In Reply to: Is it all simple as that ? posted by beppe61 on June 26, 2014 at 23:12:48:
The guy has some useful things to say. However, as is often the case with "demo/promo experiments", there are multiple flaws in both the demo and the narrative. For example:At about 2:50, the statement regarding "sounds below the noise level" being inaudible, is wrong. We, and other animals, can easily hear specific sounds which are well below the ambient noise level, because they stand out from the noise. One of the reasons they stand out is because we are listening for them. Another is because they're not part of the noise. Both of these are well-documented in the field of psychoacoustics.
A second issue is the time taken to change equipment. Only VERY experienced and dedicated listeners can maintain a sufficient mental memory of the first sound for more than 30 seconds or maybe a minute with regard to comparing it to the second sound sometime later.
One of the problems with these sorts of things is that the listener/attendee/Internet reader needs to have a sufficient knowledge of the topic in order to separate the hype, half-truths and inaccurate info from the solid information.
:)
Edits: 06/27/14
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Is it all simple as that ? - Inmate51 17:02:40 06/27/14 (6)
- RE: Is it all simple as that ? - beppe61 23:28:30 06/27/14 (5)
- RE: Is it all simple as that ? - morricab 01:47:54 06/29/14 (2)
- RE: Is it all "difficult" as that ? - beppe61 13:45:19 07/01/14 (0)
- RE: Is it all simple as that ? - Inmate51 09:21:09 07/01/14 (0)
- RE: Is it all simple as that ? - middleground 00:05:05 06/29/14 (1)
- RE: Is it all simple as that ? - beppe61 02:53:34 06/29/14 (0)