Korg Forums

[ozy]

sorry for shouting.

Everybody please pardon me.

It was just too much.

I've read more "pseudo-scientific" bullshit, more "number-studded mumbo jumbo" in this thread than in a full yearly collection of "Scientology Review"

Sorry, again.

But I think the whole concept of asking people on the internet for KNOWLEDGE (instead of just exchangin opinions), bypassing books,

is severely damaging us all.

[Kevin Nolan]

No worries -

from Ireland the relative loudness of your 'voice' was less than in the States so it was ok. Seriously - the black bold font you typed is smaller over this side of the pond!!

(now logging out fast and running for cover...)





Kevin.



PS - Great to see such passionate debate. This Kronos forum has re-vitalised Korgforums. It's going to be an interesting few years!! Hat's off to Korg for keeping all of this alive and kicking.

[ozy]

[Scott]

[Scott]

[ozy]

I am sorry I am so SLOW at UNDERSTANDING

try getting into the following mindset:

1) what you don't understand is not automatically "misterious".

2) people are not always there to give you knowledge for free, while being sneered at in the process.

Now, let me rephrase for the last time. After that, find a nice primary school and enlist.

everybody human who has repeatdly carried two rocks, then 1 rock, then again 2 rocks, then 3, then 4, forms over the years a proprioceptive image of what "double, treble" means.

If he then takes a pebble, then 10, then a rock, he will say "these ten pebbles weigh as much as HALF THAT rock. The rock weighs 10 pebbles, imho. that pther ROCK WEIGHS double THAT".

Then he moves on to animals and sounds (like I do, when I talk to you about acoustics).

he meets a dog barking, then two, then one, then a bigger one, then two, then three, then a small one.

He listens to a rock falling, then two, then three, then one, then nothing then one then two.

After YEARS, he will say: that "big dog is ONE AND A HALF the size of the LITTLE dog, but BARKS three times as loud. His bark is three times the other"

Did somebody install a meter in his brain? No.

Is his measurement totally subjective? No.

His PERCEPTION is subjective, his measurement is...

ta daaaaa!

an analogue measurement,

based on his comparison of neural data which he feels, and visual data that he can objectively assess.

He can count dogs, he can see them. he can hear them. he can count that TWO similar dogs bark DOUBLE just one such dog,

and forms the proprioceptive image and the concept of...

ta-daaaa...

"DOUBLE"!

Since dogs and rocks are the same more or less everywhere and for everybody, since we share a COMMON reality, such assessment is BY AND LARGE common to mankind,

and that "double" is BY AND LARGE the same for me, you and my cousin.

Then centuries go by,

and a scientist discovers how surfaces react to pressure...

and how variations in pressure can be measured...

... and introduces logarithmic scales and the likes in the process.

But what I tried to explain you is the MISTERY of "HOW CAN SOMETHING INTIMATE AND SUBJECTIVE BE RELATED TO AN OBJECTIVE MEASUREMENT?"

That ANALOGUE measurement exist, may be a surprise to you, but go to the nearest church, look at the tower: see the clock? Ok.

the same kind of measurement makes even analphabet people capable of distinguishing between "that noise" and "a noise double that".

Medecine relies on such subjective assessments when it judges if a man is deaf by feeding him sounds and ASKING him if he hears them, and how loud ("is the right hear the same as the left?" "Now: what about these two sounds: are they the same as before? right and left?").

Every day, people are given drugs and undergo surgery based on self-perception of their body's reaction to external pressure,

according to scales and proportions which are FAR MORE detailed than "double" or "treble": and they do it by proprioceptive judgement of external data.

Go figure if trained musicians can't do such assessments...

[ozy]

Indeed, I'd have a question for you:

do you have absolute, or relative, hear?

what is called "perfect pitch", or some distant version of it?

If you have perfect pitch, you can detect relation between frequencies of sounds with an accuracy of 1/128

Otherwise, if you can just play an instrument or sing, you can tell that sound A's frequency is DOUBLE sound B's frequency.

Well, indeed you can tell that A's frequency is = "B's frequency less 1/12th", or "plus 3/12th".

Less than that, and you can't play music, or sing a song, l

est the abovementioned dogs start howling in your neighborhood.

Is that subjective? Isn't that an objective analogue measurement? Based on what meter?

Audition of such sounds, correlated with VISION of signs related to such sounds.

Why not LOUDNESS then?

[Scott]

[Scott]

[jimknopf]

Are some of you actually living here??

[jemkeys25]

not much to do without a kronos on this forum, seems you keep coming back for the same reasons jim knopf as everyone else, trying to achieve electronic acoustical perfection.

[peter_schwartz]

[Scott]

[ozy]

[ozy]