Spectral Identification: Difference between revisions

(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)

Line 3:

Well, as it appears to me, there are no rules for communicating about audio qualities right now, something that is essential for a functional language to work. We have a whole truck-load of words, all of which mean different things to everyone. Tower of Babel. A lot of these words have been invented, I think, by the audio press. Imagine making up language for what you think you heard over the differences in audio qualities between normal and "special" AC power cords or different wood that you laid your speaker cables next to. Honest. I have seen this and much more.

I'm going to post the 10-word vocabulary I have been teaching here at Bose. "your rules" hit me funny, like it's my ball and you have to play this way or forget it. It's not like this is the script carved on the holy tablets by God, or whatnot. It's just an attempt, a proposal, for any rule where there really aren't any. I think that if we can at least agree on 10 words, it's a start. Actually, these words are a "middle man" to what we really need to do: Hear, listen (the combined activity of taking in audio information, thinking and concluding) and identify in real engineering terms. Like, for instance, a "nasal" quality is heard, the thought process says "aha, too much level in the 1KHz octave" and then you can do something about it, like reach for the 1KHz part of an equalizer and make it sound normal. The words describe familiar qualities we are all familiar with, many having to do with our knowledge of how normal human speech sounds.

I'm going to post the 10-word vocabulary I have been teaching here at Bose. "[http://bose.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3976055944/m/6621062011?r=7211049311#7211049311 your rules]" hit me funny, like it's my ball and you have to play this way or forget it. It's not like this is the script carved on the holy tablets by God, or whatnot. It's just an attempt, a proposal, for any rule where there really aren't any. I think that if we can at least agree on 10 words, it's a start. Actually, these words are a "middle man" to what we really need to do: Hear, listen (the combined activity of taking in audio information, thinking and concluding) and identify in real engineering terms. Like, for instance, a "nasal" quality is heard, the thought process says "aha, too much level in the 1KHz octave" and then you can do something about it, like reach for the 1KHz part of an equalizer and make it sound normal. The words describe familiar qualities we are all familiar with, many having to do with our knowledge of how normal human speech sounds.

But, for this discussion, here are the 10 words, which describe a 1 octave excess level in the stated center of that octave (these are all "ISO standard center frequencies"). These can be used anywhere but hopefully for better communication about qualities about our system, for better or for worse:

Line 46:

</table>

Or download [http://toonz.ca/media/videos/Bose_ListeningReference.exe Bose_ListeningReference.exe (91 megabytes)]

<!--

See also: [[Identifying Spectral Excess in Musical Sounds]]

Source: [http://bose.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3976055944/m/6621062011?r=6621097411#6621097411 Presets 2.0 Anyone Listening]

-->

----

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 Well, as it appears to me, there are no rules for communicating about audio qualities right now, something that is essential for a functional language to work.  We have a whole truck-load of words, all of which mean different things to everyone.  Tower of Babel.  A lot of these words have been invented, I think, by the audio press.  Imagine making up language for what you think you heard over the differences in audio qualities between normal and "special" AC power cords or different wood that you laid your speaker cables next to.  Honest.  I have seen this and much more.
-I'm going to post the 10-word vocabulary I have been teaching here at Bose.  "your rules" hit me funny, like it's my ball and you have to play this way or forget it. It's not like this is the script carved on the holy tablets by God, or whatnot.  It's just an attempt, a proposal, for any rule where there really aren't any.  I think that if we can at least agree on 10 words, it's a start.  Actually, these words are a "middle man" to what we really need to do:  Hear, listen (the combined activity of taking in audio information, thinking and concluding) and identify in real engineering terms.  Like, for instance, a "nasal" quality is heard, the thought process says "aha, too much level in the 1KHz octave" and then you can do something about it, like reach for the 1KHz part of an equalizer and make it sound normal.  The words describe familiar qualities we are all familiar with, many having to do with our knowledge of how normal human speech sounds.
+I'm going to post the 10-word vocabulary I have been teaching here at Bose.  "[http://bose.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3976055944/m/6621062011?r=7211049311#7211049311 your rules]" hit me funny, like it's my ball and you have to play this way or forget it. It's not like this is the script carved on the holy tablets by God, or whatnot.  It's just an attempt, a proposal, for any rule where there really aren't any.  I think that if we can at least agree on 10 words, it's a start.  Actually, these words are a "middle man" to what we really need to do:  Hear, listen (the combined activity of taking in audio information, thinking and concluding) and identify in real engineering terms.  Like, for instance, a "nasal" quality is heard, the thought process says "aha, too much level in the 1KHz octave" and then you can do something about it, like reach for the 1KHz part of an equalizer and make it sound normal.  The words describe familiar qualities we are all familiar with, many having to do with our knowledge of how normal human speech sounds.
 But, for this discussion, here are the 10 words, which describe a 1 octave excess level in the stated center of that octave (these are all "ISO standard center frequencies").  These can be used anywhere but hopefully for better communication about qualities about our system, for better or for worse:
@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 </table>
+Or download [http://toonz.ca/media/videos/Bose_ListeningReference.exe Bose_ListeningReference.exe (91 megabytes)]
+<!--
+See also:  [[Identifying Spectral Excess in Musical Sounds]]
 Source: [http://bose.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3976055944/m/6621062011?r=6621097411#6621097411 Presets 2.0 Anyone Listening]
+-->
 <noinclude>
 ----