Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site


In the Forum: Playback Listening
In the Thread: It takes balls to shop (never mind the nuts)
Post Subject: Further musings on JD's ideas above.Posted by Gregm on: 12/29/2006
The visual analogy is very appealing I must say. Looking at audio from the point of view of music, as you treat the subject, I could comment on the following:

"It is not necessary or even desirable that a system reproduce all the information of the live event."
Agreed.

"Yes some of this information is of interest, but this is not the meat of what allows perception." Agree again. 

"The principal element of what allows perception of sound can only be put forth in terms of relative contrast.
"
I don't think so. I find this concept of relative contrast very attractive -- but it seems to be more fitting with the visual example rather than audio. Reproduction of music begins to exist, when the music begins to sound real -- i.e. the various sounds have ultimate cohesion, the sounds are no longer tones but part of an intelligible whole... 

I.e., the elements of the music are easily perceptible and they come forth /thereby we no longer listen to just sounds but to music.

For much of the music we listen to, the correct perception of rythm, melody, and harmony are essential. As JD notes aptly, most systems fail one way or another to reach this goal, aiming instead at the restitution of certain sounds -- evidence the fashionable speakers that sound like whistles.
Think of how many times every one of us has listened to melody without rythm -- or at least s/thing was not quite right and the brain had to make up for that.

"Relative contrast of duration, pitch, dynamics, and timbre."
I think those are characteristics -- not the "meat". Those are tools: you can also add tempo, and tonality

"...the human ear is (...) a one membrane system, in a way, a mirror of (...) one driver." Are you sure? Aren't there tiny hairs, each of which, given SP, oscillates at a different frequency, thereby giving the brain the particulars of tonality, amplitude, etc?


"In the case of a live performance, our ear is allowed to sum the input, and our brain processes this raw information directly ; In the case of HiFi, the summing has already been done, and our brane is asked to extrapolate a line of pre-summed information.

To hope to reconstruct the original picture from information that has been completely altered (in different ways with each recording) seems ridiculous."

I like this view and would like to think about it.
Maybe I'll even take my scope for a holiday ride to listen to a ruthlessly revealing system...

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site