LarryC Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 ---------------- On 3/4/2005 12:01:27 PM minn_male42 wrote: you can actually develop a sense of perfect pitch... there is even a course you can buy that will develop your perfect pitch skills.... it includes books and CD's..... i actually purchased this course back when it was only available on cassettes... surprisingly - it does work if you put in the time and effort.. a side benefit is that your relative pitch skills are also enhanced.... http://www.perfectpitch.com/ ---------------- Well, that goes counter to what I've heard for many years, including from my music teacher, a successful composer, who tried long and hard to train himself into having perfect pitch without success. While that website has a few exceptionally enthusiastic testimonials, I'd have to fork over $169 to find out if it actually works. An apparently well-known neruoscience hearing researcher (Dr. Robert Zatorre at Montreal) apparently said as much, according to a 2003 New York Times article -- that after about 9 to 12 years of age, absolute pitch apparently cannot be acquired and no amount of training will bring it about. Another researcher was quoted as saying it's a mystery why absolute pitch is such a rare phenomenon. Geez, I'm sorry I missed the 9-12 years old window! Larry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 ---------------- On 3/4/2005 1:03:38 PM LarryC wrote: ---------------- On 3/4/2005 12:01:27 PM minn_male42 wrote: you can actually develop a sense of perfect pitch... there is even a course you can buy that will develop your perfect pitch skills.... it includes books and CD's..... i actually purchased this course back when it was only available on cassettes... surprisingly - it does work if you put in the time and effort.. a side benefit is that your relative pitch skills are also enhanced.... http://www.perfectpitch.com/ ---------------- Well, that goes counter to what I've heard for many years, including from my music teacher, a successful composer, who tried long and hard to train himself into having perfect pitch without success. While that website has a few exceptionally enthusiastic testimonials, I'd have to fork over $169 to find out if it actually works. An apparently well-known neruoscience hearing researcher (Dr. Robert Zatorre at Montreal) apparently said as much, according to a 2003 New York Times article -- that after about 9 to 12 years of age, absolute pitch apparently cannot be acquired and no amount of training will bring it about. Another researcher was quoted as saying it's a mystery why absolute pitch is such a rare phenomenon. Geez, I'm sorry I missed the 9-12 years old window! Larry ---------------- at the time i tried this course(many years ago)...it was $99... and i was a music teacher myself for 16 years as well as very active as a performer.... and it does work... i even worked with some of my students on it and once you understand the principle, it is not that difficult to do... Dr. Robert Zatorre must have missed this course in his research!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryC Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 Possibly.... Here's the text of the New York Times Article: Perfect Pitch: A Gift of Note For Just a Few By NICHOLAS WADE (NYT) 452 words Published: September 16, 2003 One of the most puzzling aspects of the brain's faculty for music is perfect or absolute pitch, the ability to identify a note without any reference point. Only a few musicians have the skill. Most rely on relative pitch. Ordinary listeners can identify six to eight categories of pitch within an octave, but people with absolute pitch can assign notes to much finer subdivisions, approaching 70 or more, Dr. Robert J. Zatorre of the Montreal Neurological Institute wrote in a recent issue of Nature Neuroscience. The mysterious ability can be helped with training but is so easily learned, by those so gifted, that just the exposure to notes and their names is sometimes enough. After a young age, about 9 to 12, however, absolute pitch apparently cannot be acquired, and no amount of training will bring it about. Two aspects point to a genetic component, Dr. Zatorre said. One is the 8 to 15 percent chance that if one sibling has absolute pitch, the other will have it too. Another is that Asians have a much greater incidence of absolute pitch than other ethnic groups. That includes Asians who are culturally distinct and who speak tonal languages like Chinese and nontonal languages like Korean and Japanese. Absolute pitch is also more common among Asian-Americans, who often speak only English. The brain's auditory cortex is arranged in maps of neurons that respond to a particular frequency, with high-frequency neurons at one end and low-frequency at the other. 'It should be relatively trivial to read out the absolute pitch of a stimulus,' Josh McDermott of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology said. Assessing relative pitch involves comparison and a complicated neural computation. 'So it's a mystery why absolute pitch is such a rare phenomenon.' One possible explanation, he said, is that everyone is born with absolute pitch, but most people lose it in favor of relative pitch. Dr. Zatorre also sees absolute pitch as a possible slight derangement of normal brain processes, rather than an enhanced natural ability. In some forms of autism, he said, people see trees and not the forest. Possibly, absolute pitch is a mild form of the same disorder in the auditory domain. Some musicians with absolute pitch find it hard to transpose melodies, he said, and they cannot shut off their absolute pitch even when they would like to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 Dodger, "For bthe Average person, the accepted norm is still 3 db." That is somewhat the accepted norm that a person will perceive the difference AS being a difference in volume on their own without knowing it in the first place. But like I've said human hearing can perceive differences in levels down to about 1/3 of a dB if it is a wide range change. Just most listeners won't identify it as a level difference but they can perceive it. Their are MANY papers published in the Audio Engineering Society (AES) about this and related psychoacoustics. There have been double blind ABX tests of the exact same piece of hardware compared against itself but dropped down in SPL slightly. Of course the listeners weren't told this was the case. In ABX tests the listeners were able to identify X (that is the control) the proper number of times to say they passed the test. In asking for their subjective opinions of the two the listeners will go on about the increased clairty, imaging, soundstaging and so of one compared to the other. And they are really perceiving a real difference since they could pick out X. What they weren't expecting is that the hardware was exactly the same in both cases... just the volume was changed slightly. Audio dealers (and manufacturers) have known this for years. Set the level of the system you want to sell slightly higher then what it is compared against and you are likely to sell the louder system. Look at all those tube 'buffer' systems that were so popular a few years ago. They all had a slight amount of gain, absolutely on purpose so that when compared against a straight wire they played slightly louder. Not suprising then that many thought they improved the sound. Level matched things might well be different.... That is also why if a person is comparing two components and doesn't level match the two to 1/10 dB (below the known level of perception) they don't know if the difference they are hearing is due to an inate quality difference in the hardware or simply from a level difference. With the level differences reversed their preference may reverse too. Try it yourself. The ABX program I linked to earlier allows you to run a true double blind listening test on *yourself* that eliminates the placebo possibility. Rip your favority song (or section.. I find a looping section is easier) to your computer. Then use a digital editing program to drop the level 1/2dB or so on one of them. Then load both files into the ABX program and run some tests trying to identify X. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 larry... not to drag this thread too far off-topic... here are some more resources that offer differing opinions on perfect pitch and whether or not it can be a learned response http://www.aruffo.com/eartraining/ http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/health/edell/020805_he_perfect_pitch.html and the following site has links to four separate research studies that suggest that perfect pitched can be a learned ability.... http://www.brenthugh.com/eartest/absolute-pitch.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 For those musically trained or trained in the fine art of audio listening, a difference of 1/4 db can be perceived. To me I have nothing to prove in disagreeing. Nor did I give an absolute. I have my physics degree also - professional student for a while. But PERSONALLY and I mean only me stating this, there are more absolutes than we even speak of. I attempt to keep the discussion / replies to what the average person sees. Pardon me Shawn, this is an area where if I have to include every frickin piece of study, I'll leave it to the engineers and to those who wish to sell something. The other night the post on laminate - Bram is buying wood (no offense Dr, Who) laminate. This has been building, we have 5 pages on ac power cords, then this thread went to perfect pitch - i was born with that. Friends have tried to put it down by playing a note, tuned wind chimes, and I have been 100 % succeswsful. I THOUGHT that this forum is to answer questions in a way all can understand. Some times if you do that it now seems like you have to revisit each topic because there are the posts that pick the minute and leavce out the meat. If all it comes to is searching for every possibility and noting it, that is impossible. Plus I have too many other needed places to put my money than a fast computer. So anyone, please post over anything I've said, including the fact that a Google search will note that 1 db can be detected. Perhaps a bushman never being out of the forest can hear 1 1/10th db difference. but I'll end with: Shawn will it affect the sound the average person living in an urban environment, subjected to all noise pollution and extremes hears. As I note the 1 db difference search, there are no difference between what I wrote and what you said. If the answer is yes (hearing aids and protectors excluded) Then you the man. And as Erik notes spelling in another thread, dodger - no caps, I was just waiting and dreading this, because it is tiring and trying. I do not post evert known positive, but if people wish that I do then my response: dodger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 "Pardon me Shawn, this is an area where if I have to include every frickin piece of study, I'll leave it to the engineers and to those who wish to sell something." You were the one who posted info on 'Google' searches, the scientific method. OSHA and other material supporting the numbers you gave. I simply referenced the AES articles to show I'm not pulling 1/3dB out of thin air. The documentation is there for those that want to read it. It isn't new either, I've seen articles going back at least 20 years with this number in it. And I've posted how people can do scientifically valid tests in their own homes if they are interested in that. I'll bet a huge percentage of this forum would pass comparing 3dB differences in levels. So would most everyone else that doesn't have hearing loss. Ditto 2dB. 1dB is still pretty easy (I've passed tests 25 of 25) and it gets progressively harder from there. All it takes is a single person here passing that test below 1dB to demonstrate that the '1dB is the limit of perception' is wrong. "Perhaps a bushman never being out of the forest can hear 1 1/10th db difference." Entirely possible. The old knowledge in this area was said to be about 1dB as reposted gazillions of places on the web and by many here. Scientific testing has shown human hearing can be more sensitive then that. The current 'best' is about 1/3dB. As soon as someone can repeatidly pass tests below that level it is the new 'best.' Like you said there are no absolutes. That is the whole point of research... you learn new things and the old 'rules' change. To ignore the fact that these sorts of things changes as more is learned is like saying man hasn't gone faster then the speed of sound. 75 years ago that was true, it no longer is today. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 I thought I heard "tics" in B9, at frist I thought it was my PC, minor, but still there, let's see, how did I do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 went back and reread post, did not hear change in level so much as change in what? pitch, but B changes, on my little HK PC speakers. whew! glad i picked the right one - it is almost as if the echo changes more than a big decrease or increase in volume... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 Shawn: If you read all of what I said, you would see that I write for the common person. Ijn the google search - I did note that the 1 db standards would show, that is not ignoring. Dr. who has a good idea, I posted what would allow for a published paper without attack. I did not ome out and say this is flawed, must be changed. I left room in my post for a number of other more extensive research, that is precisely why I do not quote out of my textbooks. I leave it for further study if wanted. The layman accepted norm and in the industry is "about 3 db." Not an absolute statement, nor did I disagree and take apart your post. Nor did I state that what I am writing is the last word. I have a friend that is currently working on HDTV screens to eliminate darening effect. He earned a triple Doctoratae. I would assist him. He would explain and answer questions in a manner that I and a high school Student could understand - but we knew there was more - we could research beyond and go into all nuances. However i use English in a manner to be understood. If you felt that I was attacking you, state it. If I left room for those to search further on Google, That is why I did not note the exact studies on pages 2 and 3 of the results received in response to what I found in text, but what I found along with whatever more. I am repeating this as I have done many times in the past. I know that I am being redundant. But I personally feel in addressing me, now picking my response apart, is not what I have done except for flames when I first came on. I've tried to be civil, respectful of differences and realizing that there is more than what is posted. If you fell that in the post made by me 2 posts ago was an attack, I apologize. I did one night question why when asked a simple question it gets so technical, I also posted Shawn, I have respect for you, followed up by 2 PMs and Emails. Lastly, on a number of Newbie posts, the knowledge the expertise may or may not be there, but the question finally received an answer. This is what is now making the board open for spammers, and no fun for people like me. As I stated to another, I will provide some of those only in a PM, but I will not make a statement like that with no back up.. Note how many do not bother to post anymore. Now with my hiatus of the time I wish to take along with Stomach Surgery. dodger is on hiatus. For those that know my exact use of English - Goodbye, Win dodger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 This is not to flame anyone, but most early (and even late) reference material always used the 1db value for what "most" folks discern as a change. Can many discern a smaller amount of change? Sure. But I thought the original use of the decibel measurement was that 1db value. Marvel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 Humans can hear a sound pressure as small as 5000/1,000,000ths change from atmospheric pressure according to F. Alton Everest. A decibel is 10 Bels (from Alexander Graham Bell). A lot of decibels is known as HellzBels. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverSport Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 ...but that's AC/DC... Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted March 4, 2005 Author Share Posted March 4, 2005 ---------------- On 3/4/2005 4:36:34 PM dodger wrote: If you feel that in the post made by me 2 posts ago was an attack, I apologize. I did one night question why when asked a simple question it gets so technical, I also posted Shawn, I have respect for you, followed up by 2 PMs and Emails. ---------------- Hey Dodger, you never come across as attacking...ever, lol. However (and I say this nicely), you always come across as striving to arrive at some common ground, or a mutual compromise of ideas (almost like you strive to avoid any differences from happening). If there's one thing I've learned about the audio industry, then it's that for every "fact," there's a million people claiming the exact opposite. I feel the main reason for this is that the only people doing research on the relative topics are companies who have a profit to make...there is no school in america that provides an education in audio (there are technical schools, but they're more about teaching the skill of mixing, not the concepts in the background). Btw, if I'm wrong and there is a curriculum, then someone please let me know and I will transfer schools immediately. Anyways, I don't think there is a need to arrive at a mutually accepted number for the threshold of human hearing (especially considering that it will be different for everyone). If we were to arrive at a number, then it would be the lowest change ever recorded...i wonder if i can hear a .1dB change I think it's worth mentioning that the best learning happens when there is a difference of opinions (i think this hobby would be boring otherwise). I would propose never refrain from becoming too technical because if someone new to the hobby doesn't understand, then he can know what there is to learn and he can always ask questions (there's no shortage of people on the forum willing to explain crap) I also wanted to comment on the perfect pitch discussion as well, but first off want to point out that I have no problem with it being discussed here (i know some ppl get possesive about threads...that's not the case here). Anyways, I just wanted to point out that having perfect pitch doesn't necesarily make you better at detecting changes in SPL. Pitch and SPL are two different things and the ability to entirely distinguish between the two is yet another skill to be learned. But in thinking about it, our playback systems always have some form of distortion and that change in 1dB is going to slightly shift those distortion patterns...i suppose it could be argued that a perfect pitch person would be able to detect the change, but i doubt it sometimes i wish i could connect my brain to another person's ears and hear exactly what they're hearing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 dodger, "If you fell that in the post made by me 2 posts ago was an attack, I apologize. I did one night question why when asked a simple question it gets so technical, I also posted Shawn, I have respect for you, followed up by 2 PMs and Emails." As I told you in those PMs and emails... no I don't think you are attacking me. Do you feel I'm attacking you? I thought we were having a discussion about audio. From your post it appears you feel it was more then that, if I've misread that I'm sorry. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 " If we were to arrive at a number, then it would be the lowest change ever recorded...i wonder if i can hear a .1dB change" Try it. Use mono pink noise (best chance of sucess) and drop one recording 1/10 db and use the PCABX program to test yourself. Based on past experience I'd say it is unlikely that you could pass the test but I wouldn't say it is impossible. If you could do this repeatedly the ABX protocol would have to get rewritten.... one of the requirements is matching to 1/10 of a dB because it is felt that is below the known audibility point. " I think it's worth mentioning that the best learning happens when there is a difference of opinions (i think this hobby would be boring otherwise). I would propose never refrain from becoming too technical because if someone new to the hobby doesn't understand, then he can know what there is to learn and he can always ask questions (there's no shortage of people on the forum willing to explain crap) " Very well said! To answer dodgers earlier question... that is why I tend to make somewhat technical posts. To show how I came to my opinion/conclusion so someone else can get a better feel for why I'm saying what I do. If they understand that they can make a more educated decision of if they agree with it or not. If they disagree and tell me why then perhaps we could all see something from a new angle or learn something new. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleve Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 It's 500 B9 - I could hear a very slight drop and then a rise, and I verified it with my sound level meter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 ---------------- On 3/4/2005 8:02:58 PM sfogg wrote: dodger, "If you fell that in the post made by me 2 posts ago was an attack, I apologize. I did one night question why when asked a simple question it gets so technical, I also posted Shawn, I have respect for you, followed up by 2 PMs and Emails." As I told you in those PMs and emails... no I don't think you are attacking me. Do you feel I'm attacking you? I thought we were having a discussion about audio. From your post it appears you feel it was more then that, if I've misread that I'm sorry. Shawn ---------------- To answer your question about attacking me Yes - I feel as others I do that the technical areas have those that truly enjoy pushing their point of view, or when a post is made by Newbies asking a question they get a college discussion over their heads There is a better than you attitude. No discussions. I have taken questions with 50 + views, no replies, answer it, then the dogs are out. Some people take great delight at trying to prove someone wrong. We were not having a discussion. Shawn, please re-read the posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 The Eastman School of Music had a 1 year course in Audio, Recording, Theory and actual taping a quartet, The Philharmanic, and most instrument Recoeding. This is a technical Section. You've changed from when you started, but others do their best to prove others wrong. That does NOT include Dean, Bob Crites, Mark Deneen. Mark has told me that you have to develop a thick skin, and that many will be the gunslingers. I totally agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 "To answer your question about attacking me Yes - I feel as others I do that the technical areas have those that truly enjoy pushing their point of view" " or when a post is made by Newbies asking a question they get a college discussion over their heads" And you see that as an attack? This post is in the technical questions thread... so a technical answer is wrong and perceived as an attack? So everything has to be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator? How is anyone supposed to learn anything then? I already posted why I tend to give technical answers, if you don't like that then don't read my posts. On any forum ask a question and you will almost always get more then one answer. For the person asking the question to truly make an informed decision they need to know the reasons behind peoples answers. Only then can they make up their own mind without blinding following the 'popular choice.' If a person doesn't understand something in a post I make they are free to ask questions and I'll try to better explain it for them. To say nothing of the fact that this thread didn't start with a question by a newbie. It was a post by a veteran member of the board posting a listening test to obviously begin a discussion on it. "Shawn, please re-read the posts." I have, have you? "I have taken questions with 50 + views, no replies, answer it, then the dogs are out. Some people take great delight at trying to prove someone wrong." And what exactly does this have to do with this thread or with me? If you re-read the posts in this thread you might note I posted the 1/3dB spl level before you mentioned anything about perceivable SPL level. If anyone was 'trying to prove someone wrong' it would be your later post about 1dB. But I didn't take it as an attack. Nor did I take your comments about the 'decline of the forum' as a veiled insult blaming it on me. Nor did I react to your random thoughts about other threads(laminate?... AC cords?)... which I had nothing to do with. If you have issues with others in others threads that is your and their problem, not mine. "We were not having a discussion." Then I simply don't know what you consider a discussion. "Mark has told me that you have to develop a thick skin" Mark is correct. A person on an online forum also needs to not jump to conclusions about the meaning 'behind' a post. Read what is written, don't try to read between the lines and potentially seriously misinterpret, and then over-react, to what a person actually posts. And if you did misinterpret my posts as an attack I'm sorry about that. They weren't meant that way. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.