I would like to make the comment that is this part of the discussion we are
well in to the psychoacoustic domain.
There are not many, possibly only a very few models of loudspeakers that
produces a sound pressure that even have a faint likeness to
The electric input signal for example a square
I am not clear just what the issue is here. C and A are defined by the
distance between them; A is not a sharp C. All the notes are equally
special, there is nothing otherwise special about middle C, and it is
in any case only approximately in the middle for the modern concert
piano. For most
On 26/04/2013 02:33, Robert Greene wrote:
..
No relatively simple physical process produces exactly a correct answer
over a small interval and then suddenly does not over a large interval.
What is a relatively simple physical process in this context?
Optical focus? Tuning of multiple
/listinfo/sursoundhttps://mail.mus
ic.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
--
07580951119
augustine.leudar.com
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130426/5f1e02cf/attachment.html
attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130426/63fc53ec/attachment.html
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
I would guess that the criteria for designing a single speaker, or a pair, are
actually different than those for designing a wavefront reconstruction system.
Ambisonics always had that peculiarity that a room full of quite modest
speakers sounded better than they had any right to.
It would be
At 05:30 26-04-13, Chris Pike wrote:
The programme contains an excellent array of speakers from the
broadcasting industry and academia, with panel discussions and many
demonstrations.
an array of speakers... An ambiguous collective noun in the context!
David
At 04:50 26-04-13, Richard Dobson wrote:
I am not clear just what the issue is here.
The issue is that if one is going to be precise about the Physics and
Maths discussed here, one should preferably extend that precision to
musical considerations.
...there is nothing otherwise special
On 26/04/2013 15:35, David Pickett wrote:
..
For most other instruments it is not in the middle at all. It is is
the lowest note on the standard flute, almost the highest note on the
bassoon
Have you heard the first note of the Rite of Spring - a C one octave
higher? This note is playable
--On 26 April 2013 16:28 +0100 Richard Dobson
richarddob...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Beethoven 9th asks the choir basses to sing a top D and that I can
confirm is decidedly painful at modern concert pitch. At early 19th-C
chorton it was hopefully a bit easier. Trained good singers can
manage
On 26/04/2013 00:28, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
On 2013-04-25, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
For first order the 'extrapolation' works well up to a distance of
around 1/4 to 1/3 of a wavelength.
So, in English, what your subwoofer plays back is usually cut off at 80
or 120Hz. There the wavelength would
/20130426/39ef0da0/attachment.html
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
--On 26 April 2013 14:12 -0500 David Pickett d...@fugato.com wrote:
Yes, but mostly the bottom note is an A, with only once a G. And when
you get to the important fortissimo top Es and Fs, do you leave them to
the Tenors?
Eh, what do you sing?
The tenors have enough on their plates dealing
On 26/04/2013 20:12, David Pickett wrote:
At 10:28 26-04-13, Richard Dobson wrote:
Beethoven 9th asks the choir basses to sing a top D and that I can
confirm is decidedly painful at modern concert pitch. At early 19th-C
chorton it was hopefully a bit easier. Trained good singers can manage
it,
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 06:33:47PM -0700, Robert Greene wrote:
To my mind it makes not much sense to suppose that the first order
reconstruction is correct in a neighborhood of the listener
but higher order is correct in a larger neighborhood--not literally
correct. This seems
At 14:30 26-04-13, Paul Hodges wrote:
--On 26 April 2013 14:12 -0500 David Pickett d...@fugato.com wrote:
Yes, but mostly the bottom note is an A, with only once a G. And when
you get to the important fortissimo top Es and Fs, do you leave them to
the Tenors?
Eh, what do you sing?
I can
On 2013-04-26, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
(Okay, this one is long and filled with intuition-beyond-verified-math.
Take it with a grain of salt, even if I think there's a point or two
there..)
Nobody claims there's a hard border between the 'correctly
reconstructed' area and the rest. If you're
OK this part I believe! As I recall the original
statement was that in a small area it was correct,
and then it was not. That I found incomprehensible.
But this makes perfect sense of course.
Thanks for the clarification
Robert
On Fri, 26 Apr 2013, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013
On 2013-04-27, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
(And actually doesn't even get solved properly unless you impose such
a cutoff. In most papers that cutoff is imposed by accident by
restricting the analysis to the order of the spherical harmonical
decomposition that the system aims at; bit mistake: in the
19 matches
Mail list logo
