In Reply to: Re: Slow switching posted by Pat D on July 30, 1999 at 14:33:24:
Well, slow switching reduces sensitivity from the partial loudness memory (some people insist in calling it "echoic" memory) to basically zero, and that means that we have to rely on the next level of memory.At the loudness level, small changes in loudness ONLY are perceptable. At the next level, changes in character, including considerably larger changes in loudness, are perceptable.
How much depends ENTIRELY on the signal, so for some things (large changes in pitch, for instance) the difference would be effectively zero. For other things, say small changes in partial loudness time details, it could reduce the threshold by some dB. How much is HARD to say until we have exact specifics, and even THEN I'd want to test the prediction.
There's a reason I try to keep nearly all of my research at the periphery. That's because if one stays at what the periphery can't distinguish, then one doesn't have to deal with the CNS, which is rather, well, shall we say "adaptive", to say the least. (But there's no good evidence of people having an editic echoic memory, as it were, although of course there is never a way to prove a negative. I'd love to meet such a person!)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Slow switching - jj 20:51:13 07/30/99 (8)
- Re: Slow switching - jfp 00:06:46 07/31/99 (3)
- DBT in British mags - Dan Bonhomme 07:32:13 07/31/99 (2)
- Re: DBT in British mags - jfp 21:20:12 07/31/99 (0)
- Re: Your example - jj 08:24:10 07/31/99 (0)
- Re: Slow switching - jfp 21:59:48 07/30/99 (3)
- Once again . . . - jj 08:21:20 07/31/99 (2)
- Re: Once again . . . - jfp 11:13:43 07/31/99 (1)
- How about some evidence - jj 22:00:30 07/31/99 (0)