it's supported by a United States Patent.
Great what's the patent number so we can look it up and have a look.
Rob
it's supported by a United States Patent.
Great what's the patent number so we can look it up and have a look.
Rob
Methinks that this thread right here is excellent!
...Just the way it is; without any transfixation, juxtaposition, or transference. :b
How about.....transubstantiation?
This also could have some bearing on what we perceive as "edginess" in digital audio Vs relaxation in vinyl reproduction i.e the noise floor etc. of vinyl is of much less importance than the dissonant characteristics of digital - the edginess & the finding that it fatigues us because of the extra processing effort required by the brain.The findings support the conclusion that the privileged status of intervals that have simple frequency ratios over those with complex frequency ratios is the result of a biological bias. Thus, consonance and dissonance are not simply determined by culture. It should be pointed out that this processing advantage may make it easier to comprehend tonal than atonal music This is not to say that people cannot do the latter, but only that it is likely to be more difficult.. The evolutionary processes (e.g., potential selective advantages) and the brain mechanisms (e.g., auditory system circuitry) that underlie consonance are not yet known. Nonetheless, the findings to date are themselves "consonant" with the view that music is not only a cultural phenomenon but that it has quite definite origins in the way that the human brain evolved.
More support that it's not all preference from here (when it comes to music preferences anyway) http://www.musica.uci.edu/mrn/V4I1S97.html#consonance
This also could have some bearing on what we perceive as "edginess" in digital audio Vs relaxation in vinyl reproduction i.e the noise floor etc. of vinyl is of much less importance than the dissonant characteristics of digital - the edginess & the finding that it fatigues us because of the extra processing effort required by the brain.
Depends on the specific vinyl noise, John. Normal surface noise? Yeah it's pretty harmless. Some even seem to like it. Snap Crackle Pop? Annoying as hell. Worse than digital distortion? I'm not at all sure to be honest. I can only recall having heard a DAC with an edge nasty enough to approach the audibility of a crackly record surface once. It was pretty bad.
Tim
Now, that is almost funny! :b
Just want to check - is this a comment on what I just posted?It's desperate; headed rapidly toward pathetic. Almost makes me long for Frank to come along and change the subject to eliminating inaudible distortion by wiring his underwear to the microwave. Comic relief would be good about now.
By phelonious ponk
Indeed
No its part of a message P P posted a couple of pages ago i think it was page 45 , but i couldnt quote the whole message , it reminds me of an audiophile who turned of all electric equipment in the entire house for " serious undisturbed " listening.
Tim,
My point is that distortion that effects us at the subconscious level & only becomes expressed consciously as discomfort (edginess) can be a more important factor in disturbing our enjoyment of audio than the consciously obvious noises like surface noise & snap/crackle of vinyl which we seem to be able to "hear through" to the music. Our ears/brains are expert at audio filtering - focussing on a conversation in noisy environment or a baby's cry from a long distance away.
SO your comparison of snap & crackle Vs equivalent obvious noises in digital audio, misses the point.
Aren't they all on the same electrical line? A refrigerator motor can't affect the sound? A computer doesn't put hash into the AC line?
I'm sure it can. And yet the fridge is on, the air conditioner is running, the computer is right here, and the background beneath my music is quiet.
Tim