On "...the medium and the message" - air is the (elastic) medium for sound, but sound is the medium for information. In fact, inasmuch as perception relies very heavily (but not exclusively) on sensation, then all the information we pick up is via signals (which we sample), on receipt of which, the appropriate information must be extracted; it's always a signal-to-noise problem.
In evolutionary terms, single-sense perception is something of a special case, multimodal perception being the norm. So whilst individual sense modes can function in standalone mode, it makes sense that information received is much more robust when it occurs across several sense modes. It also makes sense that such multimodal perception is likely to be more compelling (more 'real'). See (for example) Shimojo labs (eg: Violentyev, A., Shimojo, S., and Shams, L. Touch-induced visual illusion. NeuroReport, 16, 1107-1110, 2005.) I tried an informal experiment - ostensibly just asking a few students to judge the quality of two different ambisonic recordings of the same scene - a peaceful countryside, near the lock of a small sleepy canal, with a distant quiet railway line, bees going about their business (beesiness?), the odd cyclist pedalling up the towpath. I played it back in the ambisonic listening room over 20 speakers, at an appropriate listening level, lights out. Although this was all very casual, so no definitive conclusions can be drawn, there was a preference in the half-dozen listeners (5 out of six said recording "2" sounded slightly more realistic, a little more spacious and outdoorsy, you could seem to hear slightly further, it was more pleasant somehow, etc). The only difference between the two samples was actually that, in scenario "1" they listened to the SF recording, in the comfortable, darkened room (about 3.5m x 3.5m) just as it came, whereas in scenario "2" there were three very quiet (but not totally so) large desk fans (that were not remarkable because they lived in that room) running at moderate speed and cycling from side to side - the recording was actually the same one. It did seem as though the very gentle air movement, which changed moment to moment (but not in a hectic way) as the fans cycled side-to-side, made it feel a lot more like being outside and as a consequence (I would guess) the recordings sounded more 'realistic'. Taking this principle of multimodal perception a little further, I would guess that careful use of lights/projections, similar visual transient information would probably sharpen the imagery of 1st order ambisonics (which can sometimes be a little 'woolly'), and that careful use of Lf injected into the seat of the listener could be used to manage proximity perception. So, if asked to bet a fiver, I would put it on a measurable effect on perceived sound quality by judicious use of smells Oh, and on this "... As humankind strives to move forward, I’m curious what the next “medium” may be, and how surround sound will be shaped by paradigm shifts." - I'd bet that one day we'll discern a difference between "surround sound" and "3-D sound", where the latter contains a great deal more depth of field - distance information is probably at least as important in spatial hearing as is direction perception... Cheers ppl Dr. Peter Lennox School of Technology, Faculty of Arts, Design and Technology University of Derby, UK e: p.len...@derby.ac.uk t: 01332 593155 -----Original Message----- From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Eric Carmichel Sent: 09 April 2013 23:15 To: sursound@music.vt.edu Subject: [Sursound] Meandering a bit (not a byte, but perhaps a nibble) Greetings All, I have made more than one attempt at recording (Ambisonically, of course!) a steam whistle and its resulting echo in the Superstition Mountains of Arizona. Wind has been the foe, but it is interesting to hear first-hand how atmospheric conditions affect sound. In addition to wind noise masking the echo, sound appears to travel up-hill (attenuation) when traveling opposite to wind direction. Furthermore, isotherms (layers of cold and warm in the canyons) appear to change the way sound travels. Although yesterday's attempt at sound recording weren’t successful, I took time to visit the Boyce Thompson Arboretum (also in the Superstition Mountain Range). Despite high winds, the arboretum was somewhat isolated from an ongoing desert dust storm. The arboretum's many flowers and plants attract a lot of birds, so it’s a potentially great place to record bird sounds. (Side: Why am I the only person in the mountains with a mic? Normal people have cameras.) While I was enjoying the scent of roses and honeysuckle blossoms during my visit, the thought of electronically “recording” scents and odors came to mind (not exactly a new idea). After all, we have multiple methods of electronically recording images and sounds. It then made me think about sensation, perception, and how “reality” travels across/thru various medium. The amusing thought of an older Warner Bros/Bugs Bunny cartoon that referred to “smell-a-vision” also surfaced. Although I don’t believe scents and odors would enhance movie-goers experiences (didn’t director John Waters already try this?), it does elicit thoughts of vials of elements and compounds being electronically mixed to produce odorants. Or, as with other implantable prostheses, what (and how) would be “recorded” to produce the sensations of olfaction and gestation via their respective cranial nerves? Sound travels on a medium (typically air for audition), as does light on an aether (ok, Michelson and Morley proved light doesn’t travel on such a medium). This could elicit discussion regarding the various schools of psychology and perception (Gestalt theorists, etc.) and how the sensation-evoking stimuli reach us (not to be confused with how they’re detected). Ecological psychology, for example, addresses vision and hearing, but these are sensations evoked by events that disturb or propagate through a medium. Touch, taste, and smell have no such medium, though many animals rely heavily on olfaction for survival and can determine the direction of a scent’s source (air current direction?). Certain schools of thought lean heavily on just a couple of sensations, not sensation as a whole. This is why I don't ascribe to any single school of thought regarding perception. As I digress (and meander in my thoughts), the definitions of media and medium come to mind. Just one week ago, a Sursound reader/contributor, Mark, kindly asked whether I had heard of Marshall McLuhan. I have since downloaded a couple of books by (and about) McLuhan. As I understood (via Mark’s email), McLuhan received funding from IBM to launch a research project on various types and combinations of sensory inputs. Because of differences among scientists, McLuhan's research ran into problems. McLuhan is also the person who coined the phrase “the medium is the message.” Depending on our definition, we could say “the medium (e.g. air) carries the message.” I guess that’s being a bit too pedantic, but then touch carries a strong message without need for a medium or media. And regardless of the best audio-video recording gear in the world, I wouldn’t be able to capture or convey my experience at the Boyce Thompson Arboretum without the elusive smellavision. As the title of this post indicates, I’m meandering. But the medium, message, and enjoyment of music and other sounds change in the presence of other stimuli. Surround sound also changes (and generally enhances) our listening experience, at least compared to mono or stereo. As humankind strives to move forward, I’m curious what the next “medium” may be, and how surround sound will be shaped by paradigm shifts. For now, I'm just meandering about the message... Best, Eric C. PS--I understand that a nibble (capital N or lower-case n?) consist of 4 bites (or half a byte). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130409/8f756dfa/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound _____________________________________________________________________ The University of Derby has a published policy regarding email and reserves the right to monitor email traffic. If you believe this email was sent to you in error, please notify the sender and delete this email. Please direct any concerns to info...@derby.ac.uk. _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
