Here, you refer of analog masters converted on digital ?
My thought were more socially or artistically that technically oriented. (In the rock/pop/etc world).
Apart The wall of sound of Tamla Motown, most of the producers efforts were always to increase instant dynamic and separation. One of the ways was the use of close micink, that provide in the same time more margin to mix creativity, re-recording etc ... I'm too lazy to elaborate more.
It was working well with analog tapes and vinyls, because the fog and compressions they added compensated in kinda harmonious way. Now, with all digital recordings (ADCs are in each slide of the boards) we get out of those euphonics. It seems to me that, like in digital photography, we may have toppled over to the other side. And the disparition of most of the big studios, with a lot of space, volume and good natural acoustic do not help.
I don't accuse specifically the DACs, but the entire chain of production/reproduction and the show business in general.
Following the thread from Merrill99 and thru MountainBob, the phisiological part has no place in this context , since the musical part takes over, being an Art, it elevates, somehow. So the psychological part must be related to human being the catcher, so elaborates with culture, which is memory.
The term Audio in this forum is the BW related to human hearing😛
Sure, it's all IMO.
Even when I link to research, it is open to being overturned by other research - see below
Someone posted earlier about Fletcher-Munson equal loudness curves. Well, this often quoted & accepted as gospel but these curves were plotted in the 1930s using simple tones - so no complex binaural sounds used as test signals. Does this matter? Well yes, it does. Here's a plot of the F-M curves overlaid with more modern curves which use complex tones - the black curve is for noise perception - you can see significant divergence from F-M curves in these plots
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Historically, psychoacoustics was solely interested in the questions if real sound events will evoke a hearing sensation (or not) and if different sound events will evoke different hearing sensations.
(Potential) bias effects are just treated in this tradition as confounders that must be blocked out; if blocking out is not possible, then the influence must be randomized.
The more modern psychoacoustics is additionally interested in judgement processes about, for example, pleasentness of sound events.
Edit: Obviously is experimental design, research on methodology part of the field work.
Last edited:
What does the term, the variation within audible range, mean to you?
Do you mean that if matched and blind listening results show someone hears distortion measured at -120dB, that would be unacceptable evidence because -120dB is below the audible range?
Any difference in sound we hear will show up in measurements. The measurements are for assurance purpose.
Erm, no sh*t sherlock? I can't think of any cases on here of F-M being quoted as Gospel either. Could be wrong but no recollection of it.
Yes.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed.
More recent recordings that were made direct to digital may well be a problem in some cases, IMHO. The very top end studios and musicians can afford the best A/D converters, so their works may come across okay, IMHO.
A great majority of modern recordings of artists of lesser means, particularly those requiring a lot of mics at once to record, are likely to irreparably suffer, IMHO. We can't do anything more about that than we can do about master tapes lost in fire, IMHO.
Excuse me, should I make a mental note that in future when people say sharpness they probably mean distortion?
What if it is some dynamic effect we don't usually measure, or don't have standardized measurements for? Noise floor modulation? Room ambiance reproduction? Perceived sharpness? Can't exist if it doesn't show up on a standard AP test?
Yes maybe the art is not given enough attention?
What is the technical/measureable aspect of sound reproduction that conveys emotion?
.....I know it comes and goes with changes in audio gear.
Pro Tools used AK5394A which is still the best measuring audio ADC that exists (in real measurements, not just datasheet).
Experiments on and measurement of so-called "emotional response" is an interesting and new part of the field; there is a lot to explore.
Sometimes done using fMRI to explore more objectively if the individual response is different when using different stimuli. For example an experiment on the response to different reverberation times in concert halls. Unfortunately
due to the efforts mainly restricted to small samples (means a small number of test participants) but quite interesting nevertheless.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.