Direct Sound vs Reflected Light
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 авг 2024
- My daughter Sammy and I discuss the huge difference between the way we see and hear the world around us.
With sound we strive to ignore and eliminate reflections and with light we strive to create and focus on the reflections.
The video discusses the differences between direct sound and reflected light. Sound energy bounces and reflects before reaching us, which makes it difficult for stereo sound systems to reproduce sounds accurately. The video also examines the human sensory experience and suggests that our sensory evolution and development are directly correlated to the sounds we can create. The speakers consider the possibility of extending our sensory experiences through technology and research, and also explore what constitutes hearing, including bone conduction and brain stimulation. The concept of how energy sources and energy reflections play a role in our lives is also discussed.
If you like this and other videos I do, please join this channel to get access to more videos, early access to videos as well as to be able to join my weekly zoom chats:
/ @daverat
Also check out:
www.soundymcsoundface.com
www.ratsoundsales.com/
ratsound.com/daveswordpress/
www.ratsound.com/
www.soundtools.com
00:00 Introduction
01:17 Sound sources are energy sources
02:45 Sound is like a field of sprinklers
04:05 Reflected light info
05:01 Direct sound info
05:35 Direct light info
06:18 Frequency receptors and reflections
07:49 Multiple sources
09:28 Recreate campfire using a flashlight
10:46 Gathering around energy sources
11:59 Sensitivity to freq ranges
15:48 Hearing not with ears
17:34 Outro
The Science/art of music is a constant process. So many variables too. Sometimes a teacher always a student. Great video.
⚡🤙⚡
i think thats why i love music so much. you're never a teacher no matter how good you get. there's always more to learn and more to explore.
Agreed
Thanks. You two are awesome. For me the most beautiful sound/s is the open playa at burning man when all the sounds systems are raging at once. There are no significant early reflections and the ground is soft on the edges because of the dust(gypsum) so the sound is purely the art as you two were talking about. Your ear and body can discern all the different sound systems from far away. It's fascinating. In buildings all the reflections are dealt with or not but on the open playa the sounds radiate and mix purely. The mountains that ring the playa are miles away and sometimes when I'm walking out away from the systems I hear an extremely massive subsonic that appears to come from nowhere. But those mountains are reflecting and sometimes I'm basking in a sub node like a rogue wave. Then suddenly it disappears. Thx for this conversation. I like how you help each other.
🤙👍🤙
Just came back from Portugal listening Fado, unplugged style. Small bars, musicians going through the room, approaching tables surrounding you with their instruments. I was mixing the music in real time by just moving my head. Incredible imersive experience. Everyone at the table thought i was mad though 🤣
⚡🤙⚡
Your discussion on the differences of how our sensory systems pick up different types/mediums/frequencies of energy and how our brains interpret them made me think about how our retinas and brains accentuate the difference in light at the edges of objects, making us better at edge detection (helping us not run into things and hurt ourselves as you mentioned). As y’all are both aware the same principles apply with sound: we’re more sensitive to certain frequencies because of the shape of our ear canals and cochlea. These sensitivities and the ability to discern differences in pitch (for example) are also influenced by the maximum speed at which our neurons can fire, which is approximately 1.4khz. To get around this the neurons in our cochlea have to work together in series to reach the higher frequencies of our hearing. All of this enters a system that in general prioritizes changes in the perceptual environment and selectively ignores sensations as they become more constant. On top of this, we are also selectively more sensitive to the human voice. Obviously all of these factors vary across individuals, depending on a multitude of factors like a person’s anatomy (for example, the shape of a person’s outer ear), their specific neurodiversity, or other variations of ability etc., but the point is that our perception of reality is filtered through a huge number of systems that amplify the significance of certain aspects of our external environment and attenuate the significance of others.
Thanks to both of y’all for being cool and actually bringing these thought provoking discussions to the world (and specifically the pro audio world)!
it's so simple yet brilliant at the same time
,🤙👍🤙
Dave, you get it!!!!! If one eliminates the listening room reflections, then the original reflections of the recording shine through. They are in fact in the recording, but masked by the listening room reflections.
You're extremely spiritual and I love sound recreation with regards to two channel stereo playback. Both topics I'm extremely passionate about.
You've learned the secrets of Tesla.
Super cool and thank you!!!!
Fascinating and charming style. It's cross-discipline thinking and discussion like this that will advance the art. And my sub fully tracked the 'test tones' right at the end!
I guess one scenario in which we DO listen to the reflection rather than the source would be church organs (in europe at least) and choirs. There are some very interesting cathedrals that have been specifically designed and built to play with that concept, one example might be venice where they had multiple choir balconies in order to simulate sound coming from differend directions. and you usually dont listen to direct sound in churches.
Yes, and we listen for the source and the reflections combined, much like aesthetic lighting where the light sources are part of what we see and look at.
Also ambient music for restaurants and background are good examples where the direct sound energy is of less importance than the way the sound energy interacts with the room.
Awesome stuff as usual, thanks Dave & Sammy!
This series with your daughter is AWESOME. I work in professional photography (and wildland fire). Photography and images changed dramatically when we had more products like phones and tablets: things that are 'lighted screens', which is a totally different perception and impression of a singular image, compared to a printed image! Sound, and recording is so similar (it's all waves, man). Your analogy with sprinkler heads is BRILLIANT. Using reverb, proper mics, mic placement, etc all to help gain that sense of SPACE and SOUND. But the speaker is a keyhole you're shoving all that thru. It makes me wonder if speakers like Magnapans or MBL Radialstrahler 101 really are another level of absorbing music, because they "open up" the sound stage of the recording and reproduces it almost reversed of the microphones (placement and absorption of sound to them.). Keep these up< I'm learning and ton from yu both!
Excellent. Yeah, tablets phones and screens also directly supply info like speakers do and don't relay on reflections.
So many wonderful variables!
Thanks to Dave and your daughter, super interesting topics!
👍🤙👍
I love your videos Dave!! You have helped me with my mixing so much. I’m grateful!!! Sammy is so freakin’ cute!!
Thank you and agreed
Awesome. Practical experience is what we need more to be able to learn better. Just looking at theory is an different experience. Thanks for Sharing Dave and your lovely daughter Sammy
Awesome Hennie!
Thanks Dave for the awesome info
👍🤙👍
Best in-joke T-shirt ever: "You can't recreate a field of sprinklers with shower heads."
👍😃👍
Dave, I never thought about it that way. Great info!!! As always. Saludos desde Colombia
Awesome! Columbia!!!
"HUGE DAD POINTS" made me laugh out loud so hard.
Thanks, Dave and Sammy!
Awesome and thank you!!
Hi Dave and Sam, very interesting and stimulating subject. I think that your conclusions, that in seeing we prioritize the reflection and in earing we prioritize the direct source, is exact but stem from the fact that the "informations" we are interested in are different:
when we see we "use" the light as a mean to make what we are interested in visible, therefore the important thing is the reflection; when we ear an instrument for example,
we are interested in the sound itself (we don't use the sound to make something perceivable, in that sense air could be a similar thing to light in the fact that air allow the sound to reach our ears, simpy put in darkness we don't see and in vacuum we don't ear!).
A more exact parallelism would be: if we are interested in what colour a light source is we pay more attention at the source itself, and the reflection (let's say that a red light source bounces off
a blue surface) would be misleading like an excessive reverberation.
Anyway that's my opinion and the important thing is not whether we agree or not but the fact that your videos make us think about these fascinating topic and stimulate further thoughts and ideas!
Thank you very much and keep on rocking. 🤟
Ciao from Italy
very cool. Yeah, with light we are actually mainly interested in the physical world around us, so the information is the shape, placement, color and motion of objects and light reflecting from those objects are how we see them. With sound, we are interested in the location, and nature of the sound itself more than how it reflects from objects.
A video monitor is the opposite, we are interested in the light source itself, same with fireworks, x-mas lights and campfires.
But mainly we live in a world where our primary focuses are seeking reflected light and direct sound
What you have to say resonates with me (pardon the pun). This conversation with your daughter in particular. The ideas here cross the artificial boundaries of science, technology, human perception - psychology and how our brain and body sees and hears. As I understand, without any judgment, there are fundamental differences between the way we see and hear the natural sound and vision sources around us compared to what we experience when this is mediated by any form of technology. For example there is no such thing as zero hertz in nature... you can slow a wave down infinitely but you can never reach zero. Zero is a human construct (not in all cultures) that is a convenient abstraction that is often used in synthesis that marks a limit of the technology. We can measure the colour spectrum as frequencies from infrared to red through the human perceptible frequencies to the faster frequencies of blue into ultraviolet. Magenta doesn't exist in the light spectrum, it is synthesised by the brain when blue and red, from the opposite end of the physical spectrum are seen/combined together. The human perception of the real world out there is physically limited to the RGB senitive cones and rods in our eyes and the stuff flapping around in ours ears that are essentially flesh and bone microphes. Your ideas around the localisation of sound in physical space compared to any multi speaker configuration makes so much sense. Nature and technology are at odds. Speakers and screens are a canvas for human invention in the same realm as words and books. The obsession with getting as close to 'an idea of reality' is a waste of time - hanging onto the good stuff we can give each other in music and stories is the most important stuff we can do with our efforts. Thanks Dave.
Very cool Andrew!
I really enjoy both your perspectives! I've been considering dipole / open baffle designs for small venue PAs. Basically taking hifi and beefing it up a little bit. My reasoning is similar to your illustration of real sound sources radiating in a spherical pattern into the room. These omnidirectional speakers cement the sound into the room and create a more cohesive soundstage. It's still not recreating the actual 'holographic' experience of actual live instruments. But, it does get me a little closer.
Yeah, the challenge is that for live you already have natural sound and reducing reflections off of room surfaces is really important to not sound really reverberant
I was having a discussion with one of my colleagues an ophthalmologist. It is important to realize we see with our brain not our eyes. From the imperfect and limited sensor of the retina the brain creates an experience we describe as vision, From our ears the brain creates an experience we call sound. Just like two speakers in a room we have two microphones which we call our ears.from these two microphones/ears our brain constructs a 3d soundscape in other words we hear with our brain not our ears. Our brain tricks us just like it does with vision, we do not see two separate signals from the eyes like looking at two camera monitors, we experience a 3d movie of the world. Our ears likewise create a 3d soundscape from two inputs. This signal processor "our brain" biases our entire perception of reality. IT creates this reality with a remarkably limited sensor array. When the wires get crossed in the brain a patient they will experience synesthesia. That is when they see something they will hear sound and vis versa. A little off subject but it is fascinating to me that this little blob of tissue weighing 3lbs floating in a bath (CSF) completely encased in darkness never seeing light or directly experiencing sound creates the reality we perceive. This is why your eye doctor still uses that ancient machine to determine what glasses to prescribe you which is basically flipping different lenses in front of your eye and asking which one looks better 1 or 2. I asked my friend why this is still necessary when they have machines that can measure the globe and lens distortions and calculate the perfect glass prescription. They use this machine because as it turns out despite it incredible precise measurements in the physical world it is often is wrong because of the subjectivity of the persons brain in deciding which strength of glasses is correct. So as my friend said "we see and hear with our brains not our eyes and ears" In surgery we can stimulate certain parts of the brain and you will actually hear music or sound no cochlea needed. With your discussion of frequency range we can hear; Beethoven was deaf and like many composers I have met personally can completely hear music clear as day in their head. Which begs the question what frequency range can they access in their heads? Does our brain actually have a limitation?
By that we hear with our brain as well. Except our skin sees uv light and tells us by getting a sunburn and our skin sees infrared by getting warm and our bodies hear sub bass without our ears so it's a big smoosh
Awesome content!!!! And I have watched the 40K video too!!!
👍🤙👍
Super interesting discussion, especially when we compare the differences and similarities of other animals.
Example, different frog species are tuned to respond to their own species frequencies while treating the other with different priority. Also how ants use biochemical stimulation to encode what we would use visual and audio gestures as words and symbols to communicate. To certain ants z-citral and pyrazine is like an "Eat at Joe's" sign. I mean eventually it boils down to language the more we refine it, after all it's said a picture is worth a thousand words.
Regarding the point about how there are differences on how we consume the audio and visual, I feel they must be obverse to each other for some reason, I'm gonna be up all night thinking about that one, LOL. :)
Great video you two!
Thank you!!
You two dance around a topic that you never mention. Resonant frequencies. Where you talk about being able to "experience" things that are outside of what we (as humans) can hear or see, like bone conduction, it becomes a "feel" thing. "Touch". Resonant frequencies are incredibly powerful. They travel through space, through planets, through sun's, and through all of our bodies. With that being said, literally everything in the universe is connected through frequencies. And (to me) why music is so powerful has to do with directly connecting everyone in that space it is being played on a physics level. No one has to think about it. Or agree upon it. It just happens.
Thank you for this video. It is the most eloquent way I have heard anyone describe the things that have been floating around in my brain for many years. I just wanted to add my two cents about resonant frequencies. Again, thank you.
Super cool and everything has a resonance!!!
Hello Dave. I have probably/ arguably the highest resolving system ever made by man. Been working on it for 11 years now. Designed, fabricated, built, treated a purpose based dedicated two channel listening chamber with the sole intent of creating the most unique listening experience.
I hand selected drivers, and had some of them custom/purpose built for me and the application. Fabricated all the enclosures, installed them in their prospective locations by listening tests, and symmetry. Using lasers and careful physical measurements.
Four amplifiers mostly Italian made drive 7 drivers. The crossover types and slopes and frequency are custom selected, the time alignment to the listening position have been tweaked to achieve perfect time and phase.
I've been messing with cables now. Just tried OCC power cable on my NAD pre-amp and found significant output level increases, but haven't even had time to check sound stage characteristics.
I just received OCC speaker cable and I'm going to install it on one driver to see how it affects the overall staging.
I'm even planning to try the purple fuses from Synergistic Research to see what affect those have.
But the room and the speakers have to be designed to work together as one, in order to achieve great sound. None of this can be achieved without the proper use of Dirac Room Correction software to mitigate the affects the room has with regards to boosting/ cancelling and time and phase issues throughout the audible spectrum.
Super interesting!
@@DaveRat In the last handful people I demoed the system four of them left crying. It connected them deeply with the emotion of the singers.
So cool
Love it!
🤙👍🤙
I think the integration of the sound sources with the acoustics, reflections in a room that mixes all and we percieve like a song... the final product that matters, in this sense os similar to our vision, images formed in our brain using a lot of diferent informations
👍🤙👍
Theaters were primarily most concerned with reflections and that they are constructive. Most issues are from destructive reflections, hence diffusers. Immersive Audio seems to be the big subject these days at places like namm. It's interesting but needs much more prep and investment in installation i think to be feasible. Great subject as usual.
🤙👍🤙
Proprioception is the sense we have in our bones, joints and muscles to feel position and movement. Sound energy can stimulate them and we can feel it and have a notion of it in our minds.
Even deaf people can feel the music somehow. If they are born deaf they may not perceive it as sound, because is a learned experience.
Also as we walk through life, light REFLECTING off of physical objects holds much importance to our survival.
And comprehending the DIRECT sound of voices and things around us is important for our survival.
That difference in of direct sound vs reflected light as primary portance is why we hear differently than we look
@@DaveRat There is a video of a room painted with Vantablack (the blackest black) and you see how unnatural is without ambient reflections. Also there is one of an anechoic chamber, and also is very unnatural sound without ambient reflections.
Yes true and that is exactly why stereo never sounds real.
Reproducing sound without reflections is unnatural like you point out.
Now paint a cathedral on the walls of your living room, and the fake room in a room is equally unnatural, that is what stereo and surround do.
This just drops a musician into your living room and you hear the natural reflections of your listening room as if the musician is there with you.
So the whole idea of stereo was never about the source but rather the receptors (our ears). So to turn this whole thing around, it would seem to me that if you could record exactly as our ears and probably whole body perceive sound and accurately reproduced it in headphones or something more, would the visual or actual placement matter?
Always love your videos Dave! Always give my brain a good workout.
Interesting... !
😃👍😃
It is in both sound and light realm the same, we can focus on the position of the source of energy, or on the reflections which tell us in what kind of environment and what position in it we are. For instance if we are in a small room or a church, and we can hear when we are closer to a wall.
Speakers can never have natural hearing experience because they have crosstalk and are located in an accoustic environment that interacts.
Like with stereoscopic viewing with goggles, you need clean separation between left and right and for really natural experience no room that is interacting with the medium like in VR goggles, so only on headphones.
Yes, they are similar in they are both radiated energies that we percieve both direct and reflected versions of.
That said, when communicating with somebody you are looking at the way light reflects off of them and listening to the direct sound of their voice.
When watching a band you are looking at the way light reflects off of the band so you can see them as a primary information source and the lights flashing above is a secondary highlight.
But when listening to a band the direct signal is the primary informational source and the reflections of the room and environment are a secondary highlight.
This differential in our focal point is not absolute.
If you go out looking at Christmas lights you are looking directly at the energy sources, same with watching a campfire or a computer monitor. But while walking driving and navigating life, our primary focus is on the way light reflects off of physical objects.
Same with sound in reverse. Well navigating life we are focused on where the direct sound is radiating from where is somebody where is that noise coming from what are they saying? And also we enjoy and bask in things like ambient rooms and other situations where reflected sound may be the dominant focus.
The differential between how humans focus on light versus sound is important to consider when deploying audio or visual equipment
sound is magic
🤙👍🤙
Roy Allison's speakers emphasize reflections. DBX Soundfield speakers even more.
Very cool. The issue is that if there is a single signal that is being reproduced all of the reflections are from the same signal as the direct signal. That scenario maximizes comb filtering and phase issues
This design has a different sound in every direction so the reflections are a different sound than the direct signals minimizing comb filtering and phase issues
What's up Dave! Coming back to this series after reading about the holoplot tech in the vegas sphere, made me revisit the idea of being able to control the sound alongside the sound source. I'm sure youre already thinking about the possibilities. Would love to hear your perspective on the tech in general. Thanks!
I did a video on the member side of my channel on holoplot. MSG did not want me recording the demo so I can't really make it public but I show the tech and you can hear what it does
@@DaveRat good to hear! I wasn't aware you'd covered that. I'll have to check that out next, thanks!
I thought you might talk about how our minds are constantly adjusting and compensating for changes in sensory information. For example, color temperature is a big issue for cameras, but our minds adjust to automatically, allowing us to recognize colors independent of the color temp of the light an object is illuminated by. And in the same way our minds are able to recognize how sound behaves in a particular space, which lets us separate the sound of the source from the sound of the room. (And most people aren't consciously aware of the sound of the room, the way most people are not aware of color temperature.)
Interesting, yeah, I was sticking with the more simple. Campfires, fireworks and computer screens are ways we see and look directly at the information much the way we hear and focus on the information.
I believe visual and auditory experiences differ in a major way, and are not really analogous. We see only what is in front of us and off to the sides to varying degrees, depending on the width our peripheral vision. But we hear in 360 degrees. Although our hearing is less acute to sounds behind us, due to the shape of our ears, we do hear those sounds fairly well.
This is one of the reasons that music played back through a 2-channel system, even in a live room, sounds canned. We are not receiving enough information from other directions to recreate a believable acoustic space in our minds. However, even upmixed stereo content can be quite convincing when properly upmixed and played back through a multi-channel system.
What you are saying is exactly related to what I describe in the video.
We listen to sound as direct energy to grasp the info. Just like how light energy illuminates the entire room and you know a light is in or the sun is out even if you don't look at the light or sun directly, we know and perceive sound is being radiated regardless of whether we are facing the sound source.
But with light we are typically way more interested in the refections of light off of physical objects rather than the direct energy itself. The fact that a fluorescent is flashing at 60hz vs an incandescent that is a steady non flashing light is of minor relevance compared to the importance of whether what ever light is used is actually illuminating the road, book or meal.
So, in life, we tend to focus on sound as a direct energy source to understand what is said or hear where something is located and which way it moves.
With light our focus tends to be on the reflection of light off of a car headed towards us, or the light reflecting off of pages of a book allowing us to read
And other than fireworks shows, TVs, campfires and cell phone displays, where we are looking directly at the energy source, we spend our lives more focused on light reflections.
We intentionally diffuse light sources and strive to avoid diffusion of desirable sound sources.
Bright lights in our eyes are avoided yet sound focused at our ears is sought after.
@@DaveRat Exactly. Well said, Dave.
👍🤙👍
It would be fun to take a multitrack and play all the individual tracks through their own speakers laid out like the band on a stage. I've often thought that trying to cram all that sound through a pair of speakers in stereo rig is a challenging thing to do.
On the other hand, isn't a recording made with a binaural mic supposed to capture what we hear at our heads? But won't that only work if you listen with headphones.
I commented before about how I believe we 'perceive' sounds outside the 20-20K range.
Aguante Sammy!
🤙🤙🤙
In my room, I swear I listen to mostly reflected sound. There's a 20 foot cinder block wall on one side, and yet the room's too narrow to play squash off the wall! I think it, and the exposed roof, and thinly padded concrete floor, give quite a "room vibe" to my speakers' output, or to anything else. I DO have an old condenser mic that doesn't pick up much of the room, but you got to close mic whatever it is. And using big speakers here... eh. There are some big absorbers opposite the cinder block wall, and the wood and beam ceiling's angled... could be worse
👍🤙👍
When I think back to the beginning of stereo it was always known it could only reproduce for one listener in the perfect spot
And the time to move on from the steam engine has passed as well
My preference is bi polar electrostatics . They act as line sources with little side radiation and do have a comb filtering effect . For frequency look less than level flat however our hearing act like a comb filter. It we view 2 channel as entertainment system rather than expect it to present a live event. but rather a fine imitation of a historical event . The Russian tested to 400khz with the bone vibration experiment.
And if you listened like you spend most of your time seeing. You would point it at the wall and or the table or food and listen to how the sound reflects off of your syrroundings
@@DaveRat Valid analogy.
🤙👍🤙
In my FOH experience if you're NOT looking at the musicians while you're pushing faders your just a mechanic. 😎
Agreed
I noticed myself guilty of this a couple of times
Engineer..
Pooch mentions that he's a head-down type of mixer and rarely watches the band. His mixes are incredible!
He is good engineer and like everything with sound. There are no rigid rules. That said, with a band that does a lot of improvising, and strays from the setlist, and breaks things, the head down approach can work against you.
Seeing a snare change to a snare that is brighter and not as loud as the primary snare can be seen and accounted for before everyone hears it rather than hearing an issue and chasing down the cause.
Seeing the guitar player switch guitars, or that the drummer and bass player decided to switch positions, or they add vocals where there normally are not, spontaneous, lends itself to paying attention to what the artists are doing to not be caught out.
Also watching audience reactions can help guide the mix in an interactive way that can increase the impact of the show.
I have always worked with bands that are fairly unpredictable and spontaneous.
Before the days of artificial amplification, rooms like churches and concert halls were designed to enhance the reflections to distribute the sound. Electronic music has corrupted our expectations. The good news is the the best sound processor is the brain.
But, at this time, it’s fair to say that we think of music as an artefact that exists in a stereo mix. It is how we experience music almost exclusively and therefore it is natural.
So, as a live sound mixer are you attempting to recreate the effect of a band out of a stereo mix or of a third thing?
Provokes a lot of thoughts. I presume that people without sight have already prioritized reflections over the source, because it's a way to see with sound. I also had the thought, which I've thought about before, that a stereo mix with excellent binaural production is more convincing than the same recording played on speakers heard in a room where all the production efforts are re-reflected into new real reflections. When I listen to you both talk about this subject in my ear buds, the room sounds very realistic and immersive. If I listen to the same thing on my studio monitors, it will come from a direction in front of me and no longer sound as immersive, because my brain detects it's coming from a particular part in the room, even though the original room reverb is extremely convincing on its own. Really curious about the way in which we are perceiving 40k, which is amazing. BTW, my ear buds rock; I didn't even have my subpac active, and I heard all the low frequencies at the end of the video. Love these things!
Awesome and Sammy and I did a vid on 40k, ruclips.net/video/XczxK3vXFTk/видео.html
@@DaveRat, I remember and loved it and was amazed. I'm really surprised we can sense those frequencies and wonder how the brain receives them.
🤙👍🤙 awesome!
Unseen worlds. Things we can't see, like light, sound and other vibrations are real, but unseen. Makes you wonder what else is out there.
Well there's things we can't see that we can easily measure and create and replicate which we know are out there and then there's things that we can't see and we can't measure and we can't replicate to have a high probability of not being out there and they're probably just figments of our imagination until we can see measure and replicate them
@@DaveRat True. But, just because we can't measure it now doesn't mean we won't be able to later., 😁 I dunno. Just going a little deep there. I'm really interested in the unseen. Thanks for the reply!
You don't need to be able to measure it and some things haven't been figured out yet but if it's not predictable or repeatable and audible then it falls into the realm of mystical.
There is astronomy and there's astrology and somehow the audio world has embraced a version of both of those where part of the audio world is scientific predictable repeatable measurable and the other part of the audio world is mystical magical and extremely expensive
Flat screen tvs have their speakers facing backwards. It sounds weird off a cinder block wall... the stereo field is weird.
Agreed. We like direct sound and reflected light for most of our interactions
We have Dave Socrates now
👍🤙👍
Hearing is binaural and Seeing is stereoscopic. Kind of crazy when you think about it.
🤙👍🤙
What you mention about refections and direct sources of radiation is remediated by a dipole bass system and a multicellular horn.
Is it? Does making sound more directional eliminate reflections or just concentrate them in different directions?
@@DaveRat A multicell has a wide radation patern thus less directional than a standard hi fi loudspeaker a dipole bass system is not directional.
When comparing the way we see where our primary focus is on reflected light from physical objects to the way we listen where we use various methods like directional horns, line arrays and cardioid subs to minimize reflections so the listener hears more direct energy, shows the there is a vast difference.
Multicell horns were quite popular before more advanced technology allowed us to gain more control and fidelity in the coverage regions. But they do have a fun nostalgic sound to them with enough EQ
@@DaveRat There are more advanced multicell designs you may not be aware of that for home use do not require EQ and are far from dated sounding. A multicell loads the room in more natural way over other types. Multicells are diffuse they are not direct.
Interesting, why would a horn or multicell horn (2 or more horns connected together driven off of the same or different driver typically arranged to minimize overlap between the horn cells in the coverage area) be more diffuse than one or more horns not mounted in the same housing?
Sammy.. What school are you attending??
nice, thank you...
i've read someplace that our bains prefer to tune out reflected sound (although we can still recognize the "reflections of a bathroom") because vision offers greater resolution with less processing power needed to analyze the data.
but there are ppl who succeeded to unlearn this automated skill and are able to use echolocation w/ supersizing accuracy (very useful for blind people).
this video talks briefly about the subject: ruclips.net/video/lHkbQyywFRY/видео.html
edit: there's a video from Be Smart "How Blind People See With Sound", there's a guy riding a bike using active echolocation, it's insanely cool: (ruclips.net/video/08smCjKWNL0/видео.html)
Love the echolocation and have seen some awesome vids and interviews
For a sec when I saw the title I thought this video was gonna be about: Mix with your ears not your eyes. Because of now technologies RTA screens….😅
👍🤙👍
Great work ✌🏽
Thank you Leo!
Is this not the reason for the wall of sound Concept
there are assets to various setups. For me the point of the video is that when you look around you, you are looking at objects and humans and what you see is not the object or humans but rather, you see the light reflecting from objects and humans. Turn off all light and you no longer see anything. Vision is about mainly reflected light energy. Look at a light bulb or the sun and you see direct light energy. Conversely, when we listen, we are seeking the direct sound energy and the reflected sound energy tends to make things harder to understand, echo, reverberation and such cause issues. So for vision, we tend to seek out light reflection and for sound we tend to try an avoid sound reflections. This is a fundamental difference that should be considered when optimizing illumination versus sonic coverage and why venues designed for visual aspects tend to be non optimum for audio aspects as both light and sound energy tend to reflect from surfaces that benefit light and detriment sound.
When we hear something we automatically make a visual perception of what it is and where it is
The visuals are better on the radio
Visual perception dominates audio perception
Interesting, for me it's the opposite, I see things and get feel for what it would sound like. I vlcan floredict the resonance or tone of knocking on an object by looking. Similar to knowing whether something will be warm oflr cold to touch before touching. I am not so much a naturally visual person
Yeah much the same
What I learnt from you was why I was always happy with not having the same types of speaker in the system!
Right! Auditory diversity
A few shrooms might help expand this topic even further.
A few shrooms expands all topics. And also if we observe light like we hear sound we would spend more time staring at light bulbs and less time focused on all the physical objects that light illuminates
Dave> You are beginning to sound like DR Bose.....
Brilliant human! Ahead of his time in so many ways.
Human ears are not just on the side of your head your face and eyes are part of the ear horn like an owl. Hearing is not just about the ears.
Well, hearing may be just about ears by definition but perception of audio freqs can be a full body experience
@@DaveRat As a life form you must sense danger and infrasonics usually tell you that something bads happening earthquakes stampedes floods etc.
👍👍👍