advertisement


Sighted comparisons and sense

Try listening to a pair of speakers in white, sighted then the same pair in red, sighted, guarantee, they will sound different even though they are identical.

One will sound a little richer & warmer, the other a little cooler & more stark.

Our brains are strange man.
 
Extremely good example.

However, detractors unable to think for themselves will now be frantically googling to find the most baseless reasons to 'explain' why the demonstration is flawed ;)
 
I've seen this before. It is, without doubt, an interesting phenomenon. I don't think anybody rejects the idea that our senses (not just our ears) are easily fooled, but it doesn't lead to an automatic conclusion that our ears are being fooled.

That said, being aware of the fact and the outcome, I found it quite easy to hear 'baa' when the mouth said 'faa' because, I suspect, I could switch into a perhaps more analytical mode. So, it seems to me that the illusion can be overcome, ie, we need not necessarily be fooled and sighted listening can, with adequate care and attention, overcome some visual biases.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
I've seen this before. It is, without doubt, an interesting phenomenon. I don't think anybody rejects the idea that our senses (not just our ears) are easily fooled, but it doesn't lead to an automatic conclusion that our ears are being fooled.

That said, being aware of the fact and the outcome, I found it quite easy to hear 'baa' when the mouth said 'faa' because, I suspect, I could switch into a perhaps more analytical mode. So, it seems to me that the illusion can be overcome, ie, we need not necessarily be fooled and sighted listening can, with adequate care and attention, overcome some visual biases.
Click to expand...

Of course you can, you're special. Bless.
 
Umm. Not sure we can have a useful, interesting or constructive discussion if you are going to be childish.

Here's a tip, listen to the leading edge plosive on the 'baa', the 'b' bit, if you will. Once you focus on that, it sounds entirely unlike an 'f' sound.
 
Of course it's easy when you know the answer. So tell me how you compensate when you're comparing amplifiers? Or racks? Or whatever? Using music.

Seriously, if you can't/won't understand how this demonstrates the ease with which it's easy to be fooled when listening sighted, then nothing will. It's the principle that's important, not the detail.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Umm. Not sure we can have a useful, interesting or constructive discussion if you are going to be childish.

Here's a tip, listen to the leading edge plosive on the 'baa', the 'b' bit, if you will. Once you focus on that, it sounds entirely unlike an 'f' sound.
Click to expand...

I would not see his post as at all childish. It took into account the repeated statements by some members that they can hear something.

If members kept saying I cannot hear something worth mentioning some might become inclined to say something.
 
I wonder if anyone good at DIY has ever transplanted the gubbins from a hi-end amp and DAC into a Binatone music centre, and then put the Binatone gubbins into the hi-end sleek cases?

I wonder if anyone would be fooled on a sighted test?
 
The demonstration isn't flawed - the conclusions are - it is an example of people generalising from a specific.

The brain has specific centres for analysing speech which uses both visual cues & auditory cues. So is speech a special case for the senses or do you know enough about psychoacoustics to make this generalisation?

The second issue that Sue raised is - is this always happening in all our interactions with the world or is it an unusual event?

It's easy to check this - examine your everyday interactions with the world & determine how often you have been "lied to" by your senses.

I doubt it will show you any reason to gravely distrust your senses.

What this does show about visual & auditory senses - they are continually making a best guest fit of the data they are gathering via nerve impulses & matching this to an internal model of the world - that's why this illusion works but why statements like "a red speaker will sound different to a white speaker" are ridiculous
 
jkeny said:
The demonstration isn't flawed - the conclusions are - it is an example of people generalising from a specific.

The brain has specific centres for analysing speech which uses both visual cues & auditory cues. So is speech a special case for the senses or do you know enough about psychoacoustics to make this generalisation?

The second issue that Sue raised is - is this always happening in all our interactions with the world or is it an unusual event?

It's easy to check this - examine your everyday interactions with the world & determine how often you have been "lied to" by your senses.

I doubt it will show you any reason to gravely distrust your senses.

What this does show about visual & auditory senses - they are continually making a best guest fit of the data they are gathering via nerve impulses & matching this to an internal model of the world - that's why this illusion works but why statements like "a red speaker will sound different to a white speaker" are ridiculous
Click to expand...

Lol. I don't even know where to start picking apart the barrel of contradictions you've just posted.

On one had you state that your senses are interlinked, and so what you hear is not determined in isolation, on the other you say they're separate. Make your mind up.

It's not about your sense *lying* to you, it's about how they interact and why statements about the colour of a speaker affecting higher sound you hear aren't ridiculous, but completely plausible.
 
kennyh said:
I wonder if anyone good at DIY has ever transplanted the gubbins from a hi-end amp and DAC into a Binatone music centre, and then put the Binatone gubbins into the hi-end sleek cases?

I wonder if anyone would be fooled on a sighted test?
Click to expand...
That's one reason why longer term listening is such a good idea - it recognises the malleability of the sense & the psychological propensity for liking something initially based on looks - it recognises that this wears away over a longer term & listening over this term gets beyond this psychological propensity.

We all know this occurs with any product - it doesn't have to be audio - a new car is all perfect (we gloss over any small issues) but after living with it & using it for a time, the newness is no longer a strong factor sweetening our thoughts & we are more likely to have a balanced view of it's pros & cons
 
I just think the clip demonstrates how easy it is to be fooled, and that despite your best intentions it's *very* easy to be influenced by aesthetics, brand, etc.

I don't disagree with the statement that long term listening allows a more reliable assessment, and *may* reduce the visual impact, but knowing costs, etc. is still very likely to influence the perception, so I'd still be sceptical. Now long term listening blind listening is definitely a desirable, if impractical, method.

I actually think this demonstrates short time blind listening is problematic as well, as removing one sense is unnatural and the brain has to work to compensate, hence the apparent inability for some to distinguish what should be large differences under blind conditions.
 
i_should_coco said:
Lol. I don't even know where to start picking apart the barrel of contradictions you've just posted.

On one had you state that your senses are interlinked, and so what you hear is not determined in isolation, on the other you say they're separate. Make your mind up.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure you understand but am willing to answer any questions you have.
The brain has special centers for processing speech & may well do so in ways different to the way it processes music - do you know if this is the case or not? If not then your generalisations could well be incorrect - right?

It's not about your sense *lying* to you, it's about how they interact and why statements about the colour of a speaker affecting higher sound you hear aren't ridiculous, but completely plausible.
Click to expand...
Completely plausible, just means it's a story that you like - it doesn't mean it's true. Now if you produced some evidence to support it then that would be different.

Yes our senses interact & to get an idea of how often they contradict one another is easy - just examine your everyday experiences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top