I am so tired of hearing this nonsense. My wife is a trained psychologist. Her feedback to me:-
"The ear brain system is notoriously fickle and in the area of perception (note, the word perception) our short term memory (also known as 'working memory') capability determines what we remember. It is highly unlikely that after more than a few seconds we remember the perception accurately. This of course is a completely different mechanism to the one associated with data coming in from our ears (eg facts and numbers).
So, an ABX or DBT methodology is indeed the correct scientific way to assess differences in perception. Unless you use this approach to compare sounds it's highly likely you are fooling yourself. "
"The ear brain system is notoriously fickle and in the area of perception (note, the word perception) our short term memory (also known as 'working memory') capability determines what we remember. It is highly unlikely that after more than a few seconds we remember the perception accurately. This of course is a completely different mechanism to the one associated with data coming in from our ears (eg facts and numbers).
So, an ABX or DBT methodology is indeed the correct scientific way to assess differences in perception. Unless you use this approach to compare sounds it's highly likely you are fooling yourself. "
One for your wife - how is it we're able to distinguish the sound of a wooden flute from that of a metal one if after a few seconds we can't remember the perception of either accurately?
If your brain can be fooled why bother listening to "better measuring" equipment - it's certainly cheaper to buy mediocre performing gear, therefore it's a waste of money and time to fool around with "superior" equipment - again, any old bit of rubbish will do, because your brain will quickly adapt and forget that something better can be experienced.
Perhaps you should modify the above statement a bit, John, because run-off-the-mill discrete designs will sound about the same as a run-off-the-mill op amp based design. Some op amp designs are really good, so the above might read as comparing a really good op amp design with a really good discrete design.
The 'trick' is to focus on the unpleasant aspects in the sound - strangely, 
, humans tend not to forget unpleasant experiences - if a child makes horrible noises attempting to come to grips with say, a violin, I would suggest that the "memory" of this would not fade after some "magical" time, .
Sorting out audio one uses the same technique - is that particular type of unpleasantness I experienced in configuration A now less with configuration B, one asks oneself ...
Of course if one is impervious to sensing extreme forms of unpleasantness on your taste buds, up your nostrils, rubbing against your skin, and, even intruding into your ears ... well then, maybe there's no hope for you ... though, thinking about it, it might make you very useful for sending into areas where they use "advanced interrogation" techniques ...
, humans tend not to forget unpleasant experiences - if a child makes horrible noises attempting to come to grips with say, a violin, I would suggest that the "memory" of this would not fade after some "magical" time, . Sorting out audio one uses the same technique - is that particular type of unpleasantness I experienced in configuration A now less with configuration B, one asks oneself ...
Of course if one is impervious to sensing extreme forms of unpleasantness on your taste buds, up your nostrils, rubbing against your skin, and, even intruding into your ears ... well then, maybe there's no hope for you ... though, thinking about it, it might make you very useful for sending into areas where they use "advanced interrogation" techniques ...
Another on for the missus...how is it that she knows who is on the phone without peeking at caller id ?.
A: Audio memory.
Dan.
Last edited:
Ditto.
A good method is to train using instant AB switching, ad infinitum if required.
Once the two sounds are learned properly, A and B are then easy to differentiate, and long after the initial training.
If say, wine testers can do this, why not audio ?.
Dan.
Last edited:
Despite the inapt analogy, they do, in the sense of recognizing different wines by smell/taste only (i.e., relatively gross differences). When it comes to distinguishing fine differences, they need to be tasted side by side to get any meaningful results.
Similarly, in audio, if one is trying to pick up small differences in level or EQ, it will not happen without direct comparison. Recognizing voices is a much grosser difference.
SY already answered: gross differences.
The finer the differences, the more difficult.
No, it would be like quickly compare the wooden flute to a very similar one or a metal one.
As if they were ... clones of the original.
Unfortunate reality for some:
Capgras delusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and why it's so ... horrific:
Seeing Impostors: When Loved Ones Suddenly Aren't : NPR
I love the connection to the classic 1956 Invasion of the Body Snatchers and it got me thinkin' of so many of my absolute favourites: Aliens, The Thing,
Last edited:
Doesn't work - I don't recognise a wooden flute by noting the difference between it and a metal one.
Do you have any links/papers to support the 'gross differences' assertion?
You could start with the classic papers by Zwislocki. The types of memory used are different.
Or you could try recording two selections with a 1dB difference in level (easy to distinguish ears-only with rapid switching) and see what the effect is of putting (say) a 2 minute gap between ears-only auditions. Experimental demonstrations are interesting.
Or you could try recording two selections with a 1dB difference in level (easy to distinguish ears-only with rapid switching) and see what the effect is of putting (say) a 2 minute gap between ears-only auditions. Experimental demonstrations are interesting.
No. You could try 6 years of study though . . .
The hearing process is incredibly complicated as it's interaction with working memory.
To take you example,detecting the difference between a wooden and metal flute would be considered gross and easy to detect.
Using your example, Repeat the experiment but detect the difference between two wooden flutes. That's the stuff our GEB claim they can reliably detect differences between.
Last edited:
It appears that if the difference can be transferred easily into long term memory, then it will be easily distinguished in the future.
If the difference is very difficult to establish, the transfer does not take place . . . Other of course than the gross data about the event.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.