Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Measurement of sound wave perception range (Read 7944 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Measurement of sound wave perception range

How exactly is the ability to perceive sound waves measured? I write "perceive sound waves" as opposed to "hear" as that word may connote the brain's representation of the perceived sound waves being of the same manner as noises and music. I question whether this would cause difficulty in trials which ask "Can you hear anything?" as a means of ABXing tones and silence; which could only (give evidence towards) answer(ing) the question "Is your brain representing this tone in the same sense that it does music," excluding "felt" infrasonic rumbles and any infra/ultrasonics that may be subconsciously perceived, but not heard in the sense previously mentioned (i.e. having behavioral effects, perhaps unbeknownst to the subject),  due to a lack of utility in the context of vocal communication and localisation outside of the visual field.

Do the tests giving the 20-20 KHz range take this into account? Do we, physiologically speaking, have any instruments capable of perceiving sound waves that our ears can't? And is there any research in this area worth a read?

Apologies if my questions are confused nonsense.

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #1 –
Quote from: pixelwitch on
Apologies if my questions are confused nonsense.

Apology accepted.

Try again.

Start with understanding the words: perceive and perception (link)
and realize that instruments don't perceive or have physiology.
What are you asking?

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #2 –
Not sure I understand the full question, but we have ultrasound equipment running at 100 MHz bandwidth, so matching the <20kHz of human hearing is not much of a challenge!

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #3 –
Ah sorry for the ambiguity, by instruments I meant components of the body capable of recording and transmitting information to the brain, and by perception I was referring to the reception and utilisation of information from the environment by the brain.

Though perhaps that clarifies nothing

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #4 –
To rephrase my clumsily written question (it was written pre-coffee):

Is 20-20KHz the only interval in the sound wave spectrum which has any effect on humans at all (so not necessarily heard as sound, but with effects on say emotional state and behaviour)? How would one go about determining this, and is there considerable research in that area?

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #5 –
No, 20 to 20khz is roughly what corresponds to sound. 

0 Hz is wind and you can certainly feel that.

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #6 –
Quote from: pixelwitch on
Is 20-20KHz the only interval in the sound wave spectrum which has any effect on humans at all (so not necessarily heard as sound, but with effects on say emotional state and behaviour)?
This is still a poorly constructed question.

As saratoga said, humans can easily detect sub 20Hz oscillations in pressure.  Whether this is interpreted as sound is another matter, which has been discussed here on more than one occasion.

20kHz is a very fuzzy upper limit.  Based on the limited extent of what I've read, I'm under the impression that the outer limits of high frequency sensation comes more in the way of pressure/discomfort/pain than it does as sound.  I've also seen discussions surrounding the detection of 40kHz through bone conduction.

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,74432.0.html
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,62478.0.html

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #7 –
After some further digging, which perhaps I ought to have attempted prior to asking, I have found an article which upon skim-reading pertains my original (poorly worded) question.
http://jn.physiology.org/content/83/6/3548.full
With this as an example has there been any further research in this area?

This sort of thing was mentioned, and better put in the first thread linked by greynol, though I didn't see this particular paper.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,74432.msg654591.html#msg654591
Not sure how inter-thread quoting works though.

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #9 –
Quote from: pixelwitch on
Is 20-20KHz the only interval in the sound wave spectrum which has any effect on humans at all
No.
<20Hz has the effect of shaking things in your house, for example, when watching modern action flicks and >20KHz has the effect of having creepy 70 yr old men spending lots of money on stuff they can't possibly hear.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #10 –
Quote from: pixelwitch on
After some further digging, which perhaps I ought to have attempted prior to asking, I have found an article which upon skim-reading pertains my original (poorly worded) question.
http://jn.physiology.org/content/83/6/3548.full
With this as an example has there been any further research in this area?

This sort of thing was mentioned, and better put in the first thread linked by greynol, though I didn't see this particular paper.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,74432.msg654591.html#msg654591
Not sure how inter-thread quoting works though.
I really only meant this post:
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php?topic=74432.msg655866#msg655866

The same goes for the other topic I linked.  Neither topics were about the detection of 40kHz through bone conduction.  Sorry about that!

Anyway, I found a couple of posts by David when searching for bone conduction and guess he's maybe talking about the work published by Pumphrey in 1950 among others.

Don't waste your time on Ooha$hi $nakeoil hyper$onic bull$hit.

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #11 –
I don't see how a composer could make money from the possibility of sound waves that aren't represented by the brain as tones having a measurable effect on brain patterns though; given the point in soundtracks/music is that which is audible. It's probably more useful to cognitive scientists looking into senses.

Surely if there was significant effect measured in both the original and followup studies, that's sufficient to warrant further research into the phenomenon (for the sake of gathering more significant evidence towards its [in]existence and determining if the effects are cognitive or purely physiological)? If there was no weight to the evidence provided in the study supporting the existence of an effect on brain activity, I wouldn't expect it to have made it past the peer review process for a journal of neurophysiology.


The perception of ultrasonics via bone conduction certainly sounds interesting. Has anybody found a use for it so far? Is anything useful even encoded in environmentally present ultrasonics that isn't in the audible sound spectrum? Is the detected sound represented as tones, as skim reading google results would lead me to believe?

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #12 –
Quote from: pixelwitch on

The perception of ultrasonics via bone conduction certainly sounds interesting. Has anybody found a use for it so far? Is anything useful even encoded in environmentally present ultrasonics that isn't in the audible sound spectrum? Is the detected sound represented as tones, as skim reading google results would lead me to believe?
Bone conduction hearing aids certainly exist. I'm not sure whether ultrasonic signals are specifically used, although I believe there have been suggestions about that. .

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #13 –
Quote from: pixelwitch on
I don't see how a composer could make money from the possibility of sound waves that aren't represented by the brain as tones having a measurable effect on brain patterns though; given the point in soundtracks/music is that which is audible. It's probably more useful to cognitive scientists looking into senses.
Are there any cognitive scientists that can make sense of what you said?

Quote from: pixelwitch on
Surely if there was significant effect measured in both the original and followup studies, that's sufficient to warrant further research into the phenomenon (for the sake of gathering more significant evidence towards its [in]existence and determining if the effects are cognitive or purely physiological)?
Self contradictions were followed up by opposite findings.
The real question is where are the successful follow ups after all this time and what would any of it have to do with consumer content and reproduction systems?

Quote from: pixelwitch on
If there was no weight to the evidence provided in the study supporting the existence of an effect on brain activity, I wouldn't expect it to have made it past the peer review process for a journal of neurophysiology.
Are you in the field to know whether this is unexpected?

Quote from: pixelwitch on
The perception of ultrasonics via bone conduction certainly sounds interesting. Has anybody found a use for it so far?
Yes, creepy old men with more money than sense and certain peddlers, have great use for it, real or not.

Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #14 –
Quote from: ajinfla on
The real question is where are the successful follow ups after all this time
A question I've asked.
See:
Quote from: pixelwitch on
http://jn.physiology.org/content/83/6/3548.full
With this as an example has there been any further research in this area?

Quote from: ajinfla on
what would any of it have to do with consumer content and reproduction systems?
Nothing, I'd expect, given result isn't represented as sound by the brain. Not that I implied it was relevant to that area; otherwise I don't think blind testing would have the results it does.

Quote from: ajinfla on
Are you in the field to know whether this is unexpected?
Admittedly no, and I understand that gives little weight to my statement. But it is my personal belief that the people, whose job it is to scrutinise research regrading the ongoings of the brain, would prevent papers that make groundbreaking suggestions in that area from insignificant data, from being published.

Quote from: ajinfla on
Yes, creepy old men with more money than sense
If I'm right in understanding adamdea's post, they'd find a use for it in hearing aids to compensate for whats relatively ultrasonic to people in their age group, which I'd argue warrants the cost. I'd think it rude to call them creepy.

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #15 –
Quote from: pixelwitch on
Nothing
Right. But it's still a favorite of peddlers and believers.

Quote from: pixelwitch on
it is my personal belief that the people, whose job it is to scrutinise research regrading the ongoings of the brain, would prevent papers that make groundbreaking suggestions in that area from insignificant data, from being published.
That is a false belief, especially in the field of audio.

Quote from: pixelwitch on
I'd think it rude to call them creepy.
Take that up with the person I linked saying it
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #16 –
Quote from: pixelwitch on

But it is my personal belief that the people, whose job it is to scrutinize research regarding the ongoings of the brain, would prevent papers that make groundbreaking suggestions in that area from insignificant data, from being published.

I would sincerifly hope that  people, whose job it is to scrutinize research (i.e. review scientific papers for publication in professional journals) would prevent insignificant data from being published.

Or, do you believe that every time someone wipes their dirty knife on a napkin, the napkin should be published? ;-)

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #17 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on

Or, do you believe that every time someone wipes their dirty knife on a napkin, the napkin should be published? ;-)

Only if there are a statistically significant number of knives and napkins, and that the wiper was blindfolded, had no idea which knife he was wiping, and was given the choice of knife X to match to knife A or knife B.

Re: Measurement of sound wave perception range

Reply #18 –
Quote from: pixelwitch on
Do the tests giving the 20-20 KHz range take this into account? Do we, physiologically speaking, have any instruments capable of perceiving sound waves that our ears can't?

By "the tests" I take it you mean any tests designed to scientifically prove information regarding perceiving sounds?  We should first clarify something: 'Sounds' in the physical world, or acoustic energy, is a different thing from the 'sounds' that we hear when acoustic energy comes into contact with the ears.  The latter type of sound is just the idea of what we experience as a sound; the brain is actually what creates the thing you hear because it translates acoustic energy into the experience that we call hearing.

 So now that we can think of sound in two different ways:
1) the energy moving around in the world
2 the actual experience of hearing something

When you talk about "perceiving sound", it almost seems like you are asking whether we can perceive frequencies above the the threshold of human hearing, and in this case 'perceive' would refer to any sensory experience OTHER than hearing.  Is that what you're asking?