AudioBanter.com - View Single Post

wrote:

Now that is interesting given that small barely audible level
differences can lead one to form a prefernce. How can that be?

The slightly louder level will give the impression of more detail, because
more small levels rise above the threshold of hearing. Since the change is
small, you cannot detect more significant tones, but just a general feeling
of higher resolution.

You are
speculating that there exists something that violates this
established fact. What is it, and how do you know?

How do you explain the fact that small level diferences can lead to
prefeences if we can't remember them in our comparisons?

If there is a significant level difference, you could in fact detect more
acoustical events, like the noise when the musicians turn the page of their
partitures. In this case you can remember this additional sound, but it has
to be coined and recognized again in each trial. This would not be direct
comparison, because the recognition doesn't give a vague pointer, but a
destinctive indicator. It also needs to be learned by training and you will
need a focused attention.
So whatever people say about long-term and short-term testing, the opposite
seems to be the case, and in fact has been validated by research.
Long-term evaluation with long pauses between the trials will require an
evaluation that is tied to certain distinctive passages, where or where not
a certain sound/noise can be heard. The fast switching will give you more a
general impression of the music as a whole, without the need to concentrate
on separate noises. It will be more joyful, you listen equally to the
instruments, it is more what happens during a concert.

Scott Wheeler

--
ciao Ban
Bordighera, Italy