@bmc0 https://github.com/MalcolmSlaney/LoudnessModel
This is a loudness model in Python (MATLAB link is included) by hearing researchers who represent the top of the academic field. Might help.
In regard to loudness, there's this:
@bmc0 https://github.com/MalcolmSlaney/LoudnessModel
This is a loudness model in Python (MATLAB link is included) by hearing researchers who represent the top of the academic field. Might help.
Uuh... this is too difficult. I'm trying to test the code with the help of GPT, but it's really hard. (I have no knowledge of coding at all.)
View attachment 443309
View attachment 443310
100Hz low-pass mono noise
View attachment 443308
View attachment 443300
100Hz low-pass decorrelated noise
View attachment 443301View attachment 443302
Why so serious
I wanted to see the real-time variability of the track, but the curve moves faster than I expected, so it feels a bit overwhelming.
Thank you for the advice. I'm learning a lot from your presentation and the conversation between you and BMC.I'm not sure why lag is interesting here, rather more of a 200 millisecond aggregate normalized cross-correlation might be a tractible (more stable) number.
What you've got right now is closer to a cochlea simulation, I think, but I'm not sure what the filter used is. Now that's not a bad thing, however, interpreting it would involve modelling the inner hair cell as well, and then figuring out how to understand the firings, and I'm afraid I don't have any hard data for that to even offer vaguely. It's not something I can't help with, I don't have any such data, and the data I'm aware of hasn't been the best.
Thank you for the advice. I'm learning a lot from your presentation and the conversation between you and BMC.
I'll give it some more thought, taking that into consideration. (Of course, I also need to study the basics of Matlab.)
Thank you again.
Couldn't agree more. A consequence of not listening, and building on that original sin decade after decade without questioning.A lot remains unknown, thanks to the adherence of 60+ years of "you can't hear imaging below 90Hz" misinterpretation of "can't hear direction" as "can't hear anything else, either". It's one of the two big horrors in audio science, the other one being that intraaural phase shift is not audible.
A lot remains unknown, thanks to the adherence of 60+ years of "you can't hear imaging below 90Hz" misinterpretation of "can't hear direction" as "can't hear anything else, either". It's one of the two big horrors in audio science, the other one being that intraaural phase shift is not audible.
Multi channel is not really on for me, with two large Quad 2805 electrostats as my main speakers. I would not want to have five (or more) of those, apart from the fact that there are so few multichannel music recordings.
To me it seem like Pipe Organ music recorded in a large space would be one of the better examples of "real" LE information. I have some of these recordings I am going to take a look at and listen to.
audiosciencereview.com
Copy: L=L R=R
Channel: all
Copy: L1=L L2=L R1=R R2=R
Channel: L1 R1
Preamp: -6 dB
Filter: ON LPQ Fc 100 Hz Q 0.707
Filter: ON LPQ Fc 100 Hz Q 0.707
Channel: L2 R2
Filter: ON HPQ Fc 100 Hz Q 0.707
Filter: ON HPQ Fc 100 Hz Q 0.707
Copy: L=L1+R1+L2
Copy: R=L1+R1+R2
Copy: L=L R=R
For samples of pipe organ music, I suggest to listen to and analyze recordings made by Mr Bernard Neveu, which is known to be the best specialist of organ recording in France. He consistently uses largely spaced (several meters) omnidirectional microphones for almost all his recordings. His method is inspired by the early works of Emory Cook and experimentation he has done with the help of his friend, Georges Cabasse (a famous French pioneer in the Hi-fi field). His organ recordings are stunning. A great example is the album Transprovisations by Shin-Young Lee, Olivier Latry's wife (who is a better organ player than her male partner, said to me another organist friend of mine).
Link to download the catalogue of B. Neveu's recordings.
Is there a configuration you would suggest that does not require processing beyond the controls normally available with subwoofers (level, lowpass frequency, phase, hopefully some EQ)?
you have a bus outside , open the windows and walk around the room you still hear within that room , peaks and dips , doesn't have to be just speakersI recently built (from a GSG flatpack) a large sub to replace a couple of small heavily DSP'd subs I was disappointed with. Due to this thread and several others and the fact that I felt I was missing something with mono bass I built a second large sub. So far I am happy with how it sounds. When switching back and forth between stereo and mono bass, as mentioned, some recordings sound different and some don't but on balance it is an improvement. Thank you to all contributors.View attachment 456953
Hi JJ, this paper seems to suggest a larger and/or less reverberant room may be necessary https://audioroundtable.com/misc/icad2005F96.pdfRegretably, both more latency and a lot more processing are necessary to mimic the effects of a good real hall. This is one of my frustrations with many 'does it matter' tests, because the MATERIAL has no information to detect.
Wish I had a palace, but any good options for us living room sized folk?Yep. Physics is like that![]()
So, so true.Wish I had a palace, but any good options for us living room sized folk?![]()