Cable Asylum

• actual def's - jneutron 11:53:59 09/22/05 (3)
  In Reply to: Definitions posted by Jon Risch on September 22, 2005 at 10:11:21:

  Leslie R. Bernstein, Dept of Neuroscience, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Ct..... Journal of Neuroscience Research 66:1035-1046 (2001).

  Page 1036, second paragraph on left..

  I will highlight the relevant parts for you..
  Quote:

  ""Most of what is known about how human listeners process ITD's has been gleaned from investigations in which sounds have been presented via earphones (for review, see Durlach and Colburn, 1978). The primary advantage of this method is that it allows for extremely precise control of the stimuli and, most importantly, of the interaural disparities themselves. When stimuli of like frequency content are presented to each ear via hearphones, the perception is typically that of a singular fused "acoustic image" that is located within the head, or intracranially, along a line bounded laterally by each ear . If the sounds presented to each ear are identical, the intracranial image will be perceived close to the center of the head. Depending on the particular stimulus employed, the introduction of an ITD can result in the intracranial position of the sound being perceived as displaced toward the ear at which the physical waveform leads in time. Such an intracranial image is said to be lateralized . In contrast, sounds emitted by external sources such as loudspeakers are typically perceived as being outside the head and are referred to as being localized .""

  I await your prop posts..both the electron grain boundary one, and now, this..

  Cheers, John

  Hmmm..Bernstein is across the LI sound, about 10 miles away...my, what a short drive..:-)
  
  

  ---

  • Re: actual def's - Mudcat 04:13:51 09/23/05 (2)
    In Reply to: actual def's posted by jneutron on September 22, 2005 at 11:53:59:

    Hmmm..Bernstein is across the LI sound, about 10 miles away...my, what a short drive..:-)

    
    Huh!! Does Brookhaven have that Lotus from "The Spy Who Loved me"? Or something better like the Matador from "The Man With The Golden Gun"?
    
    

    ---

    • Re: actual def's - jneutron 06:11:19 09/23/05 (1)
      In Reply to: Re: actual def's posted by Mudcat on September 23, 2005 at 04:13:51:

      Mudcat: ""Huh!! Does Brookhaven have that Lotus from "The Spy Who Loved me"? Or something better like the Matador from "The Man With The Golden Gun"? ""

      I could tell ya, but den I'd hafta kill ya..:-)

      I live about 1000 feet from the Port Jeff Ferry..

      John
      
      
      

      ---

      • Re: actual def's - Mudcat 09:16:42 09/23/05 (0)
        In Reply to: Re: actual def's posted by jneutron on September 23, 2005 at 06:11:19:

        I could tell ya, but den I'd hafta kill ya

        Take a number, you'll be behind a lot irate husbands on Northern Virginia.
        
        

        ---
• Re: Daffynitions?? - jneutron 11:14:15 09/22/05 (0)
  In Reply to: Definitions posted by Jon Risch on September 22, 2005 at 10:11:21:

  JR: ""Sorry, but localization includes everything: image width, depth, and height. You have stated several times that all you are looking at is the side to side localization aspect, and are ignoring the factors that would come into play for imaging depth and height perception, such as HRTF and pinnae convolutions, etc.""
  
  I have provided as an example, a case of two objects which are located in an arbitrary position relative to the listener, and have explained the changes in ITD and IID which define the spacial relationship between the two objects. By using both ITD and IID, it is a trivial matter to map the space in two dimensions, either using polar, or cartesian co-ordinates. Differential ITD and IID are required to characterize what has been referred to as "blurring" or "focus". I have stated the resolution required to locate a source to within a circle in space (note this it depth and angle) around it..an uncertainty circle.

  I have also stated that the analysis in it's pure form, provides the discrimination capabilities that are needed to define the clarity of the image to image resolution, and that this is indeed both amplitude and frequency dependent...your "HRTF and pinnae convolutions", are frequency and amplitude dependent confounding factors which are dealt with once rigorous tests are setup, not before.. You are making the same mistake many others have made in the past...not breaking the problem down into discrete entities..

  It is necessary to first understand what information is being presented to the ears. To this end, the numbers are startling.

  JR: ""Lateralization accurately includes only the side to side location aspect, and that is why I am calling it what your theory is limited to examining.""
  
  You would be better off learning what I am talking about, as you are still unaware of the details, even though I have posted so much of it. So I'll repeat it again, maybe you will hear it this time..:-)

  I am speaking of the ITD/IID differential relationship which defines the circle of space around an arbitrary point in space. This area represents the region within which a specific level of discrimination will allow the listener to define the source of the sound. The worse the ability to discriminate, the larger the area..

  By setting the radius of that uncertainty circle, it is trivial to mathematically determine the total variance of ITD and IID on the edge of that circle..simple equations..easily done in excel.

  JR: ""Yes, lateralization would have to be included in any discussion of full localization, but when you are purposefuly ignoring those other aspects of localization, and focuing ONLY on the Left/Right aspect, then it should be called what it is, and not something broader and much more encompassing.""
  
  This is your typical vebage, Jon...so and so is always "ignoring other aspects". Strawman dude...I recommend you read and understand what I am saying before engaging in your typical schtick..
  JR:"" Of course, you ca call it what you will, but inventing your own language is hardly going to help people understand what you are trying to say.""
  
  Again, strawman tactics..you do not understand what I am talking about. As I clearly show, I am discussing spacial localization..anybody can read that, Jon..

  I recommend you can the attitude, and discuss like a gentleman..can you?

  Cheers, John

  PS..JR: ""I will be posting some comments on your theories of lateralization in Prop Heads as soon as I have some time to pull my notes together. ""
  
  I can't wait..hopefully, you will actually read and understand what I am writing..if you don't, just ask..if you are embarrased to ask on forum, e-mail me the questions..I don't publish private communication. If you choose to write blather like this post on a technical forum, I will enjoy correcting you with actual technical stuff..constructive dialogue, on the other hand, is welcome..

  Given time and learning, you will be able to ask the right questions..I have time, and would like you to learn..that is moving forward, not the stasis you have nurtured in the past.

  
  
  

  ---

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---