Are audio companies all involved in a huge conspiracy? - Page 70 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2071 of 3048 Old 03-09-2013, 08:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 377
The pocketing of the prism is somewhat analogous to faking a cable switch.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2072 of 3048 Old 03-09-2013, 09:13 PM
Advanced Member
 
andyc56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 522
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

The pocketing of the prism is somewhat analogous to faking a cable switch.

The whole situation is rather sad really, because some really intelligent people like Richard Heyser were duped by subjectivism. He spent a non-trivial part of his life trying to figure out a new way to look at audio signals (a kind of change of basis analogous to the Fourier transform) in such a way that the results would be more amenable to subjective interpretation. He never bothered to check whether or not the subjective observations which led him on this path were valid. If he had, he wouldn't have wasted his time.

To add insult to injury, one of the biggest BS artists in all of audio, John Atkinson, did a dedication to Heyser at the 2011 AES convention. It's not enough for Heyser to have made a fool of himself in his lifetime, pursuing the origin of baseless claims. No, he must be immortalized for that very thing, and forgotten for what he really did contribute, which was his innovative measurement technique, the forerunner of today's FFT-oriented audio measurement software such as REW, and many other related ideas, such as the energy-time curve.
andyc56 is offline  
post #2073 of 3048 Old 03-09-2013, 10:21 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 377
No different than Nobel Laureate physicist, Brian Josephson, who feels the explanation of paranormal experiences somehow lies in quantum mechanical explanations. Or the scientists that get duped by alleged psychics (James Randi has numerous stories about those). Or Fleishman and Pons. And the list goes on.

Wait. I'm getting a message from Hugo Chavez. He's saying it was crony capitalism and not capitalism that killed civilization on Mars.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #2074 of 3048 Old 03-09-2013, 11:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

No different than Nobel Laureate physicist, Brian Josephson, who feels the explanation of paranormal experiences somehow lies in quantum mechanical explanations. Or the scientists that get duped by alleged psychics (James Randi has numerous stories about those). Or Fleishman and Pons. And the list goes on.

Wait. I'm getting a message from Hugo Chavez. He's saying it was crony capitalism and not capitalism that killed civilization on Mars.
And let's not forget the winner of two Nobels by himself, Dr. Linus Pauling and vitamin C.eek.gif
CharlesJ is offline  
post #2075 of 3048 Old 03-09-2013, 11:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

You mean things like...

Cold fusion
Penta water
Reikii
Ghost hunters
Energy bracelets and necklaces
That quack, Dr. Oz
Coral calcium for arthritis
Michael Green wooden tuning blocks

Stuff like that?

Yes, thanks, and many more.biggrin.gif
CharlesJ is offline  
post #2076 of 3048 Old 03-09-2013, 11:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

The pocketing of the prism is somewhat analogous to faking a cable switch.
Yes, and 75% of people will perceive a difference between the same component presented twice.. But, then they say it is cheating.rolleyes.gif
CharlesJ is offline  
post #2077 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 01:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,327
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

Yes, and 75% of people will perceive a difference between the same component presented twice.. But, then they say it is cheating.rolleyes.gif

It's not necessarily wrong that they do, but we're into discussing the brain instead of discussing the sound at that point.

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #2078 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 05:01 AM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 22,675
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 256
posts deleted

Please take the high road in every post
Please do not quote or respond to problematic posts: report them to mods to handle
Link to sponsors
good to be back to vBulletin
markrubin is online now  
post #2079 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 05:37 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,248
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 318 Post(s)
Liked: 1152
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


[me: "...I'm suggesting that it's possible that changing a single component to have less fidelity might grant the over all sound experience greater fidelity."]

Even if this was a good idea, how would you accomplish it in practice?

I don't know. I think it would be interesting to know if it's possible in principle. Don't you think that would be interesting?

 

Personally, no. I think the whole concept of reducing distortion by adding distortion makes no sense. There are far better and far easier ways to get a system where distortion is fixed by more conventional means.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2080 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 05:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundsDif View Post

I've recently joined this forum and happened upon this thread. I've honestly not read through the entire thread (which is very long), however I did notice a person's was name mentioned several times in this thread that I personally know. That person is Richard Clark. I actually spent some time with Richard today and explained some of the things that were being discussed in this thread. He asked me to post a reply in his behalf. These are not his exact words, but hopefully you'll get the general meaning what he's saying about amplifiers and a good part of this applies to other audio equipment.

First he explained to me there are differences between amplifiers. With the proper equipment he can measure the output and tell you that there's a difference between two different amplifiers, as long as they do not share very similar builds.

Next he explained to me that there's a scientific term called "Just-Noticeable Difference" (JND) . In simple terms he told me that the JND is the minimum amount of difference that a human/person can notice a between two things using their senses (Smell, Touch, Sight, Taste and in this case Hearing). In most cases the difference has to be 3% or greater for humans to notice that one thing is different from another. There are exceptions were people have shown slightly lower in the 2% jnd and rare cases even at 1%.

IME audio JNDs are all over the map. For example, under ideal conditions for hearing nonlinear distortion with music, the JND is about 0.1% or -60 dB. Under ideal conditions for masking nonlinear distortion, the JND can be several percent which is more in agreement with the above comments. When it comes to noise, the spectral balance or timbre of the noise has very strong effects on JNDs. One indicator of these differences are the Fletcher Munson curves which show significant differences in the sesnitivity of the human ear at various frequencies and SPLs:



At the threshold of hearing (bottom line) there is a 70+ dB difference in the sensitivity of the human ear over the normal frequency range. At high levels the difference is still about 25 dB.

Another example is the JND for long term changes in pitch which is about 0.5%.

The ear's sensitivity to frequency response differences depends on the frequency where the difference is centered and the width of the band over which the difference exists:


Quote:
What his tests show is that people can not tell the difference between two decently built or better amplifiers. He can show the difference using sensitive measurement equipment, however the differences are too small for humans to detect a noticeable difference.

Exactly.

All of the above is consistent with generally accepted wisdom in audio's mainstream. Using modern test equipment it is often possible to consistently measure even the small differences between the channels of stereo and multichannel amplifiers that replicate the same circuit for every channel and they all share the same power supply. However, many modern amplifiers have nonlinear distortion that is 10 to 100 times less than the established JND. Good thing, because if we heard strong differences among the channels in stereo or multichannel amplifiers it sure would be confusing!
arnyk is offline  
post #2081 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 05:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Personally, no. I think the whole concept of reducing distortion by adding distortion makes no sense. There are far better and far easier ways to get a system where distortion is fixed by more conventional means.

The development of audio gear over the years agrees with you. The long term trend for amplifiers, preamps, DACs, and even speakers has been towards components with flatter frequency response and lower nonlinear distortion.

Compensating for frequency response errors with equalizers is fairly straightforward and is done routinely. Compensating for nonlinear distortion is generally tricker, and rarely shows up in production equipment. One exception to this showed up in some professional tape recorders from the 1970s and 1980s that had nonlinear compensators in their record amplifiers to compensate for the signficant nonlinear distortion in magnetic tape at high levels.

Please notice the linearity control (R628) that used symmetrical FETs (CR 501 and 502) as nonlinear compensation (adjustment resistor is about 1/3 down and half ways across).

arnyk is offline  
post #2082 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 08:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

It's not necessarily wrong that they do, but we're into discussing the brain instead of discussing the sound at that point.
The two are somewhat indistinguishable though. My opinion is that the folks did hear a difference and that difference was because their auditory focussing was different and this changed the weighting factor do what the brain assimilated. Hearing is a lossy process and information (sounds) are rejected in the processor making its way to long term hearing. If the brain can only hold a finite amount of information when hearing, if we sub(consciously) focus ononeaspectof thereproduced sound, we inadvertently lose something else. It's like when one is a room full of people and we're trying to hear what a person many feet away is saying.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #2083 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 09:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,327
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

The two are somewhat indistinguishable though. My opinion is that the folks did hear a difference and that difference was because their auditory focussing was different and this changed the weighting factor do what the brain assimilated. Hearing is a lossy process and information (sounds) are rejected in the processor making its way to long term hearing. If the brain can only hold a finite amount of information when hearing, if we sub(consciously) focus ononeaspectof thereproduced sound, we inadvertently lose something else. It's like when one is a room full of people and we're trying to hear what a person many feet away is saying.

Yes, that's why we need longer, significant, series for statistics that will hold water.

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #2084 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 10:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

No different than Nobel Laureate physicist, Brian Josephson, who feels the explanation of paranormal experiences somehow lies in quantum mechanical explanations. Or the scientists that get duped by alleged psychics (James Randi has numerous stories about those). Or Fleishman and Pons. And the list goes on.
But the other side of that is that at the very highest level, scientists tend to have unconventional aspects to their thought -- they're a little wild -- and they are not willing to dismiss ideas simply because they don't seem sensible.

Greg Lee
GregLee is online now  
post #2085 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 11:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New Milford, CT, USA
Posts: 5,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Compensating for nonlinear distortion is generally tricker, and rarely shows up in production equipment. One exception to this showed up in some professional tape recorders from the 1970s and 1980s that had nonlinear compensators in their record amplifiers to compensate for the signficant nonlinear distortion in magnetic tape at high levels.

Yes, and I mentioned that in an earlier post. Here's an article that explains pre-distortion fully, and even shows a schematic plus plans for a basic but effective distortion analyzer:

http://www.ethanwiner.com/distort.html

--Ethan

RealTraps - The acoustic treatment experts
Ethan's Audio Expert book

Ethan Winer is offline  
post #2086 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 11:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
rnrgagne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

The two are somewhat indistinguishable though. My opinion is that the folks did hear a difference and that difference was because their auditory focussing was different and this changed the weighting factor do what the brain assimilated. Hearing is a lossy process and information (sounds) are rejected in the processor making its way to long term hearing. If the brain can only hold a finite amount of information when hearing, if we sub(consciously) focus ononeaspectof thereproduced sound, we inadvertently lose something else. It's like when one is a room full of people and we're trying to hear what a person many feet away is saying.

And all while blinking, breathing, seeing, smelling and feeling....

I have nowhere near the technical acumen of some on these forums, but to me that is plain and obvious human characteristic. The interesting part is how conveniently and frequently it gets ignored in these discussions.
rnrgagne is offline  
post #2087 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 12:32 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

Yes, that's why we need longer, significant, series for statistics that will hold water.
Why bother? You can have all the studies and proofs in the world, disseminate to everyone, and people will still believe what they want. Rhinos and elephants and tigers will still be slaughtered for their horns or whatever. People will still have rain dances. We will still elect dumb asses and the media outlets will still cater too foolishness because it sells.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #2088 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 12:34 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

But the other side of that is that at the very highest level, scientists tend to have unconventional aspects to their thought -- they're a little wild -- and they are not willing to dismiss ideas simply because they don't seem sensible.
Which just goes to show no matter one's level of education, it doesn't insulate them from foolishness.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #2089 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 02:24 PM
 
Heinrich S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
I agree. When people bring up ABX testing as their main defense and ask for a more reliable model in its place I just counter by saying "use your hearing, man". It works. Alright, I'm joking so please don't get your knickers in a twist.
Heinrich S is offline  
post #2090 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 03:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Which just goes to show no matter one's level of education, it doesn't insulate them from foolishness.
Exactly!
CharlesJ is offline  
post #2091 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 04:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

But the other side of that is that at the very highest level, scientists tend to have unconventional aspects to their thought -- they're a little wild -- and they are not willing to dismiss ideas simply because they don't seem sensible.
And, usually nature doesn't use sleigh of hand tricks as people tend to so the scientist believe that they will not be tricked but they will be.
CharlesJ is offline  
post #2092 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 04:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

It's not necessarily wrong that they do, but we're into discussing the brain instead of discussing the sound at that point.
As mentioned by Chu, in the end, the brain is a very large part of this perception business. After all, it is the brain that is affected or is causing the bias, believing to hear what is not there, etc, being fooled. It is the processor. The ear just sends a bunch of signals, neuron pulses, then the brain does the rest.
But, I could be way off.wink.gifbiggrin.gif
CharlesJ is offline  
post #2093 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 06:41 PM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
on a personal level, has anyone here experienced this 'ability' of the brain to 'hear things which are not there'??

You know, the old example of 'they held up these humungous looking speaker cables and then bent down behind the speakers'.....all reported improvements and changes to the sound. The kicker is of course the people changed nothing. If you have experienced this mind trick, can you give the example?

I am really curious, I'd love to subjectively find out the magnitude of what this brain trick can do.

I think what is telling would be the reaction of the individual when they found out that in fact nothing was changed. I'd imagine mine would be 'wow! really? geez, is that not an amazing thing our brains could do'. Another's would be perhaps anger, or complete rejection 'I don't believe you'.

To the guy (prior to informing him nothing was changed) what would his reaction be to the suggestion 'some would say changes like this need to be confirmed by blind testing', would he say 'no, when the change is as obvious like this then no blind testing is needed'? In other words, and what I am intensely curious about, is it THAT real and solid to him that the whole idea of it possibly being personally created is beyond possibility?

[this is the whole area I was talking about brett in that last email...think we should pursue it somehow]

How would/could the reverse be manifested?? Would I NOT hear an obvious existing difference between dacs say (if my pre existing stance is 'not much difference there')? Does the question of 'reverse' even make sense in this context?
terry j is offline  
post #2094 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 06:45 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,385
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post


As mentioned by Chu, in the end, the brain is a very large part of this perception business. After all, it is the brain that is affected or is causing the bias, believing to hear what is not there, etc, being fooled. It is the processor. The ear just sends a bunch of signals, neuron pulses, then the brain does the rest.
But, I could be way off.wink.gifbiggrin.gif

Not significantly.


Kal Rubinson

"Music in the Round"
Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Kal Rubinson is offline  
post #2095 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 06:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 377
Terry, some of those that heard a difference in a fake cable swap might just rationalize it as proof that cables have a settling time because the dielectric was stressed and it takes time for the system to achieve equilibrium again.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #2096 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 07:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Terry, some of those that heard a difference in a fake cable swap might just rationalize it as proof that cables have a settling time because the dielectric was stressed and it takes time for the system to achieve equilibrium again.
What if the set of 'fake' cables were made and given to someone nearly a decade ago, and they still hear what they think they are not what they actually are? I have a data point there and told Terry the story in person some years ago.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #2097 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 07:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Terry, some of those that heard a difference in a fake cable swap might just rationalize it as proof that cables have a settling time because the dielectric was stressed and it takes time for the system to achieve equilibrium again.

Ha, that's the least of some of the rationalisations I'd expect!

We know that 'explabation' is rubbish, not least that it does not make sense heh heh. (the original 'explanation' had a typo in it, but felt it appropriate to not fix it as it rhymes with or implies a mix of explanation and babble..ie explababble' haha)

I am super curious about this whole area. He hears these differences and they are so 'real' to him that he can go to great lengths with flowery descriptors. You then show him incontrovertible proof that nothing had changed, the 'new' sound is exactly the same as the 'old' sound. Which path do the individuals take in dealing with this set of factors?

'You tricked me' might be one response...possibly that might be so. Or was it his own brain? Could he acknowledge that?

Or would it be such an eye opener that he could change his mind and now see the need for controlling this aspect of audition by means such as blind testing? Because the one thing a procedure like this has NOT proven is that there are no differences between dacs (say). It is a prior step to that, demonstrating the need to control these mental gymnastics.

The thing is, we are ALL subject to this phenomenon, it is not just the realm of the subjectivist, it is a human trait. Which is what prompted me to wonder how the objectivist might exhibit the trait, with the example of 'not hearing an obvious difference'. Does it work that way?

Brett, no doubt you saw the earlier link from arny, would something like this be of use in the earlier project we spoke of??

http://www.ebay.com/itm/USB-8-Channel-Relay-Board-RS232-Serial-controlled-/280758385304
terry j is offline  
post #2098 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 08:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bigus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The South
Posts: 4,258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post

on a personal level, has anyone here experienced this 'ability' of the brain to 'hear things which are not there'??

I am really curious, I'd love to subjectively find out the magnitude of what this brain trick can do.

Did you see the link posted earlier about the McGurk effect? Well known well documented example. Simple and powerful example.

Bigus is offline  
post #2099 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 08:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post

Brett, no doubt you saw the earlier link from arny, would something like this be of use in the earlier project we spoke of??

http://www.ebay.com/itm/USB-8-Channel-Relay-Board-RS232-Serial-controlled-/280758385304
Not really. I already have the relays and the interface worked out so it would cost me $50 to get what I already have.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #2100 of 3048 Old 03-10-2013, 09:11 PM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus View Post

Did you see the link posted earlier about the McGurk effect? Well known well documented example. Simple and powerful example.

Yeah, have seen that before.

I really like this other example!


Ok brett. Am leaning towards the latest idea that was mooted (in keeping with where this thread has gone lately) but I daresay the arduino one will come in handy sooner than later.
terry j is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off