I once had a philosophy professor who casually mentioned to the class that
when we listen to a recorded piece of music, we don't hear the entire
spectrum of the music, but only the outer shell. He explained that when,
for example, a classical symphony is recorded, only the extreme peaks and
valleys of the signal are picked up and when the recording is played back,
because the speakers can only move in one direction at any given moment, you
will only hear these peaks and valleys, and none of the filler in-between.
I know that I'm not explaining this using proper audio terminology, but his
explanation seems logical to me. If, for example, a clarinet and a flute
are playing at the same time, all we will ever hear from the recording is
the "combined" signal.

The result of this is that, no matter how good the recording is, we can
never truly hear the individual instruments which, of course, negates things
like "air" around the instruments (unless, of course, there is a space
between the actual notes). In fact, we can never hear the entire orchestra,
nor differentiate between the instruments playing. All we hear is the
shadow of the music.

If this idea is way off, please correct me. I have very little technical
knowledge, but I do love music. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Roland Goetz.

Spiderant wrote:
I once had a philosophy professor who casually mentioned to the class that
when we listen to a recorded piece of music, we don't hear the entire
spectrum of the music, but only the outer shell. He explained that when,
for example, a classical symphony is recorded, only the extreme peaks and
valleys of the signal are picked up and when the recording is played back,
because the speakers can only move in one direction at any given moment, you
will only hear these peaks and valleys, and none of the filler in-between.
I know that I'm not explaining this using proper audio terminology, but his
explanation seems logical to me. If, for example, a clarinet and a flute
are playing at the same time, all we will ever hear from the recording is
the "combined" signal.

What did your professors of biology and physics think of your
philosophy professor?

Eiron wrote:
Spiderant wrote:

I once had a philosophy professor who casually mentioned to the class
that when we listen to a recorded piece of music, we don't hear the
entire spectrum of the music, but only the outer shell. He explained
that when, for example, a classical symphony is recorded, only the
extreme peaks and valleys of the signal are picked up and when the
recording is played back, because the speakers can only move in one
direction at any given moment, you will only hear these peaks and
valleys, and none of the filler in-between. I know that I'm not
explaining this using proper audio terminology, but his explanation
seems logical to me. If, for example, a clarinet and a flute are
playing at the same time, all we will ever hear from the recording is
the "combined" signal.


What did your professors of biology and physics think of your
philosophy professor?

Saves me the trouble of saying something similar.

When the pressure waves from the two instruments get to your ears, they
have combined in just they same way, so to use your prof's description,
we can never heard the two instruments at that point. Its the processing
the brain does that allows us to decide the combined sound is actually
the product off two sources, and its just the same whenhearing the
recording.

--
Nick

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 04:03:56 GMT, "Spiderant"
wrote:

I once had a philosophy professor who casually mentioned to the class that
when we listen to a recorded piece of music, we don't hear the entire
spectrum of the music, but only the outer shell. He explained that when,
for example, a classical symphony is recorded, only the extreme peaks and
valleys of the signal are picked up and when the recording is played back,
because the speakers can only move in one direction at any given moment, you
will only hear these peaks and valleys, and none of the filler in-between.
I know that I'm not explaining this using proper audio terminology, but his
explanation seems logical to me. If, for example, a clarinet and a flute
are playing at the same time, all we will ever hear from the recording is
the "combined" signal.

Had he been a *physics* professor, he would have known better........

The result of this is that, no matter how good the recording is, we can
never truly hear the individual instruments which, of course, negates things
like "air" around the instruments (unless, of course, there is a space
between the actual notes). In fact, we can never hear the entire orchestra,
nor differentiate between the instruments playing. All we hear is the
shadow of the music.

If this idea is way off, please correct me. I have very little technical
knowledge, but I do love music. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

It's way off. All you have to do is listen to a good recording played
on a good system, and you'll realise that the guy was talking utter
********.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article MQcpd.321783$nl.260854@pd7tw3no, Spiderant
wrote:
I once had a philosophy professor who casually mentioned...

[snip]

If this idea is way off, please correct me. I have very little
technical knowledge, but I do love music. Any help would be greatly
appreciated.

Afraid that if you report them accurately, then his ideas tell us that his
understanding of physics, physiology, etc, was pretty limited. I'd
recommend that you regard his views on this as misleading and misguided.
Think of them as being a "philosopher's song" version of the subject. :-)

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

"Spiderant" wrote in message
news:MQcpd.321783$nl.260854@pd7tw3no...
I once had a philosophy professor who casually mentioned to the class that
when we listen to a recorded piece of music, we don't hear the entire
spectrum of the music, but only the outer shell. He explained that when,
for example, a classical symphony is recorded, only the extreme peaks and
valleys of the signal are picked up and when the recording is played back,
because the speakers can only move in one direction at any given moment,
you will only hear these peaks and valleys, and none of the filler
in-between. I know that I'm not explaining this using proper audio
terminology, but his explanation seems logical to me. If, for example, a
clarinet and a flute are playing at the same time, all we will ever hear
from the recording is the "combined" signal.



If that's the case, take your audio kit to the nearest recycling centre and
swap it for a three piece suite......

In message MQcpd.321783$nl.260854@pd7tw3no, Spiderant
writes
I once had a philosophy professor who casually mentioned to the class that
when we listen to a recorded piece of music, we don't hear the entire
spectrum of the music, but only the outer shell. He explained that when,
for example, a classical symphony is recorded, only the extreme peaks and
valleys of the signal are picked up and when the recording is played back,
because the speakers can only move in one direction at any given moment, you
will only hear these peaks and valleys, and none of the filler in-between.
I know that I'm not explaining this using proper audio terminology, but his
explanation seems logical to me. If, for example, a clarinet and a flute
are playing at the same time, all we will ever hear from the recording is
the "combined" signal.

The result of this is that, no matter how good the recording is, we can
never truly hear the individual instruments which, of course, negates things
like "air" around the instruments (unless, of course, there is a space
between the actual notes). In fact, we can never hear the entire orchestra,
nor differentiate between the instruments playing. All we hear is the
shadow of the music.

If this idea is way off, please correct me. I have very little technical
knowledge, but I do love music. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Roland Goetz.




What a plonker he was. And what were his views on the eardrum of the
listener, (being a diaphragm etc
--
Chris Morriss

Spiderant wrote:

I once had a philosophy professor who casually mentioned to the class that
when we listen to a recorded piece of music, we don't hear the entire
spectrum of the music, but only the outer shell. He explained that when,
for example, a classical symphony is recorded, only the extreme peaks and
valleys of the signal are picked up and when the recording is played back,
because the speakers can only move in one direction at any given moment,
you will only hear these peaks and valleys, and none of the filler
in-between. I know that I'm not explaining this using proper audio
terminology, but his
explanation seems logical to me. If, for example, a clarinet and a flute
are playing at the same time, all we will ever hear from the recording is
the "combined" signal.

The result of this is that, no matter how good the recording is, we can
never truly hear the individual instruments which, of course, negates
things like "air" around the instruments (unless, of course, there is a
space
between the actual notes). In fact, we can never hear the entire
orchestra,
nor differentiate between the instruments playing. All we hear is the
shadow of the music.

If this idea is way off, please correct me. I have very little technical
knowledge, but I do love music. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Roland Goetz.

I think you will find most of this group will tell you that your philosophy
professor is completely wrong.

Ian
--
Ian Bell

"Chris Morriss" wrote in message
...
In message MQcpd.321783$nl.260854@pd7tw3no, Spiderant
writes
What a plonker he was. And what were his views on the eardrum of the
listener, (being a diaphragm etc
--
Chris Morriss

I actually did think about that. When listening to a live performance, all
the music is hitting my eardrums silmutaneously (well, maybe not
silmutaneously as, from what I understand, some frequencies travel faster
than others). Consequently, as per your suggestion, I would only hear the
combined instruments--but only if I held my head exactly the same way and,
perhaps, only if the musicians held perfectly still. But as soon as I would
turn my ears towards, say, the clarinets, then they would dominate over the
violins, and so on. And when the solo pianist would start to play, I would
turn my head towards him or her and the piano would dominate. As a result,
a live performance would seem much more dimensional, would it not? Since a
recording can only play the combined signal from a stationary point,
regardless of how I would turn my head when listening to my speakers, I
don't see how I could distinquish the instruments in the same way.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Roland Goetz.

"Ian Bell" wrote in message
...
Spiderant wrote:

I think you will find most of this group will tell you that your
philosophy
professor is completely wrong.

Ian
--
Ian Bell

I posted this question, which has intrigued me for quite a few years, in
this newsgroup because it seems that a lot of the posters here know what
they're talking about. If someone would tell me a proper explanation as to
why my professor was wrong, I would really appreciate it.

But let me rephrase my question a bit. If a microphone is placed before an
orchestra, and the microphone is connected to an oscilloscope, from what I
know of oscilloscopes, the signal is not going to show every individual
instrument, but only the combined sounds coming from the orchestra.
Consequently, no matter what I do with that signal after it is recorded, and
even if I had as many speakers as instruments in an orchestra, I never again
break the signal up to reproduce the original instruments. The recording is
forever going to be only a shadow of the orchestra. Again, this seems quite
logical to me.

Now, as I believe Chris Morriss suggested in another posting, the diaphragm
of an ear is not unlike the diaphragm of a microphone. Consequently, when
listening to a live concert, I too would only hear the combined signal
coming from the orchestra. However, as I mentioned to Mr. Morriss, when we
go to a concert, it is not a static event. We're constantly turning our
heads and thereby altering the signal coming to our eardrums. Therefore,
even if we can only experience the combined signal while attending a live
recording, this shadow is constantly shifting and changing along with the
shifts of our heads and it becomes possible to discern the individual
instruments that a static recording can never reveal.

Again, please correct me if this analagy is incorrect.

Roland Goetz.