Howdy All, This is in response to **Reads well, but no. Both matters? Otherwise FOA wouldn't work at all... Come on!**
Let’s say that instead of humans I wish to study the effects of acoustical stimuli on birds, bats, or critters whose hearing exceeds that of human perception. Or maybe include special populations of humans: For example, children who are neurotypical may have perceptual ability that far exceeds the norm (e.g. can hear frequencies well above 20 kHz). I know that wavelength and physical accuracy of reproduction (to include air particle direction) may effect interaction for tiny critters because the high-frequency wavelengths are similar to their body size. So, as a scientist (someone who does science), I’m not really concerned with humans opinions as to what sounds good or boring because we (humans) can’t hear the infrasonic or ultrasonic stimuli. Our perception, then, is null or non-existent. What DOES matter is the physical accuracy of the stimuli. When studying effects of sounds on hearing-impaired listeners (or persons with central auditory dysfunction), I wish to know how they interact or are affected by the stimuli. To ensure external validity of the study, I won’t rely on normal-hearers’ perception; instead, I’ll know the study is valid because the physical make-up of the stimuli is real. So, Come on! (as it was put)? How 'bout *Get with science!* I'm not claiming to have an answer as to how to go about validating physical realism, but perceptual judgments don't always fly. If I were to present a manuscript to JASA describing a new (acoustical) stimuli for spatial-hearing research, and my only validation for using the stimuli was that it *sounded real* (i.e., perceptual judgments), I believe the manuscript would find its way to the trash bin in a hurry. Sound intensity probes are one way of measuring acoustical events beyond basic sound pressure level (scalar) measurements. As I understand, the TetraMic can be used as an intensity probe, plus it could offer simultaneous measurement in 3-D space -- it would be tedious to make some measurements with a conventional intensity probe. Maybe my goal of a new standard of standardness is lofty, but I'd like to see a better yardstick for the objective measurement of hearing devices (which includes hearing aids and implantable auditory prostheses). In the end, perception does matter. But if perception in the lab is to equal perception in real-world environments, I need a physically accurate stimuli. Best to All, The Eric C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130709/947202f5/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
