25 Jul
2010
25 Jul
'10
1:24 a.m.
On 07/24/2010 10:31 PM, fons(a)kokkinizita.net wrote:
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 02:58:36PM +0200, lieven moors
wrote:
That is assuming that our experience of loudness
corresponds to the continuous logarithmic scale
with which we measure SPL's. I suspect that this
is not the case. Our ears have minimum and
maximum SPL values they can observe/tolerate,
and I think that this range is the 'unconscious'
reference for measurement of loudness.
So we might have to adapt the 'steepness' of the
logarithmic curve to that range.
On 07/23/2010 10:23 PM, fons(a)kokkinizita.net
wrote:
So with e.g. A = B - 60 dB we could end up with X at
B - 30 dB (two steps of 30dB which are supposed to be
near equal subjectively), On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 06:42:11PM +0200, lieven
moors wrote:
Let's put it differently. If you only had sound B, and you
were asked to position a similar sound X halfway between
total silence, and the level of sound B, wouldn't that be the
same as asking that sound X has half the loudness of sound
B, or as asking that sound B has double the loudness of
sound X?
On 07/23/2010 06:29 PM, fons(a)kokkinizita.net
wrote:
> Transporting this to the audio domain, given two similar
> sounds A and B with a B having a higher level than A, you
> could adjust a third one X so it appears to be 'halfway'
> between A and B. If you do this with A much smaller than
> B, would you expect X to be close to 'half a loud as B' ?
>
>
>
>
If A would be very close to silence, yes.
I'd be *very* surprised if that would turn out to be true.
I bet that if B is A + 40 dB, X would turn out to be
close to A + 20 dB. And if B is A + 60 dB, X will be
close to A + 30 dB. In both cases A is very small
conpared to B (at most 1/10000 in power).
Ciao,
while with A = silence we would
have X somewhere between -6 and -10 dB relative to B
(these are the extremes of common values for 'twice as
loud'). How low can A be before this inconsistency turns
up ? Or more important: how reliable is such an idea of
'halfway' ?
I would say it's the only reliable thing in this context,
because it's the very thing we want to measure.
The simple fact is that on a logarithmic scale the
whole
concept of 'half' or 'double' is **meaningless**. That is
because such a scale depends on an arbitrary reference
value, and changing that value shifts the whole scale by
a constant amount without changing the underlying reality.
Two levels that are e.g. 10 and 20 on one scale (hence the
second is 'double' the first) could be as well be 80 and 90
just by changing the reference value for the log scale.
Yes, but changing the base does change the underlying
reality.
Of course half/double still makes sense in the
original
domain. But if the perceptual scale is logarithmic, they
are perceived as a constant difference, not as a ratio.
I think we are aware of the original domain, in de sense
we are approaching the limits of our hearing. What
we interpret as half/double as loud depends on the
position within that range.
regards,
Lieven