Unexpected Validation

On December 20, 2011, IBM predicted mind reading machines. The announcement stated that IBM scientists are among those researching how to link your brain to your devices, such as a computer or a smart phone. IBM gave the examples of ringing someone up just by thinking it, or willing a cursor to

move on a computer screen. They further state that biological makeup will become the key to personal identity, with retina scans, recognition of faces, or voices, used to confirm who people are rather than typing in passwords.

The metaphysics of such technical develop-ments’ ability to access our conscious thinking process (which this chapter on brain has discussed as electromagnetic energy) leaves open the possi-bility of two way transmission along the same paths.

The current prediction that 80% of the population will have means of intercommunication with hand-held devices such as I Pads and cellular telephones suggests that addressing large crowds will not require large sound systems but rather control of the individual devices carried by the majority of the population. Just as my use of digital voice recogni-tion has allowed me to “type” these words (requiring an effort on my part to enunciate more clearly than was my normal pattern and allowing the program to learn the characteristics of my speech), so will we be required to obtain control of our often many layered consciousness when in the presence of mind reading devices.

We have had an exponential growth rate of hard-ware over recent decades, and it is now apparent that some of the software is beginning to grow exponen-tially as well. The earlier advent of neuron, axon, and synapse chips by IBM (see Chapter 5 Digital Theory) coupled to this most recent announcement regarding access to the internal signals of the human brain suggests that Orwell was only in error by 100 years in the means of human control to be accom-plished in 2080.

Bibliography

B. J. Baars & K McGovern (1988), A Theory of Consciousness, New York: Cambridge University Press.

F. Crick & C. Koch, “A Framework for Consciousness”, Nature Neuroscience, 6 (2), February 2003.

E. R. John, “The Neurophysics of Consciousness”, Brain Research Reviews 39 (2002) pp. 1–28.

S. Martine-Conde, “A Review of Christof Koch’s The Quest for Consciousness”, Psyche 10 (2), September 2004.

http//www.merkle.com/humanMemory.html, No. 4, October 1988.

J. McFadden, “Synchronous Firing and Its Influence on the Brain’s Electromagnetic Field”, Journal of Consciousness Studies, 9 (4), 2002, pp. 23–50.

H. Moravec. “When will Computer Hardware Match the Human Brain?” Journal of Evolution & Technology, (1) (1998).

V. Vinge, “The Coming Technological Singularity: how to survive in the Post-Human Era”, Whole Earth Review, Winter (1993).

Chapter 4

Psychoacoustics

by Don Davis

23

4.1 Motivations . . . .25 4.2 Sound Reproduction . . . .25 4.3 Is it Better to be Born Blind or Deaf ? . . . .26 4.4 Recording Sound at the Eardrum . . . .27 4.5 Psychoacoustics via a Metaphysical Foundation . . . .27 4.6 Barks, Bands, Equivalent Rectangular Bandwidths (ERBs), Phons and Sones . . . .28 Phon Level . . . .29 Sones . . . .29

Psychoacoustics 25

4.1 Motivations

As I mentioned elsewhere in the book, my original motivation for pursuing audio studies came from extensive listening to classical music. This listening begun, in a serious way in 1949, and by 1952, I was engaged in the custom construction of what was then called high fidelity systems. Parallel to these activities I had the opportunity to hear many large orchestras and many fine artists due to the fact that we lived in a University town. In attempting to match the sound level, low distortion, and wide frequency range of a large orchestra we encoun-tered many unmeasurable qualities that led us to understand the difference between “high fidelity”

and fidelity. The difference was vast then, and it is still vast today.

Richard C. Heyser once remarked that the scene boards used on motion picture sets (the scene tech-nical data is written on the board and a sound clap is made with a hinged section of the board) provided the necessary impulse data to let us, years later, if we ever acquired the ability, to reproduce the acoustic environment present on that soundstage.

Some of the better classical recordings, such as those made by EMI years ago, allow the listener to hear the room’s reverberation and unique ambient noises. The spaces between crescendos can have important emotional content, especially in operas.

There may be many significant signals in modern-day recordings that contain emotional content, if not processed out by modern digital technology.

The world’s psychoacoustians have made great strides in aiding digital recording technology to remove meaning and emotion while retaining infor-mation. It is indeed true that Shannon ignored both meaning and emotion as irrelevant to his goal of transmitting and preserving information, but the technology has hidden within it possibilities as yet unimagined. None of these comments are intended to deprecate the remarkable gains that digital tech-nology has provided us, but rather to encourage exploration into what constitutes true fidelity. I would encourage anyone making archival record-ings today to never use less than 96kHz sampling rate and twenty-four bit depth for two channel recordings

I a m n o t a f a n o f “ t e s t e d i n t h e h o m e , ” double-blind tests, etc. Over the decades, it has been shown that subtle flaws in recordings are detected by listening over and over again to favorite selec-tions without any thought of conscious analysis.

Often the realization will sneak in that the recording caused undue fatigue compared to other recordings of the same material. This has been true for both analog and digital recordings.

I have, in sixty years in audio, encountered a few individuals whose hearing, experience and intelli-gence provided exceptional judgmental capabilities that rank at the top of the Gaussian curve for human hearing. Such individuals can be an interesting guide to new listening experiences. A music critic detected in the recording of an older diva that a single high note had been dubbed in for her. He then identified the artist who had supplied the single note. A music critic who can do that demands our recognition and respect, both for his aural acuity and experience.