Reply-To: "Kevin Aylward"
From: "Kevin Aylward"
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <3DC634B7.C303BC8E@scazon.com>
Subject: Re: Bullshit wins v. science
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-Inktomi-Trace: public1-pete2-5-cust19.pete.broadband.ntl.com 1036443078 26707 126.96.36.199 (4 Nov 2002 20:51:18 GMT)
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 20:51:10 -0000
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 20:51:19 GMT
"John Woodgate" wrote in message
> I read in sci.electronics.design that Kevin Aylward
> wrote (in
.ntli.net>) about 'Bullshit wins v. science', on Mon, 4 Nov 2002:
> >This is a misconception. The ear is *absolutly* *insensitive* to
> >A static phase shift is quite undetectable. It is a Fourier analyser.
> It is essential in such a case to distinguish 'polarity' from 'phase'.
> polarity inversion of a complex signals cannot be described as a
> valued 'phase shift'.
I agree that this is a classic subtlety. A waveform with a positive
triangle shape and a square negative illustrates the difference between
phase and inversion.
I note your comment in the other post that there are claims on detection
of polarity. I'm very sceptical on this. There may be a possible
mechanism for this if the sound was *very* loud, since you can increase
pressure to whatever you want, but only reduce pressure to zero. This
means distortion would be different. Still, I have never noticed this
effect, despite much humping of 2*15's with horns, up and down many
flights of stairs, whilst so drunk, there was Guinness coming out of my
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.