In Reply to: RE: That video posted by 3db on March 27, 2015 at 08:54:36:
Your example demonstrated that when the brain is presented correlated but conflicting auditory and visual information for one syllable of human speech, that in this case, the brain chooses to trust the visual. You haven't demonstrated that the same is true for other syllables and speech patterns, and you haven't demonstrated that our brain's approach to speech recognition has any relevance to sighted audio component comparisons. The McGurk effect is simply not present in those comparisons. There is no way for the brain to be "fooled" by conflicting audio and visual cues when the visual is static and not correlated to the music. Your conclusion is just a non sequitur.By the way, I do think that our listening impressions are biased in some way by knowing what we're listening to in combination with preconceptions, prejudices, and other baggage we bring into the listening session. It's just that it is has nothing to do with our reliance on a combination of visual & auditory cues in speech recognition. If we're predisposed to like something before hearing it, we're more likely to like it when we do hear it. And vice versa. If you put a sheet in front of the equipment rack when I'm comparing components, but you tell me what's playing, I suspect I would form the same opinions as I would if I could see the equipment.
Edits: 03/27/15
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Your examples haven't demonstrated that - Dave_K 09:16:32 03/27/15 (8)
- Dr Floyd Toole's work has also supported sight bias - 3db 11:23:24 03/27/15 (3)
- Who cares? Nobody is saying certain biases don't exist in audio. Just don't blame everything on them. Nt - geoffkait 06:53:07 03/28/15 (2)
- RE: Who cares? Nobody is saying certain biases don't exist in audio. Just don't blame everything on them. Nt - 3db 06:20:33 03/30/15 (1)
- RE: Who cares? Nobody is saying certain biases don't exist in audio. Just don't blame everything on them. Nt - kerr 10:18:24 03/31/15 (0)
- RE: Your examples haven't demonstrated that - 3db 10:51:24 03/27/15 (0)
- RE: Your examples haven't demonstrated that - 3db 10:15:32 03/27/15 (2)
- The logic eluded you - Dave_K 13:54:45 03/27/15 (1)
- Its clearly evident that - 3db 06:14:39 03/30/15 (0)