Hi,
If the ear where a microphone it would be a spectacyulary bad microphone. Yet it is what we use (together with our brain) to listen. And even the best Mic's, Amplifiers and Speakers rarely fool the ear completely.
Your comparision "is like asking whether the fatness of a pig is more or less green than the designated hitter rule" (Guaspari).
Sayonara
If the ear where a microphone it would be a spectacyulary bad microphone. Yet it is what we use (together with our brain) to listen. And even the best Mic's, Amplifiers and Speakers rarely fool the ear completely.
Your comparision "is like asking whether the fatness of a pig is more or less green than the designated hitter rule" (Guaspari).
Sayonara
Hey KYW how can you said that, ear is the one and only reference for all of us to hear, no other instrumen in this body can catch the sound, somebody here in this forum said our human ear can catch the difference about half diameter of Hidrogen atom, so if you been fool wit amp or speaker even mic, I can absolutely say your ear been damaged, perhaps your brain too so if you cannot got the point, pls better shut up
Yeah it's true, the ear is capable of detecting pressure waves so tiny that they cause the ear drum to move about 1/2 the diameter of a Hydrogen atom. Sure the ear doesnt have a flat response but neither does a mic. both use EQ. Since the human brain is the least understood part of the human anatomy, I'd think it is fair to say that a well educated / well looked after pair of ears can match or better pretty much any mic that we currently have available to us. The one area that we are lacking is our inability to detect changes in volume below (on average) 2-3dB .. a mic can certainly do better than that.
Hi,
Because it's true? You can argue until the cows come home from doing what cows do when they are out and about, but unless the ear/brain is sufficiently fooled into believeing it really listens to music, not to captured soundwaves passed through all sorts of contraptions the "reproduction" of music has not taken place.
This may very well be true. Yet the things that ear/brain system detects and those it does are widely different from the kind of output a microphone provides.
Or maybe I had very good amp's, speakers and Mic's?
My key point is that comparing a microphone and the ear/brain system is not possible in any meaningful sense, as they operate hugely differently and as they have a very different reaction to stimuli.
For example, the ear/brain system can "hear" a fully surpressed fundamental tone if a significant number of harmonics are present in the right ratio. Yes, the ear/brain system can "hear" a full tone and it's harmonic envelope with fundamental tone and some of the harmonic information missing (this is called residdiumhearing). No microphone can do that. Equally, the ear/brain system can detect pretty accuratly signals burried up to and more than 20db below exterior noise.
The ear/brain system can compensate for certain types of "distortion" and it is on the other hand exceptionally sensitive to others, more so than the basic analysis of the signal distortion by mechanical means will not indicte the audibility of the problem.
Hence your attempt at comparison has no meaning, as you are not comparing like with like. I might argue that a Abrahms M-1 heavy assault tank, when compared to Mercedes Benz S-Class Car is the better vehicle. If I intend to whoop *** in some gulf state whose government I don't like IT IS THE BETTER VEHICLE (the merc won't last 5 seconds against even the worst WW2 Tank, never mind modern ones).
If I want to go downtown on a saturday night and pull girls I suspect the Merc is a MUCH BETTER choice. In either case one can argue that one vehicle is better than the other. But that is for a given application. No "absolute" better vehicle can be chosen. The Merc is a nice car, the M-1 a nice tank. In their respective intended application they are good, if expensive choices to get around.
No need to get nasty.
BTW, if a given golden ear has a 10 on a scale or 1 to 10, then the best current microphone also has a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. However that applies only for the Golden Ear compared to other ears and the Mic compared to other Mics.
No inference can be drawn as to if the Mic or the Ear is "better" in absolute terms, as they have different applications.
Sayonara
Because it's true? You can argue until the cows come home from doing what cows do when they are out and about, but unless the ear/brain is sufficiently fooled into believeing it really listens to music, not to captured soundwaves passed through all sorts of contraptions the "reproduction" of music has not taken place.
This may very well be true. Yet the things that ear/brain system detects and those it does are widely different from the kind of output a microphone provides.
Or maybe I had very good amp's, speakers and Mic's?
My key point is that comparing a microphone and the ear/brain system is not possible in any meaningful sense, as they operate hugely differently and as they have a very different reaction to stimuli.
For example, the ear/brain system can "hear" a fully surpressed fundamental tone if a significant number of harmonics are present in the right ratio. Yes, the ear/brain system can "hear" a full tone and it's harmonic envelope with fundamental tone and some of the harmonic information missing (this is called residdiumhearing). No microphone can do that. Equally, the ear/brain system can detect pretty accuratly signals burried up to and more than 20db below exterior noise.
The ear/brain system can compensate for certain types of "distortion" and it is on the other hand exceptionally sensitive to others, more so than the basic analysis of the signal distortion by mechanical means will not indicte the audibility of the problem.
Hence your attempt at comparison has no meaning, as you are not comparing like with like. I might argue that a Abrahms M-1 heavy assault tank, when compared to Mercedes Benz S-Class Car is the better vehicle. If I intend to whoop *** in some gulf state whose government I don't like IT IS THE BETTER VEHICLE (the merc won't last 5 seconds against even the worst WW2 Tank, never mind modern ones).
If I want to go downtown on a saturday night and pull girls I suspect the Merc is a MUCH BETTER choice. In either case one can argue that one vehicle is better than the other. But that is for a given application. No "absolute" better vehicle can be chosen. The Merc is a nice car, the M-1 a nice tank. In their respective intended application they are good, if expensive choices to get around.
No need to get nasty.
BTW, if a given golden ear has a 10 on a scale or 1 to 10, then the best current microphone also has a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. However that applies only for the Golden Ear compared to other ears and the Mic compared to other Mics.
No inference can be drawn as to if the Mic or the Ear is "better" in absolute terms, as they have different applications.
Sayonara
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.