Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Testing audiophile claims and myths
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Testing audiophile claims and myths - Page 218

post #3256 of 3264

Most interesting - and I *guess* there is no scientific proof satisfying all the statistical requirements to be accepted

by regular science at the moment - to prove her claims wrong or false. It is certain that humans with this ability exist and that they must be extremely rare; depending on circumstances, the time and place they were/are discovered, they might end up as guinea pigs in some lab, supreme sorcerers, royalty or simply being "disposed of " if they insist on their special ability - people tend to be hostile to things they can not understand and do not fit in the "accepted" drawer.

 

I am most interesting if this does get researched and explained scientifically - but with all the science, at least one another human being with the same ability will have to be independently used for confirmation; one can not create a scientific apparatus if it is not known what to look for and one single person might be simply telling ferytales upon which wrong set of scientific parameters would end up being used. 

post #3257 of 3264

the only uncertainty here seems to be how she really sees. when she looks at a chair, it's still a chair. and the spectrum of light hitting the chair and coming back to the eye is also still the same. reality doesn't change. checking that she has more kinds of cones is not at all at the limit of science. but sure if we could cut one eye open it might make things easier ^_^.

in fact we have a rough idea about how a lot of animals see things and what frequencies they can perceive. it's how they interpret the data that is always the unknown factor.

 

 

Quote:

"You might see dark green but I’ll see violet, turquoise, blue. It’s like a mosaic of color.”

 

hey I'm a tetrachrothingy!!! I've got tonnes of pictures done with my camera where shadow areas are dark green and full of violet and turquoise and blue. I used to call it noise and try to remove it. :veryevil:
 

post #3258 of 3264
Quote:
Originally Posted by castleofargh View Post
 

the only uncertainty here seems to be how she really sees. when she looks at a chair, it's still a chair. and the spectrum of light hitting the chair and coming back to the eye is also still the same. reality doesn't change. checking that she has more kinds of cones is not at all at the limit of science. but sure if we could cut one eye open it might make things easier ^_^.

in fact we have a rough idea about how a lot of animals see things and what frequencies they can perceive. it's how they interpret the data that is always the unknown factor.

 

hey I'm a tetrachrothingy!!! I've got tonnes of pictures done with my camera where shadow areas are dark green and full of violet and turquoise and blue. I used to call it noise and try to remove it. :veryevil:

 

I think the point of bringing up that rare example is to claim that there are certain individuals within this community that can hear sonic differences that normal people can't.

 

The more interesting example of people with 'special sensory gifts' would be synesthesia, where people hear colors or see sounds, due to neurons being cross-wired between traditional divisions of senses in various regions of the brain.

 

Note that these types of phenomenon are extremely rare and not really applicable to the average population. Also, the processes behind them can be understood through science and research though some of these areas have not been well-studied.

 

The traditional audiophile claims made around here of being able to hear certain sonic discrepancies due to an genetic golden ear or intensive ear training are mostly anecdotal without any rigorous testing using the scientific method. There have been certain cases where blind testing revealed something beyond mere chance, but I would imagine further objective testing would be required to verify the actual scope and accuracy of such personal claims. The existent of expectation bias is certainly well-established and not being blinded to the equipment drastically changes preferences. fun quick summary. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ear

post #3259 of 3264
Quote:
Originally Posted by money4me247 View Post

I think the point of bringing up that rare example is to claim that there are certain individuals within this community that can hear sonic differences that normal people can't.

The more interesting example of people with 'special sensory gifts' would be synesthesia, where people hear colors or see sounds, due to neurons being cross-wired between traditional divisions of senses in various regions of the brain.

Note that these types of phenomenon are extremely rare and not really applicable to the average population. Also, the processes behind them can be understood through science and research though some of these areas have not been well-studied.

The traditional audiophile claims made around here of being able to hear certain sonic discrepancies due to an genetic golden ear or intensive ear training are mostly anecdotal without any rigorous testing using the scientific method. There have been certain cases where blind testing revealed something beyond mere chance, but I would imagine further objective testing would be required to verify the actual scope and accuracy of such personal claims. The existent of expectation bias is certainly well-established and not being blinded to the equipment drastically changes preferences. fun quick summary. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ear
Interesting that it's only women that can have the necessary chromosome mutation, leading to this condition, a corresponding mutation in men leads to color blindness. Presumably therefore a similar phenomenon with hearing would also only apply to women, the result in men would be "cloth ears" not "golden ears". wink.gif

There is evidence that hearing can be trained, but it's not improving hearing, it's improving listening, two completely different things.
post #3260 of 3264

If you actually go and find out what sort of exceptional hearing that people with exceptional hearing have, you find out that it isn't that much more than regular hearing. Just a few notes higher in the scale. And music wouldn't sound any different to them because most music doesn't contain those frequencies, and those frequencies are way beyond the range of being perceived as a musical note. Exceptional hearing is something you can test for and identify, but in the real world, it's no real advantage at all. In fact, it is often a detriment because high frequency squeals of fluorescent lights and TV monitors can become irritating.

post #3261 of 3264
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

If you actually go and find out what sort of exceptional hearing that people with exceptional hearing have, you find out that it isn't that much more than regular hearing. Just a few notes higher in the scale. And music wouldn't sound any different to them because most music doesn't contain those frequencies, and those frequencies are way beyond the range of being perceived as a musical note. Exceptional hearing is something you can test for and identify, but in the real world, it's no real advantage at all. In fact, it is often a detriment because high frequency squeals of fluorescent lights and TV monitors can become irritating.


but there are a lot of cures for that one problem. rave parties close to the speakers are just one of many.

 

 

as you say it's easy to test people for their hearing : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mosquito.

post #3262 of 3264

Just a technical question to the EEs on the forum. If you have two amps, one is rated to supply 100 watts and the other rated to supply 400 watts, and both are playing at a specific volume (let's say 90 dB), and you are using the same speaker, the power to the load at that SPL will remain the same between both amps, irrespective of the rated power output?

 

Just want to wrap my brain around this before it kills me.

post #3263 of 3264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mezzo View Post
 

Just a technical question to the EEs on the forum. If you have two amps, one is rated to supply 100 watts and the other rated to supply 400 watts, and both are playing at a specific volume (let's say 90 dB), and you are using the same speaker, the power to the load at that SPL will remain the same between both amps, irrespective of the rated power output?

 

Yes. The power required for a given SPL depends on the speaker's efficiency (usually specified in dB/W at 1 m distance). The maximum power output of the amplifier determines the maximum peak SPL that can be achieved with a given speaker efficiency at an acceptable level of distortion. However, if the more powerful amplifier has higher gain, it will probably need a lower volume setting for matched power output.

post #3264 of 3264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mezzo View Post
 

the power to the load at that SPL will remain the same between both amps, irrespective of the rated power output?

 

This is correct.

Ceteris paribus of course.

And given that the 90dbs are measured at the acoustic output (speaker), and are not some electrical level at some point in the chain. ;)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Testing audiophile claims and myths