15 Jul
2023
15 Jul
'23
3:57 a.m.
https://scitechdaily.com/the-sound-of-silence-johns-hopkins-researchers-pro…
---
David W. Jones
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
exploring the landscape of god
http://dancingtreefrog.com
Sent from my Android device with F/LOSS K-9 Mail.
15 Jul
15 Jul
9:48 a.m.
On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 15:57:56 -1000
"David W. Jones" <gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
I saw that link a few days a go somewhere else. Fascinating study - well worth
reading.
--
Will J Godfrey {apparently now an 'elderly'}
https://willgodfrey.bandcamp.com/
http://yoshimi.github.io
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
11:59 a.m.
On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 08:48:36AM +0100, Will Godfrey wrote:
Fascinating study - well worth reading.
I'd disagree. To me it's just word-play, starting with a
completely fuzzy definition of 'hearing'.
Philosophers have long debated whether silence is
something
we can literally perceive
As they have wasted their time debating if zero is a valid
number or something the devil created to mislead us.
I'm writing this in an xterm with a white background and
black characters. Surprise surprise ! I can read what I
am typing ! And it has exactly the same meaning as if I
would have white text on a black background !
So I can 'see' black - even if black means 'no light' !
Ciao,
--
FA
12:40 p.m.
Am 15/07/2023 um 11:59 schrieb Fons Adriaensen:
I'm writing this in an xterm with a white
background and
black characters. Surprise surprise ! I can read what I
am typing ! And it has exactly the same meaning as if I
would have white text on a black background !
Thumbs up, you made my day :-)))
1 p.m.
Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org> writes:
On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 08:48:36AM +0100, Will Godfrey
wrote:
Well, the philosophical question might possibly be phrased as "if no
tree falls down in a forest and there is someone around to hear it, does
it make a sound?"
But this makes more sense as a neurophysiological question, namely how
the hearing adapts to total silence, similarly to how vision adaption in
total darkness is a neurophysiological question.
If you ask "what is total darkness" of a camera film, its answer from a
month in darkness will pretty much be "nothing". If you ask the same of
a digital camera sensor, the answer will be "noise".
This tells you more about the sensor than about darkness.
--
David Kastrup
Fascinating study - well worth reading.
I'd disagree. To me it's just word-play, starting with a
completely fuzzy definition of 'hearing'.
Philosophers have long debated whether silence is
something
we can literally perceive
As they have wasted their time debating if zero is a valid
number or something the devil created to mislead us.
5:34 p.m.
On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 01:00:53PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
Well, the philosophical question might possibly be
phrased as "if no
tree falls down in a forest and there is someone around to hear it, does
it make a sound?"
That again is word games, it just depends on how you define 'sound'.
But this makes more sense as a neurophysiological
question, namely how
the hearing adapts to total silence, similarly to how vision adaption in
total darkness is a neurophysiological question.
In this case adaptation doesn't play any role, it's all about how a
sequence (in time) of events is perceived. Humans are quite bad at
making 'objective' measurements of such things. This is even more
evident when visual and auditory events are mixed and the subject
has to find out the time relation between those.
Re. total silence: if you are in a completely soundproof room you
will start hearing your heartbeat and the blood flowing in your
ears after some time. Most people can't handle this for long and
start screaming 'let me out'. Those that remain inside longer
usually have a completely wrong idea of how long they were in.
--
FA
6:36 p.m.
On 15/07/2023 03:57, David W. Jones wrote:
https://scitechdaily.com/the-sound-of-silence-johns-hopkins-researchers-pro…
<https://scitechdaily.com/the-sound-of-silence-johns-hopkins-researchers-prove-people-hear-it/>
One interesting thing is that while reading I noticed the files for
their experiments [1] which are referenced in the full PDF paper [2]
there seems to systematically be a tone where the left and right tones
are with inverted phase. This was immediately audible with headphones.
For example this
one:https://s3.amazonaws.com/mcd-headphone-check/v1.0/assets/antiphase_HC_I…
Reading the rest it seems this was actually intentional and a
'screening' procedure to see if people were using headphones.
Then, because this is the Linux Audio Users mailing list, they write
"Beyond requiring headphones, we also optimized our experiment for
Google Chrome (and tested it on multiple machines), and then required
all subjects to use Google Chrome as well. If any subject initiated the
experiment using a non-Chrome browser, they were required to switch to
Chrome before being allowed to participate."
Sorry to derail from the more philosophical subject :-D
[1] https://philpapers.org/archive/RUITPO-4.pdf (this is released with a
CC BY-NC-ND license so linking it here)
[2]
https://rzg.perceptionresearch.org/silence/stimuli/oneSilenceIsMore/3_contr…
(note this seems to need chrome but you can see the files by doing a
'network inspection' in the browser)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
David W. Jones
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
exploring the landscape of god
http://dancingtreefrog.com <http://dancingtreefrog.com>
Sent from my Android device with F/LOSS K-9 Mail.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list -- linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-audio-user-leave(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
9:10 p.m.
On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 06:36:06PM +0200, Lorenzo Sutton wrote:
Reading the rest it seems this was actually
intentional and a 'screening'
procedure to see if people were using headphones.
I found that test quite easy with both earphones and speakers.
And then, if you have any level metering on your sound output
(zita-mu1 here) you don't even need to listen...
Then, because this is the Linux Audio Users mailing
list, they write "Beyond
requiring headphones, we also optimized our experiment for Google Chrome
(and tested it on multiple machines), and then required all subjects to use
Google Chrome as well. If any subject initiated the experiment using a
non-Chrome browser, they were required to switch to Chrome before being
allowed to participate."
Oh dear. I don't think you can do such a test today via the internet
and claim any validity.
Almost all modern laptops will have extensive processing on their
built-in sound card. Some primitive 'stereo widening' when using the
speakers and some simple 'binaural processing' when using headphones.
And $(DEITY) knows what else. Windows (which probably most users have)
may add its own on the 'system' audio stream.
The probability that what gets into the headphones is a true copy
of the original file approaches zero.
To do a valid listening test, all of that needs to by bypassed.
Which means using an external sound card that is not configured
to be the 'system' one, and software capable of using that card
without any additional processing. There is no reason to assume
that Chrome can do that.
Sorry to derail from the more philosophical subject
:-D
Not at all, you raised some very valid concerns.
Ciao,
--
FA
526
days inactive
526
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
David Kastrup -
David W. Jones -
Fons Adriaensen -
Gerhard Zintel -
Lorenzo Sutton -
Will Godfrey