Re: [LAD] twice as loud

On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 12:14 -0500, Charles Henry wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Ralf Mardorf
> <ralf.mardorf@email-addr-hidden-dsl.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 11:10 -0500, Charles Henry wrote:
>
> >> Because psychoacoustics just hasn't been defined in a way to make hard
> >> numbers stick. The tendency in psychoacoustic experimental design is
> >> to use discrete conditions (which gives better experimental power) in
> >> order to show that an effect exists. But this way, any given
> >> experiment can't produce results that cover the whole space.
> >> Generalization and extrapolation are limited.
>
> > Masking theories used by audio codecs to compress audio signals don't
> > work for people who are trained in listening, e.g. MP3 at any rate is a
> > PITA. Trained people (here where I do live) do always here a loss in
> > blind tests.
>
> It's a problem for current models to accomplish compression without
> losing some part of the audio quality. Do you think there could be a
> better (or best) basis for reducing the complexity and bitrate of
> sound? or is it just plain impossible?

It's not impossible. I guess nobody is able to note, let's say, 10 000
pictures a second as single steps for a movie, of course you and I
aren't able to note it for just 30 pictures a second. But I don't
believe in digital audio math, on the niveau we reached until today.
Btw. I don't have knowledge of this math, I'm just listening and have
long time experience with doing analog recordings.

>
> > Before the brain does "math", are there any other senses involved to the
> > interpretation of the input given by the ears? (Btw. I'm sure that math
> > is just part of nature and can't describe nature, because it's just a
> > part.)
> >
> > Regarding to the topic that there are two sound sources and you are
> > thinking about a relation, try to imagine people who are autistic or who
> > are 'normal', but having a panic attack, or try to remember a situation,
> > when you barely were able to escape an accident. The filtering is
> > completely different. Everybody of us is able to focus allegedly masked
> > "things".
>
> I agree--but I'll put a little more on the table here. A strong model
> is able to describe not only the big trends but the contextual,
> situational, and personal sources of variation. A model of that kind
> of scope is very far off, in my mind. I would be happy to have a
> weaker model that generalizes well first.

You could be right.

I didn't do research about the hearing and sense of balance, so the
following might be a stupid thought:

Let's say you doe a recording with a dummy head, where it's possible to
separate height differences (from ahead, from the ground). Will it be
possible to recognise those differences when you move your head up and
down?

Upgrade: You might be right, but ...

with the exception for a non-life-threatening situation.

Yes, one day some people would be able to do perfect 3D acoustics for
music, but NOT FOR REPORTAGES. Imagine you are climbing an antenna mast.
The recordings of the helmet camera and of the microphones is of of the
context, no adrenalin etc..

>
> > Perception, the interpretation of the input by all senses will change,
> > regarding to the context, for audio even regarding to the tilting of
> > your head to the body.
> >
> > Recordings and digital audio virtualization always has the lack of the
> > experienced context. If it should be possible to completely gather
> > everything of nature by math for specific situations, there still will
> > be the context, a situation were everybody brains is able to count the
> > peas that drop to the ground, after the glass of peas fall down to the
> > ground.
> >
> > Remember your own experiences when you had or nearly had an accident.
> > Time seemed to be slower and silent, but important sounds (regarding to
> > your survival) become loud, while loud, but unimportant sounds become
> > silent.
> >
> >

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Wed Jul 28 00:15:01 2010