Originally Posted by Bob Lee (QSC)
DulcetTones, if you're interested in brain activity and music, I would recommend the book This Is Your Brain on Music,
by Daniel Levitin.
Will make a note of it, thx.
Although if it takes away my enjoyment of music can I sue you for damages
Still, I like the website I provided because they have done some very interesting experiments.
Have you had a chance to check it out Bob?
Michael, the point of the quoted experiments does not matter if the differences are heard or not, the point is that they have identified another aspect of interaction of music with the brain beyond the previously known studies for pitch/contour/rythm/meter.
This interaction is also pretty dramatic and surprising, touching on regions now that include emotions/attention/novelty/and error detection, and furthermore actual parts of the brain involved in speech and language processing (this is interesting because the music was pure piano).
My point is this.
The above test is a perfect example and way for ending once and for all those that argue for or against that a listener enjoys system expensive more than system cheap or there is no difference.
However if someone believes they do hear a difference and prefers one over the other, then it should be comparable to the results found in the experiment I quoted above.
It is an ideal test because the listener just sits and listens to all the products blindly without even having to select either A-B-etc and the measurements would not lie.
Personally I would love to see this kind of test involving WAV/FLAC/cheap player/moderately expensive player/no player but use music server-pc.
Lets not forget that in the design/development of some products it is a combination of measurements and ear listening (seen this mentioned by a few speaker manufacturers and other product types as well).
Now the above test does away with any arguments because it does not matter if something is being measured or not, or what those factors are.
It should appear on the above test and if differences occur then it raises the question what factors are causing it, otherwise it can be used as part of the argument by the those who are objective.
But lets not forget that it really is not possible at the moment to use auditory perception as a science for the objective side, as I have seen throughout this discussion.
As that article shows, it is far more complex than is usually presented with evidence highlighting how strongly we can react differently to the same music but with subtle differences.
Until someone does a comparable experiment to the one I quoted, I am keeping an open mind.
Its late stopping there but hopefully the point gets across.
The point is Bob that I do not believe we actually measure everything that is relevant to our listening.
Otherwise you would not have speaker manufacturers testing crossovers by ear, and other product manufacturers using ear as well.
I am not saying everything is done by ear, just at times it seems to be a combination of ear and measurements.
So, if we cannot clarify 100% whether we measure every factor involved with listening, we have to look for an alternative (that being measuring brain response in the context provided by the experiment quoted).
Ok I am really really really off to bed now