Korg Forums Forum Index Korg Forums
A forum for Korg product users and musicians around the world.
Moderated Independently.
Owned by Irish Acts Recording Studio & hosted by KORG USA
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

need for larger velocity scales, 0-128 to small
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16, 17  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korg Forums Forum Index -> Korg Kronos
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ozy
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
Kevin Nolan
Approved Merchant
Approved Merchant


Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 2508
Location: Dublin, Ireland

PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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...)


Smile


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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ozy
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kevin Nolan wrote:
from Ireland the relative loudness of your 'voice' was less than in the States so it was ok.


I don't think so. I am THIS side of the pond!

Or maybe you are following new law of physics, discovered by Scott? Wink

Whatever.

I faded it all down to a nice -40dB

hush!
Back to top
Scott
Platinum Member


Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Posts: 886

PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ozy wrote:
The internal, subjective response to the doubling of the weight CANNOT be measured!

you said "how do I know that when I feel double it's realy double the weight?". Because that's how "double" is defined!

HOW THE FRIGGING ELSE COULD YOU MEASURE A HUMAN SENSATION BEING "DOUBLE" OR "TREBLE"?!?!?.

Telepathy?!? WHAT ?!?!?

How would you quantify a sensation?

Thank you for finally coming somewhere in the neighborhood of understanding me.

I can look at a 6' plank of wood and tell that it's about double the length of a 3' plank of wood, because my mind's eye can imagine two of the 3 footer's stacked next to the 6 footer; or because experience has taught me how big 3' is and how big 6' is and I know that 6' is double 3'. There are references. That's what's missing to me when someone says such-and-such is twice as loud as something else. With nothing external, short of some kind of training, I don't see how anybody makes that guess.

And yet you see references to something being perceived as "twice as loud" as something else (i.e. that's what you apparently need 10x the power for). I have no idea where people are getting those references from. I can imagine one person saying that something 3 dB louder seems twice as loud to him, and someone else not saying something seems twice as loud until the difference is much greater than that (as apparently happens, since 10x the power would be an increase of more than 9 dB). So this idea that people, as a whole, have some inherent rough idea of what something "twice as loud" sounds like, such that one can make a generalization of how much more power is required to achieve it, is something that I find mysterious.

And then you said that a comment like "your guitar is twice as loud as my keyboard" is objective, which surprised me when you said you actually meant it seriously. At least in this last message, you admit it is subjective. (Unlike estimating that something is twice as long as something else, which is objective, because there is clear reference.)

Anyway, it was only a side comment, way off the topic of the thread, and nothing I really expected a response to. Sorry for the distraction.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scott
Platinum Member


Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Posts: 886

PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

peter_schwartz wrote:
To understand what 3dB and 10x and all of the other numbers associated with sound pressure levels are about you just have to do some reading up on the matter.

I do understand the basics of decibels, power, etc. What I was commenting on was what I thought was the interesting psychoacoustic phenomenon... that, absent any kind of clear objective reference, people seem to "guess" at what feels twice as loud to them at about the same point, with enough consistency such that there can actually be a generalization that it equates to about 10x the original power. Personally, as I said, I don't feel comfortable guessing at all, exactly because, without a reference point, it seems too arbitrary... and yet, there seems to be a kind of consensus. That's the part that seems mysterious to me. But I imagine there is research on it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ozy
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am sorry I am so SLOW at UNDERSTANDING Laughing

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...
Back to top
ozy
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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?
Back to top
Scott
Platinum Member


Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Posts: 886

PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ozy wrote:
I am sorry I am so SLOW at UNDERSTANDING Laughing

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.


As an aside in some message, I noted an observation that seems mysterious to me. I don't think I actually asked for an explanation. Nor did I sneer at anyone.


ozy wrote:
After that, find a nice primary school and enlist.

Sounds like a sneer.

ozy wrote:
After YEARS, he will say: that "big dog is ONE AND A HALF the size of the LITTLE dog, and BARKS three times as loud.

Did somebody install a meter in his brain? No.

Is his measurement totally subjective? No.

I would call his estimate that one dog barked at 3x the volume of the other to be subjective. But let's agree to disagree.

Most of what you said simply has nothing to do with the point I was talking about, which I tried to make as clear as I could a few posts back. I'm sorry if that is not sufficiently clear, but since you really are not addressing what I'm talking about, perhaps we should just leave it at that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scott
Platinum Member


Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Posts: 886

PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ozy wrote:
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.

Why not LOUDNESS then?


My ears subjectively tells me that A above middle C is a "higher version" of the same note as A below middle C. School later taught me that that corresponds to double the frequency, 880 Hz vs 440 Hz. But if I hadn't learned that in school, and someone gave me knob controlling a VCO, started it at A-440 and asked me to turn the knob until the frequency was exactly double, I'd have no way to know. I'd be able to tell it was higher, but not "what amount" higher, because there's no internal sense of what sound is "twice as high" -- that's something you learn, that "an octave higher" equates to actually "twice the frequency."

The reference for "twice as loud" is even more nebulous. If I were going to look at it comparably to the example in the previous paragraph, a sense of what I would consider "double" the volume would be derived, for example, from playing a mono program through a stereo system, and first plugging in just the left speaker, and then plugging in the right speaker. Adding the right speaker would, to my mind, double the volume, as it doubles the total sound energy into the room. However, for the second speaker to exactly duplicate the first speaker only requires double the power and only adds 3 dB (let's forget about possible phase complications for now). Yet people apparently routinely say that they need to hear something driven with 10x as much power to subjectively think it's twice as loud. I think that's interesting.

And although I could probably train myself pretty easily to recognize the approximate volume difference between one speaker and two speakers each playing the same program with the same power, I presume that most people who say that something needs 10x the power to be what they consider twice as loud are doing it through some kind of gut response, and not through any training of what "double the sound energy into the room" actually sounds like. And as far as I know, 10x more power does not yield anything that objectively measures as double.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jimknopf
Platinum Member


Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Posts: 3363

PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Are some of you actually living here??
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jemkeys25
Full Member


Joined: 15 Jan 2011
Posts: 243

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 1:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peter_schwartz
Full Member


Joined: 14 Jan 2011
Posts: 206

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 2:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scott wrote:
Personally, as I said, I don't feel comfortable guessing at all, exactly because, without a reference point, it seems too arbitrary... and yet, there seems to be a kind of consensus.


What's there to feel uncomfortable about? What's the worst thing that could possibly happen?

Situation: you're in a recording studio working with an engineer and you ask them to make something twice as loud in the mix. I dunno, maybe a guitar part that's buried. So they'd probably just move up the fader and make something louder to the point where they interpret what you're asking for. It may be exactly 3dB louder or it might not, but that doesn't matter. You're mixing, not doing calculations. Anyway, they did what you asked for, and now it's your turn to evaluate the change. What's the worst that could happen if you got the whole "twice as loud" thing wrong? Here are your options for what happens after they raise the fader: the part is...

• still too soft
• way too loud
• somewhere in the middle
• just right

So what's the worst that could happen by guessing? Nothing. If the part's still too soft you ask them to turn it up. If it's too loud, well, you ask them to back it off, split the difference... You get the idea. The best part of guessing is that you learn from it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scott
Platinum Member


Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Posts: 886

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

peter_schwartz wrote:
Scott wrote:
Personally, as I said, I don't feel comfortable guessing at all, exactly because, without a reference point, it seems too arbitrary... and yet, there seems to be a kind of consensus.


What's there to feel uncomfortable about? What's the worst thing that could possibly happen?

I don't want to get carried away over semantics here. But what I meant by saying that I would not feel comfortable saying something was twice as loud as something else was simply another way of saying that I would not have confidence that I was correct.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ozy
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jimknopf wrote:
Are some of you actually living here??


I got evicted from my house when I couldn't pay the mortgage I had taken to buy the last mixer.

Then I live here. But it's a bit cold at night.

Now I am planning to buy the Kronos because it's got a big box: I plan refurbishing it, adding maybe a patio,

and sleep in it under my favorite bridge.
Back to top
ozy
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scott wrote:
I don't want to get carried away over semantics here.


You are indeed LIVING in semantics - according to your postings,

because you don't realize that shared perception of reality among human being,

based on external common reality (vision and sound) and on INTERNAL comparable reality (proprioception) is NOT arbitrary nor founded on consensus.

On consensus only, you could say anything.

On perception of common experiences, you extract knowledge, not by consensus but by integration.

I spoke of REAL, existing, measurable dogs and barks. There's no need of consensus on the fact that "TWO dogs are barking".

Hence the fact that you can start measuring perceptions based on that.

If I had said "the bark of dogs IN DREAMS", or "the bark of hypothetic future dogs", then everything would have to be based on just consensus.

Consensus doesn't equal integration of data.

I understand school may have confused you on the subject.

Most of what's taught in schools about language and logic is currebtly deeply flawed.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korg Forums Forum Index -> Korg Kronos All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16, 17  Next
Page 15 of 17

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group