naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Another neophyte flailing around on this subject...

Subject: Re: Another neophyte flailing around on this subject...
From: "Marinos Koutsomichalis" marinoskouts=
omichalis
Date: Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:44 am ((PDT))

being in the edge of human perception (12000-20000 Hz) or near it is one th=
ing and being one or several octaves above it a different..

we are surrounded by such frequencies all the time.. When for example there=
 are several bats above your head - and we hear nothing.. neither do we not=
ice other changes in other sources due to the ultrasounds produced by the b=
ats - at least AFAIC - I do not doubt that such frequencies - even higher m=
ight have some effect on humans, but researchers are still on a very elemen=
tary stage here

In any case even if that high overtones are in fact responsible for audible=
 effects in the range we can hear - they would be of minor importance compa=
red to all sorts of speaker, subject and space-related phenomena - from har=
monic distortion to reverb tails and the acoustics of each individual ear, =
etc.. So unless you are using PERFECT speakers located in some kind of anec=
hoic chamber and you are interested only in the way you hear things - I don=
' t see any point in getting interested on those artifacts

When of course you are interested in other things - like visualizing or man=
ipulating things digitally - that' s a whole different story

Brass acoustics is whole science on its own.. All the things you mention ha=
ppen in the audible range and are for sure related to various resonances an=
d such phenomena happening inside the tubes. I recall once I found an artic=
le in the internet explain in several pages the various forces and the mech=
anics of multi-phonics and I was completely overwhelmed - these things are =
really complicated..

Once again I' m really skeptical on all these until I find something well-r=
eferenced and documented

something crucial here of course is what are we referring to - acousticians=
, physicists, psycho-acousticians, phenomenologists and our audience will a=
ll have different views and interests on this for sure

m


On 13 =CE=91=CF=85=CE=B3 2010, at 5:52 =CE=BC.=CE=BC., James Shatto wrote:

> A/B of the korg with internal and external preamps would be a little moot=
 given the signal to noise ratio differences.  30dB, that's a lot.  Althoug=
h probably closer to 2dB with my 28dB noise floor mics (A weighted).  And t=
he Korgs internal preamps are known to have a subdued low end (frequency re=
sponse).  There's a mod and detailed instructions on how to do that mod.  B=
ut I opted for external preamps instead.
>
> I don't know about proof, but as a brass player for 20+ years.  There's m=
ultiphonics stuff where you sing a major tenth above the note you buzz with=
 your lips on the horn.  And the combination of the two (root + 3rd) sounds=
 the 5th (BELOW both of those tones).  It's not as strong as the other tone=
s, but it's definitely there.  If you get a group of like minded brass play=
ers together and play sustained chords.  When the group actually gets it in=
 tune the upper harmonics start to sound and ring above the actual notes be=
ing played and the dB level of the group goes up a notch.  Now whether that=
's fact or just belief, I don't know.  But it's certainly evidence of somet=
hing.  Could be physics, could be psychology.  I know that in the early mid=
i days, the synths that could sound/synth those upper harmonics had the mor=
e realistic sounds.  But I haven't dwelled in those circles much for a whil=
e now.
>
> - James
>
> --- On Fri, 8/13/10, Marinos Koutsomichalis <> wrot=
e:
>
> From: Marinos Koutsomichalis <>
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Another neophyte flailing around on this=
 subject...
> To: 
> Date: Friday, August 13, 2010, 8:04 AM
>
>
>
> On 13 =CE=91=CF=85=CE=B3 2010, at 2:25 =CE=BC.=CE=BC., James Shatto wrote=
:
>
> > Well in theory the upper harmonics do re-enforce the lower ones, which =
are in the capabilities of a lot of ears
>
> If you have any scientific references on this I' d love to have a look.. =
I might be wrong on this but I believe this is mainly just a myth..
>
> This is a subject already discussed a lot generally - Indeed, when I' m w=
orking in quality studios in high sampling rates and then switch to lower o=
nes, it sometimes seems like I can sense a subtle difference - but I' m not=
 really sure if this is actually happening and what would be the real reaso=
n for this..
>
> I guess I can easily figure this out via AB tests and such - it would wor=
th trying at some point..
>
> m
>
>
>
>










<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU