... "Only the best will do", vs. "Make the best of what is" ...Dynamics ...?! Means that the loud bits hit you hard, whack you in the noggin; and the immediately following echo fading away and away and away, into nothingness, all register. The problem with many systems is that they don't get the loud bit right, and then also louse up that quiet fade away. Hence, poor dynamics ... and "improving" the recording process is not going to fix that ...
I mean it in a totally broader context. I know a man who has been deaf since birth.... no connection between the ear and brain. he just got a microphone and induction device/system that when placed next to his scull at a certain location, allows him to hear sounds for the first time. The sounds are inductively coupled directly to the brain (wonder if he can hear Better than we can?) >He is very disoriented by it when he first turns it on.. he has to learn what all those sounds are. My mother taught sign launguage to the deaf and hard of hearing and I spent a lot of time learning about such things. She was going deaf and went deaf in her middle years. [No you wont get a bunch of foot notes and literature. No time for that.] You learn to hear what sounds mean etc.
I wanna play with my PONO.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Tom, thanks for that clear posh it, I fully agree with it. Nowadays I seldom can muster the patience to explain it again. We rely on someone like you to do it.
Jan
Dynamics ...?! Means that the loud bits hit you hard, whack you in the noggin; and the immediately following echo fading away and away and away, into nothingness, all register. The problem with many systems is that they don't get the loud bit right, and then also louse up that quiet fade away. Hence, poor dynamics ... and "improving" the recording process is not going to fix that ...
Exactly.
You get everything the same as with lower level listening, only you get more of it. Another fascinating aspect of that is that well done amps almost encourage you to play loud, the loudness is clean and it doesn't sound very loud.
So far, the only other thing that I know of which beats that is using biamping. I can't ptove it, but I have a feeling that when using really good amps, the midrange seems to benfit the most, because most of the action is there and the amp driving the mid and tweeter drivers actually has less to do that the one driving the bass.
My experience is "the better the amp used in "singleamping" mode, the less improvement in biamping mode"..Simply because really good amps have no (audible, measurable) problem with intermodulation and distortions from bass range signals , what can disturb in mids and high range.
Last edited:
Yes, but in context of '3D' sound and direction finding I believe that is hard coded. Someone with a mono implant is not going to help with that conjecture.
40 years of auditory neuroscience and physiology show us the opposite ... or at least a high constrained 'learning'
Even the word 'learned' used in this context is highly misleading and is more a left over from the ill-conceived Nature-vs-Nurture 'debate' of the 80's.
The way the genes, body and environment interact cannot even be understood with those concepts.
...
Then people try to pull philosophical or political "support" from the science ....
For what i know, localisation of sound sources by our ears+brain use different methods, and many of them lie on the recognition of a previously known source.
Left and right localization works on both phase and level differences of the sounds as they reach our ears.
Vertical localisation use the variation of the harmonic content of a known source (the vertical and front/back response curves of our ears, changing with directivity). It is more efficient when the source is moving in the space, and our brain analyse Doppler effect too. And, in an unconscious way, we use head movements to help to figure out.
And it seems our brain helps himself with early reflections too.
The evaluation of the distance of a source is a mix of its response curve alteration (air absorption), absolute level, and early reflections.
I remember to had tried a studio gear witch was able to create the illusion of a plane flying from your back, to your front, passing just above your heads... And it was very convincing, listening to the result across simple headphones.
It was based on the studies of IRCAM: http://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/135527/files/MAR07_spatialisation_3D.pdf (Sorry, it is in French ;-)
There is a big difference between the way our brain is able to localize sounds in 3D between known and unknown sources.
Since the possibility of localization depends largely on the knowledge of the original spectrum of the source, it is eminently cultural. IE subjective.
Left and right localization works on both phase and level differences of the sounds as they reach our ears.
Vertical localisation use the variation of the harmonic content of a known source (the vertical and front/back response curves of our ears, changing with directivity). It is more efficient when the source is moving in the space, and our brain analyse Doppler effect too. And, in an unconscious way, we use head movements to help to figure out.
And it seems our brain helps himself with early reflections too.
The evaluation of the distance of a source is a mix of its response curve alteration (air absorption), absolute level, and early reflections.
I remember to had tried a studio gear witch was able to create the illusion of a plane flying from your back, to your front, passing just above your heads... And it was very convincing, listening to the result across simple headphones.
It was based on the studies of IRCAM: http://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/135527/files/MAR07_spatialisation_3D.pdf (Sorry, it is in French ;-)
There is a big difference between the way our brain is able to localize sounds in 3D between known and unknown sources.
Since the possibility of localization depends largely on the knowledge of the original spectrum of the source, it is eminently cultural. IE subjective.
Last edited:
Really ? Just try the following.
Make a full (automated) mix, concentrated on 3D placement of well known acoustic instruments (recorded in mono, multi track ).
When it is done, just replace one of the instruments, fully localizable in 3D space, by some synthe, using the same mixing desk slice (same treatments).
Oh, we are not able to localize-it any more ? ;-)
I would have to add to my previous notes the importance of the presence of transients in the sources: it is very difficult to localize a continouous source.
In one sense 'learning' does play a role. I have 'learned' that Levinson amplifiers (or whatever your fav is) sound pretty good. So, in any sighted test against an unfamiliar brand, it is almost impossible NOT to prefer the Levinson, unless there is an obvious pathological problem.
jan
jan
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.