14 Apr
2010
14 Apr
'10
7:06 p.m.
On 04/15/2010 06:06 AM, Arnold Krille wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 14 April 2010 21:40:08 Kim Cascone wrote:
You are mixing something up here.
If machines can't measure it, it doesn't exist (at least to Ken)[*]. Does that
doesn't mean that if your 0.50€ mic can't record anything from mosquitos
making out, they don't exist?
No, it means that if no mic in the world can record the mosquitos, they don't
make any sound.
The human reception is different then machines reception (not just the non-
linearity!). But it isn't able to detect anything machines can't. Your ears
are worse then any half-decent microphone regarding SNR and frequency-range.
Your eyes are worse then microscopes, telescopes and slower then fast cameras.
Your nose is a lot worse in detecting smells then any mass-spectrometer is.
What makes the human different (some call it superior) is combining this
sensory input not only into facts but also into feelings. And it can combine
thoughts to create new ideas much better then machines combine their input to
even foresee the future, let alone transfer knowledge of one thing onto
predicting behaviour of some other thing.
Of course there are legions of scientists and nerds working on making machines
better in these parts too.
Going into psychoacoustics is not really contradicting the "machines can't
measure it, still it exists". Machines can measure the frequencies the human
ear can't hear but which still have an effect how we perceive the sound. Only
the effects aren't looked into as deep as the frequencies below 20kHz are. To
the result that most scientific research wasn't able to give reliable results.
Which in turn makes most audio people discard frequencies>22kHz light-
heartedly. And they are right as the scientific (thus neutral) proof of the
effect of the frequencies below 22kHz is _much_ greater then above. That
doesn't deny the psycho-acoustic effects, it only ignores them for the sake of
bandwidth, reliability and cost...
Have fun,
Arnold
[*] Might also be that today's machines aren't good enough. Just compare the
knowledge about the atom of today with that of 250 years ago...
Currently we only measure in upto 4 dimensions but if there are 12 as
string theory suggests then we are most likely missing a lot of
information from our scientific measurements.
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
It's
all ones and zeroes. Given the same inputs, the same output should
be obtained. Acoustics is physics. And if I can't measure it, it doesn't
exist.
yeah well that quite nicely works for machines
but with human sensory systems you'll find they are quite non-linear
and hence the field of psycho-acoustics
which can be interpreted as voodoo by some