![]() |
The Outer Shell
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. |
The Outer Shell
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? |
The Outer Shell
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 |
The Outer Shell
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 |
The Outer Shell
In article MQcpd.321783$nl.260854@pd7tw3no, Spiderant
wrote: I once had a philosophy professor who casually mentioned... [snip] If this idea is way off, please correct me. I have very little technical knowledge, but I do love music. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Afraid that if you report them accurately, then his ideas tell us that his understanding of physics, physiology, etc, was pretty limited. I'd recommend that you regard his views on this as misleading and misguided. Think of them as being a "philosopher's song" version of the subject. :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
The Outer Shell
"Spiderant" wrote in message news:MQcpd.321783$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...... |
The Outer Shell
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 |
The Outer Shell
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 |
The Outer Shell
"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. |
The Outer Shell
"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. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:42 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