Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Reply to John Curl's suggestion to read Schroeder's "Models of hearing"

Posted by KlausR. on May 15, 2007 at 07:12:49:
For some unknown reason you have deleted your post so I post my reply here.
I went to the IEEE website and downloaded the paper in pdf-format. I had a look and to be sure I used the Adobe search function:
the term "polarity" is not mentioned. The paper further does not describe listening tests where signals other than artificial or synthesized were used.
What conclusion was I supposed to draw from this paper considering the current context which is consumers/music lovers/audiophiles listening to MUSIC.

Klaus