On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Mark Constable wrote: > On 2007-11-27 01:19 pm, Bill Unruh wrote: >>> A point is that these kind of "hearing tests" are almost >>> useless in absolute terms but are indeed meaningful when >>> tested and accumulated results are compared with for any >>> particular individual. The consistent mean is to set up >>> the listening environment to just be able to hear 1khz >>> at (about, I forget the right level) -50db and then run >>> the rest of the tests from that reference. As long as >>> this reference marker is used for each testing session >>> then the results can be reliable for that individual. >> >> ?? And that particular pair of headphones (and another of the same brand >> can be different significantly) And placing them on your head in exactly >> same way ( esp for "on the ear" or "in the ear" resonances in the aural >> cavities can change the amplitude a lot) > > Presumably the documentation that comes with this mythical > non existent proggie would explain these basic points and > advise the end user how best to set up the tests and apply > any results... and optionally offer to tweak some system > wide EQ settings based on results. > > I've had one formal hearing test and I had to step inside > a small booth, close the door, and put on a pair of passive > noise cancelling headphones... took about 15 minutes and I > walked away with a crude printout and another appointment > for the following year. I remember looking at the printout > and thinking "how could I use something like Jamin to master > what I generally listen to according to these results and > automatically apply any compensation?". Except of course, you have the problem that what you really want is for the sound source coming into your ears to be what you (or a mythical "perfect ears" ) would hear in a concert hall. Except those perfect ears would need to be installed in your head, because it is your shoulders, your hair, your ear folds, and your ear-stickingout, and your ear canal, and ear drum that would be needed to decide what the ideal would be. And those audiologist results are results with a single set of earphones interacting with your ears. And if you tried to compensate for a 40dB fall off somewhere, the sound level would be high enough to damage the hair cells in your ear (even though it would not sound loud to you) and thus next year you would find you needed 80dB compensation instead of just 40. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Alsa-user mailing list Alsa-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-user
