Is there more to Audio Measurements?

[Evenharmonics]

Yes.

dave

Why haven't you posted examples of those after all these months when asked? After all, you've claimed that there are lots of those.

 

[planet10]

I’m not Toole or Novick.

And i already supplied an example.

dave

 

[scottjoplin]

Yes.

dave

I wonder how they got there?

 

[planet10]

Lots of experience.

dave

 

[scottjoplin]

I mean the sound waves, what I'm saying is that they must have been picked up by a microphone (etc) in the first place, ie, measured?

 

[planet10]

The microphone will only capture part of the wavefront.

dave

 

[scottjoplin]

What microphone? You've lost me now, I mean the microphone used for the initial recording

 

[planet10]

… picked up by a microphone...

dave

 

[scottjoplin]

I meant the microphone during the initial recording, it is picking up ie measuring, everything that is then being reproduced. What do you mean by the microphone will only capture part of the wave front? If you are just going to quote other people, as usual, don't bother answering

 

[Evenharmonics]

I’m not Toole or Novick.

It was you who made the claim. The onus is on you to prove it.

And i already supplied an example.

No, you haven't. You quoted examples of certain brain waves not being measurable, not the sound waves people can hear.

 

[planet10]

I meant the microphone during the initial recording, it is picking up ie measuring, everything that is then being reproduced.

No matter where it is the microphone only captures a small part of the wavefront — why we often see way more than a pair of microphones — and one of the reasons that with current recording technology no hifi is going to be able to reproduce a real world performance. We are starting with a facsimile of the event being captured (ignoring recordings that were never “real” in the 1st place (most studio recordings or even computer generated tracks).

dave

 

[scottjoplin]

No matter where it is the microphone only captures a small part of the wavefront

Same as our ears

 

[mmerrill99]

Same as our ears

You really think your ears work like microphones?

 

[scott wurcer]

And I get criticized for trimming quotes, he noted ears have a limited physical extent nothing more.

 

[mmerrill99]

Before I do - explain what you understand by "only captures a small part of the wavefront" & "ears have a limited physical extent"?

Because I suspect when I give the explanation you will say that's what you meant.

Edit: I really should have said I need to know what your understanding is so I can formulate an appropriate answer to where you are currently in your understanding of auditory perception?

 

[mmerrill99]

If you are reluctant, maybe the other Scott wants to explain what was meant as he seemed to be sure ""only captures a small part of the wavefront" (your phrase) & his phrase, "ears have a limited physical extent" both meant the same thing?

 

[planet10]

Same as our ears

True. But ears are usually a binary pair separated by a head function, with a lifetime of programming to sort out all sorts of details.

Back here;

To quote Floyd Toole:

Two ears and a brain are massively more analytical and adaptable than an omnidirectional microphone and an analyzer.

dave

 

[planet10]

A wavefront exists in 3D space (4D if you count the progression of the wavefront). A mic captures a 2D point in the wavefront.

Ears have the ability to capture a more complex portion of that wavefront. 2 ears spaced apart on either side of the head, complex earlobes, and a huge amount of processing power trained to analyze the raw data.

dave

 

[scott wurcer]

If you are reluctant, maybe the other Scott wants to explain what was meant as he seemed to be sure ""only captures a small part of the wavefront" (your phrase) & his phrase, "ears have a limited physical extent" both meant the same thing?

The wavefront is everywhere, recordings routinely use multiple microphones sometimes many feet apart. AFAIK you have two ears probably less than a foot apart (limited extent). As far as I'm concerned this whole discussion of not being able to sample exactly the wavefront impinging on your ears is a red herring. At some point the audio information is contained in two 2D signals (amplitude vs time) and the information they can contain is limited by fundamental principles.

 

[planet10]

At some point the audio information is contained in two 2D signals (amplitude vs time) and the information they can contain is limited by fundamental principles.

But the brain provides way more analysis capability than a mic.

dave