83.84.178.82
In Reply to: RE: Give it up… posted by David Aiken on January 06, 2008 at 12:51:19
In my job, when someone makes a statement similar to yours, I ask for the precise passages of the document. I just went through the paper and I could not find anything w.r.t. experiments performed with 2-channel/multiple reflection systems, apart from the passage quoted in my previous message. So just indicate the exact passage where Olive says that it can be applied to situations of 2 or more channels. FYI, to this date I could find only one paper investigating 2-channel systems, which is Burgtorf (1963) indicated below.
2-channel systems generate a phantom source. For noise as signal this has the effect of producing slightly increased thresholds of detection:
Burgtorf (1963), “On the subjective effect of sound fields in rooms (backward masking, phantom sources“, (Zur subjektiven Wirkung von Schallfeldern in Räumen (Rückverdeckung, Phantomschallquellen)), Acustica, vol. 13, p.86
The findings of a single loudspeaker/single lateral reflection system may or may not be applicable to 2-loudspeaker/multiple reflection systems. In order to know, it must be experimentally verified.
Absolute thresholds for lateral reflections with music are well below the thresholds for speech (the latter appear to further depend on the language used!), and they further depend on the music motif (and pop music has never been investigated!):
Schubert (1966), “Detectability of single reflections for music” (Untersuchungen über die Wahrnehmbarkeit von Einzelrückwürfen bei Musik), Technische Mitteilungen RFZ, vol. 10, no. 3, p.124
Somerville et al. (1966), “Recent works on the effects of reflectors in concert halls and music studios”, J. of Sound and Vibration, vol.3, no.2, p.127
Further, thresholds depend on the playback level:
Buchholz et al. (2001), “Room masking: understanding and modelling the masking of room reflections”, Audio Engineering Society preprint 5312
Different thresholds due to phantom source, music instead of speech, playback level: when one considers all the available evidence, one must conclude that the issue is so complex that basing a recommendation on one single experimental result using speech, which is what Everest does, is maybe somewhat optimistic. Again, if you read Everest carefully you see that he does not say to eliminate reflections, all of them and below thresholds of detection!
You constantly reproach me with selecting quotes from papers that suit my purpose, out of context etc. The answer to this is as obvious as it is simple: read yourself! I frankly do not know what the reason might be that prevents you from mailing me off-board to ask for a copy of the papers I’m referring to. The offer stands, take it or leave it.
Klaus
Follow Ups: