[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: applications

Thank you Peter for your comments. I have not come across any literature
referencing this phenomenon. Subjects listening to my recordings have
demonstrated an inability to detect what is recorded sound and what is
insitu environmental sound. This is due in no small part to the earphones
becoming essentially transparent to the listener. Earphones that I use
(open) have a minimal effect on reducing the volume of sounds around the
listener apart from some high frequency filtering caused by physical
obstruction of the ear canal. As the recordings still contain these high
frequencies and also localisation cues, the recordings are theoretically
closer to reality than the surrounding environmental sound field - hence
the seamless merging of the two sound fields.

I can imagine grandpa being able to listen to the television using binaural
earphones at a level that is comfortable for him whilst not disturbing
those around him. Personalised listening levels. At the same time he can
still be involved in converstation and still hear the doorbell/telephone
ring. Binaural recordings eliminate the "blocking out effect" that normal
listening through earphones/headphones create.
I recall an elderly friend of mine with hearing problems could only listen
to the television through headphones as the volume he required was too loud
for his neighbours. He felt insecure when listening through the headphones
as the rest of the world was blocked out. He could not hear if the
telephone rang or the cat was stuck in the bin or if the smoke alarm went
off. Binaural localisation of the television sound would enable him to hear
the sounds around him and at the same time hear the television at a level
that was comfortable for him - without disturbing those around him.
There are obvious advantages in being able to selectively hear generated
soundfields and at the same time being aware of your environmental audio
surrounds - safety being the obvious application.

Tim Cox

At 17:41 28/09/98 +0200, you wrote:

>Absolutely, but first I wonder why it would be easier
>to hear out one externalized sound (the "conversation")
>from another (your "binaural recording") than it is
>hear out one externalized sound (the "conversation")
>from an internalized one (the "conventional stereo
>recording") ? Has this been studied (and confirmed)
>in the literature?
>Do internalized sounds cause more "neural interference"
>because they create activity in auditory brain areas
>that externalized sounds would not reach (e.g., because
>spatial ambiguities have already been resolved at an
>earlier neural filtering stage, such that less of our
>wetware needs to be wasted on futile analysis attempts)?
>Best wishes,
>Peter Meijer
>Soundscapes from The vOICe - Seeing with your Ears!
>Email to AUDITORY should now be sent to AUDITORY@lists.mcgill.ca
>LISTSERV commands should be sent to listserv@lists.mcgill.ca
>Information is available on the WEB at http://www.mcgill.ca/cc/listserv

Email to AUDITORY should now be sent to AUDITORY@lists.mcgill.ca
LISTSERV commands should be sent to listserv@lists.mcgill.ca
Information is available on the WEB at http://www.mcgill.ca/cc/listserv