Hi Dave,
The paper Blauert cites is by Gardener, M.B (1969) ... this one:
http://asadl.org/jasa/resource/1/jasman/v45/i1/p47_s1?isAuthorized=no
(I dont have access to it right now)
The abstract says the experiment included the use of both loudspeakers and
voices. Blauert's wording suggests he
I used whispers in a sound installations quite often . We had several PA
speakers hidden around the trees and amongst other things whispers were on
the soundscape (in the darkness) . I dont really recall any proximity
illusions being created but I had the whispers at the volume that was not a
lot
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] the power of doppler shift illusion
Hi Dave,
The paper Blauert cites is by Gardener, M.B (1969) ... this one:
http://asadl.org/jasa/resource/1/jasman/v45/i1/p47_s1?isAuthorized=no
(I dont have access to it right now)
The abstract says
Augustine Leudar wrote:
...
The sounds and settings have to
be convincing enough, believable enough, for cognitive effects to work -
then you can get away with all sorts of acoustic inaccuracies - thats why I
think so many sound installations in galleries leave me cold - you can see
all the
Another point that is interesting, in considering the cognitive dimension
of spatial perception, is that some processes involve the identification of
a sounding object, and some do not.
The recognition of an over-simplified mono reverb algorithm, as an Icon
of the sound of a large space, requires
Semiotic frameworks such as that of Charles Peirce indicate that
references
(or signs) work in different ways. For example, mono reverb acts as an
icon (that is, it is similar to) the experience of large spaces.
Whereas
the recording of hair clippers acts as an index of close
Hi,
I don't have Blauert handy unfortunately, so perhaps someone could
enlighten me about how the study mentioned was conducted - real
whisperers or recordings? It pretty well has to be recordings -
because otherwise a whisper at 9 metres would pretty well be inaudible
(that being the whole
this is not meant to refute all the comments on the over-rated
importance of doppler cues in distance estimation, but: never
under-estimate the suggestive power of faked doppler shift cues.
this humble bear of very little brain once had the exceptional honor to
prepare john chowning's turenas
Jorn,
it turned out that this monster of a piece is unkillable, no matter what we
tried. so this evil little bear of little brain but inexhaustible
mischievousness folded it down to mono, out of pure spite. the sound was
still all over the place. chowning 10, bear 0.
and here's to fake
On 26/02/2013, at 9:01 AM, etienne deleflie wrote:
Jorn,
it turned out that this monster of a piece is unkillable, no matter what we
tried. so this evil little bear of little brain but inexhaustible
mischievousness folded it down to mono, out of pure spite. the sound was
still all over
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf
Of etienne deleflie [edelef...@gmail.com]
Sent: 25 February 2013 22:01
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] the power of doppler shift illusion
Jorn,
it turned out
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On
Behalf Of etienne deleflie [edelef...@gmail.com]
Sent: 25 February 2013 22:01
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] the power of doppler shift illusion
Jorn,
it turned out
Semiotic frameworks such as that of Charles Peirce indicate that
references
(or signs) work in different ways. For example, mono reverb acts as an
icon (that is, it is similar to) the experience of large spaces. Whereas
the recording of hair clippers acts as an index of close proximity
13 matches
Mail list logo
