> > Extrapolating a bit, that is one of the reasons why an
> > unamplified singer in an opera theatre can have a dramatic
> > effect that is much stronger than someone yelling into
On 07/22/2010 11:44 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
Extrapolating a bit, that is one of the reasons why an
unamplified singer in an opera theatre can have a dramatic
effect that is much stronger than someone yelling into a
microphone and being amplified to 130 dB SPL. By which I
don't want to im
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 06:42:11PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
> On 07/23/2010 06:29 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
>
> > Transporting this to the audio domain, given two similar
> > sounds A and B with a B having a higher level than A, you
> > could adjust a third one X so it appears to be 'halfw
lieven moors wrote:
> On 07/22/2010 11:25 PM, Albert Graef wrote:
>> lieven moors wrote:
>>
>>> ...continuation of truncated mail (does anyone know why this happens?)
>>>
>> Probably it's the second "From" line; looks like your mail client is
>> confused by this.
>>
>> Concerning your quest
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 14:57:36 -0700 (PDT)
James Warden wrote:
> > We all agree on what 'red' means. Because we have learned
> > the meaning of that word by association. But do we
> > 'see'
> > the same thing ? AFAIK, that is impossible to verify.
>
> I would tend to say yes, for if I was in your
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 02:20:02PM +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
> But if two people talking is power because their talking is uncorrelated
> (even
> if they speak about the same thing:), then making a PA louder (twice as loud
> as before) would be an amplitude thing as it is correlated. No?
Ass
On 07/23/2010 06:29 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 01:28:37PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
>
>
>> I don't think this is easy. Imagine a ruler lying on your desk, and
>> try to imagine the point where the ruler would become twice as
>> long. I think you will find that you
On 07/23/10 18:29, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> For sound this is quite different. Except by imagining or
> remembering '2 of the same' there seems no way to even just
> define what 'twice as loud' is supposed to mean.
Brightness and color temperature would be a better analogy than
distance, as
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 01:28:37PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
> I don't think this is easy. Imagine a ruler lying on your desk, and
> try to imagine the point where the ruler would become twice as
> long. I think you will find that your brain is continually adjusting
> that distance, and that it r
On 07/22/2010 11:25 PM, Albert Graef wrote:
> lieven moors wrote:
>
>> ...continuation of truncated mail (does anyone know why this happens?)
>>
> Probably it's the second "From" line; looks like your mail client is
> confused by this.
>
> Concerning your question: As other have remarked, t
On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 17:37 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 17:31 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 11:13 +0100, Frank Smith wrote:
> > > Hi All
> > > I was under the impression that every 3 db increase doubled the volume
> > > and you needed to increase the po
On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 17:31 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 11:13 +0100, Frank Smith wrote:
> > Hi All
> > I was under the impression that every 3 db increase doubled the volume
> > and you needed to increase the power needed by a factor of 3 . Things
> > could have changed by n
On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 11:13 +0100, Frank Smith wrote:
> Hi All
> I was under the impression that every 3 db increase doubled the volume
> and you needed to increase the power needed by a factor of 3 . Things
> could have changed by now but this is what I use.
>
>
> Cheers
> Bob
And ... 1 KHz si
Excerpts from Ralf Mardorf's message of 2010-07-23 16:04:17 +0200:
> On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 12:13 +0200, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 11:34:43AM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> >
> > > > > We could think about what makes judging twice the
> > > > > loudness more diffic
On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 12:13 +0200, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 11:34:43AM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
>
> > > > We could think about what makes judging twice the
> > > > loudness more difficult and maybe find a relation to another phenomenon
> > > > this way. The lim
On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 11:13 +0100, Frank Smith wrote:
> Hi All
> I was under the impression that every 3 db increase doubled the volume
> and you needed to increase the power needed by a factor of 3 . Things
> could have changed by now but this is what I use.
>
>
> Cheers
> Bob
I guess this was
On Friday 23 July 2010 07:21:00 Florian Faber wrote:
> On 07/23/10 00:06, drew Roberts wrote:
> > Is some pepper dish twice as hot as another?
>
> If you define 'hot' as 'amount of capsaicine', there is the Scoville scale.
I know of the scale, but does doubling the amount of capsaicin double
the
On Friday 23 July 2010 12:13:32 f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 11:34:43AM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> > May I ask why you used 10*log(2/1) in your two person example?
> You mean why power and not amplitude ? Two persons talking would
> produce twice the power, since th
On 07/22/2010 03:36 PM, Fons Adriaensen-2 wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 09:31:09PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
>
> > Hi Fons, I'm a fool to even try to answer this question.
> > But I couldn't resist...
>
> :-)
>
>
> > Let's suppose we have two sounds A and B,
> > and sound B has been measured
On 07/23/10 00:06, drew Roberts wrote:
> Is some pepper dish twice as hot as another?
If you define 'hot' as 'amount of capsaicine', there is the Scoville scale.
Flo
--
Machines can do the work, so people have time to think.
public key DA43FEF4 x-hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net
_
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 11:34:43AM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> > > 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
Hi All
I was under the impression that every 3 db increase doubled the volume and
you needed to increase the power needed by a factor of 3 . Things could
have changed by now but this is what I use.
Cheers
Bob
On 22 July 2010 20:14, lieven moors wrote:
> On 07/21/2010 07:24 PM, Fons Adriaen
Excerpts from fons's message of 2010-07-23 00:18:59 +0200:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:49:03PM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
>
> > 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 matte
Excerpts from James Morris's message of 2010-07-23 10:25:44 +0200:
> On 23 July 2010 08:37, Arnold Krille wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thursday 22 July 2010 23:53:14 Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> >> Excerpts from fons's message of 2010-07-22 23:24:24 +0200:
> >> > We all agree on what 'red' means. Beca
On 07/22/2010 09:14 PM, lieven moors wrote:
On 07/21/2010 07:24 PM, Fons Adriaensen-2 wrote:
Subjective loudness is a very complex thing, depending on the
spectrum, duration, and other aspects of the sound, and also
on circumstances not related to the sound itself.
Let's suppose we have two s
On 23 July 2010 08:37, Arnold Krille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday 22 July 2010 23:53:14 Philipp Überbacher wrote:
>> Excerpts from fons's message of 2010-07-22 23:24:24 +0200:
>> > We all agree on what 'red' means. Because we have learned
>> > the meaning of that word by association. But do we 's
Hi,
On Thursday 22 July 2010 23:53:14 Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> Excerpts from fons's message of 2010-07-22 23:24:24 +0200:
> > We all agree on what 'red' means. Because we have learned
> > the meaning of that word by association. But do we 'see'
> > the same thing ? AFAIK, that is impossible to
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 23:53 +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> Excerpts from fons's message of 2010-07-22 23:24:24 +0200:
> > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 01:56:41PM -0700, James Warden wrote:
> >
> > > > This is
> > > > probably closer to the object size comparison.
> > > > I wonder how well we can ju
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:09:13PM -0700, James Warden wrote:
> I do think it has something to do with intensive vs extensive in the
> following way:
>
> when we talk about sound waves, temperature, smell, brightness, etc, these
> are macro-observables representing a statistically huge number o
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:49:03PM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> 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.
Which makes perceptual coding an interesting domain...
> We cou
> > It reminds me a little about intensive and extensive
> variables
> > in physics. That may well be unrelated though ...
>
> I don't think it is directly related to that particular
> difference. But it certainly is related to a more general
> form of it - seeing each 'unit' in its own domain, a
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 02:57:36PM -0700, James Warden wrote:
> > We all agree on what 'red' means. Because we have learned
> > the meaning of that word by association. But do we
> > 'see'
> > the same thing ? AFAIK, that is impossible to verify.
>
> I would tend to say yes, for if I was in your
On Thursday 22 July 2010 17:24:24 f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> We all agree on what 'red' means. Because we have learned
> the meaning of that word by association. But do we 'see'
> the same thing ? AFAIK, that is impossible to verify.
Been asking people the above at least since I was a youngish
> We all agree on what 'red' means. Because we have learned
> the meaning of that word by association. But do we
> 'see'
> the same thing ? AFAIK, that is impossible to verify.
I would tend to say yes, for if I was in your brain to check, I would be you :)
J.
_
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:37:23PM +0100, Folderol wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 23:24:24 +0200
> f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
>
> > We all agree on what 'red' means. Because we have learned
> > the meaning of that word by association. But do we 'see'
> > the same thing ? AFAIK, that is impossible
Excerpts from fons's message of 2010-07-22 23:24:24 +0200:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 01:56:41PM -0700, James Warden wrote:
>
> > > This is
> > > probably closer to the object size comparison.
> > > I wonder how well we can judge something like twice the
> > > brightness.
> >
> > or smelling a per
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 t
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 04:57:41PM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> one little side problem with this is that our sensitivity to both
> loudness and brightness is adaptive. this means that although one
> could do some experimental work to determine the ratios that lead most
> people to judge one sound 2
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 23:24:24 +0200
f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
> We all agree on what 'red' means. Because we have learned
> the meaning of that word by association. But do we 'see'
> the same thing ? AFAIK, that is impossible to verify.
>
> Ciao,
This brings back memories of long arguments amo
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 13:56 -0700, James Warden wrote:
> > This is
> > probably closer to the object size comparison.
> > I wonder how well we can judge something like twice the
> > brightness.
> > --
>
> or smelling a perfume twice stronger :)
Because the impression of loudness is a mix of 'tas
lieven moors wrote:
> ...continuation of truncated mail (does anyone know why this happens?)
Probably it's the second "From" line; looks like your mail client is
confused by this.
Concerning your question: As other have remarked, that is a very
intricate question which is studied in psychoacousti
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 01:56:41PM -0700, James Warden wrote:
> > This is
> > probably closer to the object size comparison.
> > I wonder how well we can judge something like twice the
> > brightness.
>
> or smelling a perfume twice stronger :)
A very nice analogy, taking us even deeper into fuz
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
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Philipp Überbacher
wrote:
> We may be comparing the wrong thing when we compare with the size of
> objects to loudness.
> It's relatively easy to say that the interval between sound B and C
> is twice as long as the interval between A and B (given the
> interval a
> This is
> probably closer to the object size comparison.
> I wonder how well we can judge something like twice the
> brightness.
> --
or smelling a perfume twice stronger :)
It reminds me a little about intensive and extensive variables in physics. That
may well be unrelated though ...
J.
Excerpts from fons's message of 2010-07-22 22:36:58 +0200:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 09:31:09PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
>
> > Hi Fons, I'm a fool to even try to answer this question.
> > But I couldn't resist...
>
> :-)
>
> > Let's suppose we have two sounds A and B,
> > and sound B has been
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 09:55:40PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
> ...continuation of truncated mail (does anyone know why this happens?)
No such problem here.
Ciao,
--
FA
There are three of them, and Alleline.
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-a
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 09:31:09PM +0200, lieven moors wrote:
> Hi Fons, I'm a fool to even try to answer this question.
> But I couldn't resist...
:-)
> Let's suppose we have two sounds A and B,
> and sound B has been measured as being twice as loud as A,
> by somebody. In order to be able to
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 21:31 +0200, lieven moors wrote:
> On 07/21/2010 07:24 PM, Fons Adriaensen-2 wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 01:05:01AM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> >
> > > I think the word loudness is a problem here. Afaik it usually
> > refers to
> > > how it is perceived, and
...continuation of truncated mail (does anyone know why this happens?)
>From that chart we could get an estimate of the size of the measurement
unit. Frequencies with with bigger SPL variations would be measured
with bigger units, and visa versa. And from this we could deduce what
the minimum prec
On 07/21/2010 07:24 PM, Fons Adriaensen-2 wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 01:05:01AM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
>
> > I think the word loudness is a problem here. Afaik it usually refers to
> > how it is perceived, and twice the amplitude doesn't mean twice the
> > perceived loudness. It may
On 07/21/2010 07:24 PM, Fons Adriaensen-2 wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 01:05:01AM +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
>
> > I think the word loudness is a problem here. Afaik it usually refers to
> > how it is perceived, and twice the amplitude doesn't mean twice the
> > perceived loudness. It may
94 matches
Mail list logo
