![]() |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
=== Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
In article ,
Andy Evans wrote: Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group? With audio in the title I'd say it deals more with the hardware. You don't need any interest in audio to be a music lover. -- *Don't use no double negatives * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
Andy Evans wrote:
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group? Here's the group's charter... http://www.usenet.org.uk/uk.rec.audio.html -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
"Andy Evans" wrote in message
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group? As they say, audio is engineering, music is art. |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
"Andy Evans" wrote in message ... Is this an audio group, Yes, it says so on the tin...... a group for music lovers or an engineering group? Ideally, elements of both to some degree, I would have thought, or what's the point of subscribing here? (Just testing to see if Pipex is still eating all my emails and/or posts....) |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
"Keith G" wrote (Just testing to see if Pipex is still eating all my emails and/or posts....) Great! That's my Debut turntable FS: posts gone west then! |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
As they say, audio is engineering, music is art.
....you can see engineering, you can touch engineering and you can measure engineering but you can't hear engineering. Isn't hearing phenomena called psychoacoustics? "Psychoacoustics can be defined simply as the psychological study of hearing. The aim of psychoacoustic research is to find out how hearing works. In other words, the aim is to discover how sounds entering the ear are processed by the ear and the brain in order to give the listener useful information about the world outside.Some of the hot areas of psychoacoustic research at the time of writing a How do we separate sounds occurring simultaneously (e.g. two speakers speaking at once)? How do we localise sounds in space? How do we determine the pitch of, say, a musical instrument? How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components? Determining the abilities and limitations of human hearing is invaluable in helping us to use sounds in our environment. Any device that produces sound for the purpose of human listening should take account of what the listener's ears are going to do with that sound. " === Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
In article , Andy Evans
wrote: As they say, audio is engineering, music is art. "Psychoacoustics can be defined simply as the psychological study of hearing. The aim of psychoacoustic research is to find out how hearing works. I am not sure that it would be sufficient to call these things (and some of the specific areas you mention below) Psycho-acoustics. I'd add in a fair bit of physiology and other rather more 'physical' sciences. To pick just one example from your list. [snip] How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components? There has in recent years been a lot of *measurements* on this process. These seem to have established a number of the physical mechanisms involved in the hair bundles, etc. Goes some way to explaining some of the more remarkable features of human hearing in terms of sensitivity, pitch discrimination, masking, etc. [snip] Any device that produces sound for the purpose of human listening should take account of what the listener's ears are going to do with that sound. " Alas, the above is at present a council of perfection since we are a long way from knowing about or understanding all the relevant details of what our ears and brain do in this process. We can only take into account factors when we are aware of them. :-) Hence we may tend to have to fall back on a more pragmatic approach. So, for example, we can aim to ensure that a sound reproduction system would provide the ears with the same pressure-time patterns as they would have been subjected to if listening to the original sounds that have been recorded or broadcast. Provided we can get near enough to this, we can relax how much we have to know about the physiology and psychology aspects. In reality, of course, having some knowledge of the physiology, etc, makes it easer for us to assess when we get "The closest approach to the original sound..." (TM ;- ) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
In article ,
Andy Evans wrote: How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components? It doesn't - it's part of a simple microphone. The brain does the clever bits. -- *Why is it that doctors call what they do "practice"? Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineeringgroup?
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Andy Evans wrote: How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components? It doesn't - it's part of a simple microphone. The brain does the clever bits. I woudn't argue that the brain does the clever bits, but the little I have read about the subject shows that the operation of the cochlea is nothing like any microphone I have seen, and is far from simple. -- Nick |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ... In article , Andy Evans wrote: How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components? It doesn't - it's part of a simple microphone. The brain does the clever bits. I was under the impression that different parts of the cochlea are sensitive to different frequency bands...?? Roy -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
"Nick Gorham" wrote
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Andy Evans wrote: How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components? It doesn't - it's part of a simple microphone. The brain does the clever bits. I woudn't argue that the brain does the clever bits, but the little I have read about the subject shows that the operation of the cochlea is nothing like any microphone I have seen, and is far from simple. Yeah. Micro-hairs at different positions along the length of the inside of the cochlea respond to different frequencies. It's been years since my degree now, but the whole thing is rather elaborate. If you care, you (pl.) could google for something like cochlea hairs frequencies "organ of corti" window Hmm, just tried the above; it works ok. Martin -- M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890 Manchester, U.K. http://www.fleetie.demon.co.uk |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
In article ,
Roy rp wrote: It doesn't - it's part of a simple microphone. The brain does the clever bits. I was under the impression that different parts of the cochlea are sensitive to different frequency bands...?? It's not linear, unlike a decent microphone. But the brain sorts that out too. -- *Is it true that cannibals don't eat clowns because they taste funny? Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
"Andy Evans" wrote in message
As they say, audio is engineering, music is art. ...you can see engineering, you can touch engineering and you can measure engineering but you can't hear engineering. I don't know about that "You can't hear engineering" stuff. You can definately hear some examples of bad engineering. Isn't hearing phenomena called psychoacoustics? It's related. "Psychoacoustics can be defined simply as the psychological study of hearing." You have obviously not read some of the best-known and classic works related to psychoustics, Zwicker and Fastl for example. The aim of psychoacoustic research is to find out how hearing works. That's more like it. In other words, the aim is to discover how sounds entering the ear are processed by the ear and the brain in order to give the listener useful information about the world outside. That goes well afield of "the psychological study of hearing". For example, psychoacoustics included the physiological study of hearing. Some of the hot areas of psychoacoustic research at the time of writing a How do we separate sounds occurring simultaneously (e.g. two speakers speaking at once)? A mixture of temporal and spectral separation of sounds and decoding. How do we localize sounds in space? A mixture of temporal and spectral analysis of sounds. How do we determine the pitch of, say, a musical instrument? That's spectral analysis. How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components? Vibrating hairs acting on the basilar membrane activating nerves connected to the brain. Determining the abilities and limitations of human hearing is invaluable in helping us to use sounds in our environment. The biggest milestone in psychoacoustics to date is arguably perceptual coding, an example of which is the well-known MP3 coding of music and speech. It's an interesting process - the information content of sounds are reduced by 90% or more with minimal perceptual loss. Any device that produces sound for the purpose of human listening should take account of what the listener's ears are going to do with that sound." Which is one reason why I don't take all those earnest reports of sonic differences due to different choices among well-engineered capacitors, too seriously. |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
In article , Andy Evans wrote: How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components? It doesn't - it's part of a simple microphone. The brain does the clever bits. More than a microphone, the ear embodies a pretty interesting spectrum analyzer as well. |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 18:53:32 +0100, Nick Gorham
wrote: Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Andy Evans wrote: How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components? It doesn't - it's part of a simple microphone. The brain does the clever bits. I woudn't argue that the brain does the clever bits, but the little I have read about the subject shows that the operation of the cochlea is nothing like any microphone I have seen, and is far from simple. OK, it's a broad-band mechanical transducer connected to a series of narrow-band electro-mechanical transducers. Still relatively simple. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
|
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
|
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
In article , Nick Gorham
wrote: Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Andy Evans wrote: How does the cochlea separate a complex sound into its different frequency components? It doesn't - it's part of a simple microphone. The brain does the clever bits. I woudn't argue that the brain does the clever bits, but the little I have read about the subject shows that the operation of the cochlea is nothing like any microphone I have seen, and is far from simple. It is. :-) I've been looking into this in recent years, and the current physiological understanding of the cochlea is mind-bogglingly complex. One model is to regard it as a non-linear dispersive set of linked transmission lines (with characteristics that vary along their lengths) upon which the sensors are a series of non-linear *active* resonant detectors whose effective gain and bandwidth vary with the signal levels they experience. (This only covers the physical/mechanical side. After that comes the nerves.. and I've also ignored the biochemistry of what 'pumps' the active parts of the system. ;- ) I've now written a few articles on this for mags like "Hi Fi News", and some of the material is now at http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM...ing/index.html if anyone is interested. Bear in mind that what I've written is very much a *simplified* version of what the physiologists now use as a model, but even so it has some surprising implications for audio/hifi... :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 10:14:07 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote: I've now written a few articles on this for mags like "Hi Fi News", and some of the material is now at http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM...ing/index.html if anyone is interested. Bear in mind that what I've written is very much a *simplified* version of what the physiologists now use as a model, but even so it has some surprising implications for audio/hifi... :-) Slainte, Jim Jim, I remember well a demo I heard many years ago. The sound was of a person reading words out slowly against a noise background. The background was sufficiently loud that it was impossible to work out the words. We listened several times, but still no intelligibility The proctor then told us what a couple of the words actually were. As if by magic, these words were suddenly clearly audible against the noise, whilst the rest remained inaudible. I don't suppose you know where a copy of this test may be found? It is really impressive. d Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
In article , Don Pearce
wrote: On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 10:14:07 +0100, Jim Lesurf wrote: Bear in mind that what I've written is very much a *simplified* version of what the physiologists now use as a model, but even so it has some surprising implications for audio/hifi... :-) Jim, I remember well a demo I heard many years ago. The sound was of a person reading words out slowly against a noise background. The background was sufficiently loud that it was impossible to work out the words. We listened several times, but still no intelligibility The proctor then told us what a couple of the words actually were. As if by magic, these words were suddenly clearly audible against the noise, whilst the rest remained inaudible. Not come across the above, but it sounds like a neat example of how humans can perform 'pattern recognition'. I'd presume this was occuring at a stage later than the cochlea, though. Somewhere in the brain activity. Afraid that I don't really know much about that beyond noting that humans seem to have some remarkable abilities in such things. I suppose that it is analogous in some ways to the visual test where a sheet of white paper with blobs on it can suddenly be 'recognised' as a dalmation dog against a background of leaves. This presumably only works if you are familiar with what a dog/dalmation looks like! :-) I don't suppose you know where a copy of this test may be found? It is really impressive. Afraid not. Even my own brain activity baffles me. :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 11:56:53 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote: In article , Don Pearce wrote: On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 10:14:07 +0100, Jim Lesurf wrote: Bear in mind that what I've written is very much a *simplified* version of what the physiologists now use as a model, but even so it has some surprising implications for audio/hifi... :-) Jim, I remember well a demo I heard many years ago. The sound was of a person reading words out slowly against a noise background. The background was sufficiently loud that it was impossible to work out the words. We listened several times, but still no intelligibility The proctor then told us what a couple of the words actually were. As if by magic, these words were suddenly clearly audible against the noise, whilst the rest remained inaudible. Not come across the above, but it sounds like a neat example of how humans can perform 'pattern recognition'. I'd presume this was occuring at a stage later than the cochlea, though. Somewhere in the brain activity. Afraid that I don't really know much about that beyond noting that humans seem to have some remarkable abilities in such things. I suppose that it is analogous in some ways to the visual test where a sheet of white paper with blobs on it can suddenly be 'recognised' as a dalmation dog against a background of leaves. This presumably only works if you are familiar with what a dog/dalmation looks like! :-) I don't suppose you know where a copy of this test may be found? It is really impressive. Afraid not. Even my own brain activity baffles me. :-) Slainte, Jim I think there is an analogy to telecoms - namely CDMA. What you receive is noise, unless you know what the spreading code is. Then you can perform what looks rather like magic on the signal to noise ratio. Nonsense, of course, since what actually happens is that the information hasn't been transmitted - it is already present at both ends of the link. Impressive though, until you suss what is going on. d Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
Is this an audio group, a group for music lovers or an engineering group?
Arny Krueger wrote:
More than a microphone, the ear embodies a pretty interesting spectrum analyzer as well. ....and if you take enough drugs you get to see the graphical display that goes with the analyser :-)) -- The presence of this sig indicates that I'm under the influence of excess alcohol. Until I'm sober enough to remember to switch this sig file off, please treat the above as merely drunken ranting and treat it with the contempt it probably deserves. I apologise in advance for any offence caused :-) |
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:16 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk