Discussion:
OT: Is there a sound engineer in the house?
Add Reply
Nick Odell
2020-07-04 19:43:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I think I have mentioned this before: I can measure the frequency
range of my hearing by noting how far I can go up the piano keyboard
before the notes change from do, re, mi to the clunk, clunk, clunk of
the action.

We were watching the streaming service, Teatro Colon en Casa,
Prokofiev, Romeo y Julieta(1) and in the interval they played promos
for other concerts in the season. In one of the promos, this
twelve-year-old(3) sat down at the piano and was dashing away all over
the place. Including some tricky bits on the last octave.

Hang on a moment, I said to myself. I can hear that. And yes, I could
hear the notes tinkling away in the last octave.

So how did that happen then? Cunning use of EQ before the signal was
broadcast? Harmonics generated on other strings which are actually
lower but which make me think I can hear the real notes? Or what? For
the avoidance of doubt, I do not think my hearing has suddenly come
back: I still can not hear the highest notes on either an acoustic
concert grand or an electric baby grand played live.

Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Nick


(1)Synopsis: Middle-aged woman and forgetful old man(2)meet and fall
in love. It ends badly.
(2)He forgot to put on his trousers before he came on stage
(3)Ooh! I have come on all Ed Reardon!
Mike
2020-07-05 08:42:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Odell
I think I have mentioned this before: I can measure the frequency
range of my hearing by noting how far I can go up the piano keyboard
before the notes change from do, re, mi to the clunk, clunk, clunk of
the action.
We were watching the streaming service, Teatro Colon en Casa,
Prokofiev, Romeo y Julieta(1) and in the interval they played promos
for other concerts in the season. In one of the promos, this
twelve-year-old(3) sat down at the piano and was dashing away all over
the place. Including some tricky bits on the last octave.
Hang on a moment, I said to myself. I can hear that. And yes, I could
hear the notes tinkling away in the last octave.
So how did that happen then? Cunning use of EQ before the signal was
broadcast? Harmonics generated on other strings which are actually
lower but which make me think I can hear the real notes? Or what? For
the avoidance of doubt, I do not think my hearing has suddenly come
back: I still can not hear the highest notes on either an acoustic
concert grand or an electric baby grand played live.
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Nick
(1)Synopsis: Middle-aged woman and forgetful old man(2)meet and fall
in love. It ends badly.
(2)He forgot to put on his trousers before he came on stage
(3)Ooh! I have come on all Ed Reardon!
Thereby hangs a long very shaggy tail...

(Those who are easily bored may care to move along now please, nothing of
interestworth reading.)

When one carries out a hearing test, it is normal to establish a reference
point (usually the reference frequency will be a 1kHz sinewave . The level
at which the person being tested (testee?) can perceive the lowest level
(usually through calibrated headphones) is established as the reference.
This might be done by playing intervals of the tone at decreasing levels
until no longer audible to the testee. Having established the threshold
point, other frequency sinewaves will be played over the headphones whilst
the testee responds to the stimulus by confirming when they can hear a
tone. (Usually by pressing a button each time they can hear a tone.) as the
tones rise in frequency, a young ear will still hear clearly that which
starts to become ‘quieter’ to the ear of greater years.* The results are
displayed as points on a chart indicating the loss relative to the 1kHz.
sinewave. A young ear may well hear a 16 kHz. tone as well as a 1kHz tone
but a 70 year old ear may well not detect anything more than an octave
lower, (8kHz.) Speech intelligibility requires the ability to hear clearly
between 300 Hz. and 3 kHz. (+ or - 3dB.) as far as the old BT system
requirements were concerned so this was the required operating range for
telephone communications systems.

The hearing charts rarely display results above 12 kHz. as little
‘intelligence’ is thought to be required above this frequency. If you have
read this far (yawn) you may recall that a reference frequency is used
through calibrated transducers. The average television loudspeaker may well
not be calibrated and unlikely to have a linear frequency response even
when tested in an anechoic chamber, let alone a sitting room / kitchen /
bedroom etc. the result of this being that the output of the loudspeaker is
unlikely to be ‘flat’ and may well be ‘tilted up’ towards the higher end of
the frequency range. Assuming the volume of the television is set high
enough, it is quite possible that higher frequencies will still be audible
but, if the volume level is lowered, those higher frequencies will be
‘lost’ to that same ear or ears.

So, in summary, higher frequencies require higher levels relative to lower
ones to be audible to a person with hearing loss.

N.B. I have deliberately not muddied the waters by referring to such
factors as ‘loudness control’ featured on some amplifiers, ‘equal loudness
curves’, ‘A, B or C weighting’ or any other wibbling tools.

*this assumes other factors are equal.

THBAVBPSA.
HTH, HAND.
--
Toodle Pip
Mike
2020-07-05 11:28:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Nick Odell
I think I have mentioned this before: I can measure the frequency
range of my hearing by noting how far I can go up the piano keyboard
before the notes change from do, re, mi to the clunk, clunk, clunk of
the action.
We were watching the streaming service, Teatro Colon en Casa,
Prokofiev, Romeo y Julieta(1) and in the interval they played promos
for other concerts in the season. In one of the promos, this
twelve-year-old(3) sat down at the piano and was dashing away all over
the place. Including some tricky bits on the last octave.
Hang on a moment, I said to myself. I can hear that. And yes, I could
hear the notes tinkling away in the last octave.
So how did that happen then? Cunning use of EQ before the signal was
broadcast? Harmonics generated on other strings which are actually
lower but which make me think I can hear the real notes? Or what? For
the avoidance of doubt, I do not think my hearing has suddenly come
back: I still can not hear the highest notes on either an acoustic
concert grand or an electric baby grand played live.
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Nick
(1)Synopsis: Middle-aged woman and forgetful old man(2)meet and fall
in love. It ends badly.
(2)He forgot to put on his trousers before he came on stage
(3)Ooh! I have come on all Ed Reardon!
Thereby hangs a long very shaggy tail...
(Those who are easily bored may care to move along now please, nothing of
interestworth reading.)
When one carries out a hearing test, it is normal to establish a reference
point (usually the reference frequency will be a 1kHz sinewave . The level
at which the person being tested (testee?) can perceive the lowest level
(usually through calibrated headphones) is established as the reference.
This might be done by playing intervals of the tone at decreasing levels
until no longer audible to the testee. Having established the threshold
point, other frequency sinewaves will be played over the headphones whilst
the testee responds to the stimulus by confirming when they can hear a
tone. (Usually by pressing a button each time they can hear a tone.) as the
tones rise in frequency, a young ear will still hear clearly that which
starts to become ‘quieter’ to the ear of greater years.* The results are
displayed as points on a chart indicating the loss relative to the 1kHz.
sinewave. A young ear may well hear a 16 kHz. tone as well as a 1kHz tone
but a 70 year old ear may well not detect anything more than an octave
lower, (8kHz.) Speech intelligibility requires the ability to hear clearly
between 300 Hz. and 3 kHz. (+ or - 3dB.) as far as the old BT system
requirements were concerned so this was the required operating range for
telephone communications systems.
The hearing charts rarely display results above 12 kHz. as little
‘intelligence’ is thought to be required above this frequency. If you have
read this far (yawn) you may recall that a reference frequency is used
through calibrated transducers. The average television loudspeaker may well
not be calibrated and unlikely to have a linear frequency response even
when tested in an anechoic chamber, let alone a sitting room / kitchen /
bedroom etc. the result of this being that the output of the loudspeaker is
unlikely to be ‘flat’ and may well be ‘tilted up’ towards the higher end of
the frequency range. Assuming the volume of the television is set high
enough, it is quite possible that higher frequencies will still be audible
but, if the volume level is lowered, those higher frequencies will be
‘lost’ to that same ear or ears.
So, in summary, higher frequencies require higher levels relative to lower
ones to be audible to a person with hearing loss.
N.B. I have deliberately not muddied the waters by referring to such
factors as ‘loudness control’ featured on some amplifiers, ‘equal loudness
curves’, ‘A, B or C weighting’ or any other wibbling tools.
*this assumes other factors are equal.
THBAVBPSA.
HTH, HAND.
Might be worth adding that middle C is (for concert pitch anyway), 440 Hz.
An octave above middle C =880 Hz., 2 octaves above = 1760 Hz. and so on.
--
Toodle Pip
Clive Arthur
2020-07-05 13:46:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 05/07/2020 12:28, Mike wrote:
<snip>
Post by Mike
Might be worth adding that middle C is (for concert pitch anyway), 440 Hz.
A?
--
Cheers
Clive
Mike
2020-07-05 13:55:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Clive Arthur
<snip>
Post by Mike
Might be worth adding that middle C is (for concert pitch anyway), 440 Hz.
A?
Oooops! Yes, of course, silly me!
--
Toodle Pip
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2020-07-05 19:25:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by Nick Odell
I think I have mentioned this before: I can measure the frequency
range of my hearing by noting how far I can go up the piano keyboard
before the notes change from do, re, mi to the clunk, clunk, clunk of
the action.
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by Nick Odell
the place. Including some tricky bits on the last octave.
Hang on a moment, I said to myself. I can hear that. And yes, I could
hear the notes tinkling away in the last octave.
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
lower, (8kHz.) Speech intelligibility requires the ability to hear clearly
between 300 Hz. and 3 kHz. (+ or - 3dB.) as far as the old BT system
requirements were concerned so this was the required operating range for
telephone communications systems.
For male voices, needless to say. (Also Western.)
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
through calibrated transducers. The average television loudspeaker may well
not be calibrated and unlikely to have a linear frequency response even
when tested in an anechoic chamber, let alone a sitting room / kitchen /
bedroom etc. the result of this being that the output of the loudspeaker is
unlikely to be ‘flat’ and may well be ‘tilted up’ towards the higher end of
the frequency range. Assuming the volume of the television is set high
enough, it is quite possible that higher frequencies will still be audible
but, if the volume level is lowered, those higher frequencies will be
‘lost’ to that same ear or ears.
So, in summary, higher frequencies require higher levels relative to lower
ones to be audible to a person with hearing loss.
So, basically, you're saying that Nick's TV (or the complete chain, from
original source all the way through to Nick's sound system in his room)
might have significantly higher gain in the low kHz range than the
flatness of "real life" when Nick plays his own piano.

(Nick, when you do that, can you hear the notes _at all_, if you really
play them loudly, or do you just hear louder thunks from the
action/mechanism? If the latter, then I don't think system non-linearity
is the explanation [of why Nick could hear upper piano from the TV].)
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
N.B. I have deliberately not muddied the waters by referring to such
factors as ‘loudness control’ featured on some amplifiers, ‘equal loudness
curves’, ‘A, B or C weighting’ or any other wibbling tools.
(-: I like a good wibbling tool.
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
*this assumes other factors are equal.
THBAVBPSA.
HTH, HAND.
Might be worth adding that middle C is (for concert pitch anyway), 440 Hz.
An octave above middle C =880 Hz., 2 octaves above = 1760 Hz. and so on.
A I think? C is 256 Hz on some early synthesized systems, as easy to
generate from easily-available references. (Then we get into top-octave
synthesizers ...)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

One of my tricks as an armchair futurist is to "predict" things that are
already happening and watch people tell me it will never happen.
Scott Adams, 2015-3-9
Nick Odell
2020-07-05 20:35:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 5 Jul 2020 20:25:41 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by Nick Odell
I think I have mentioned this before: I can measure the frequency
range of my hearing by noting how far I can go up the piano keyboard
before the notes change from do, re, mi to the clunk, clunk, clunk of
the action.
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by Nick Odell
the place. Including some tricky bits on the last octave.
Hang on a moment, I said to myself. I can hear that. And yes, I could
hear the notes tinkling away in the last octave.
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
lower, (8kHz.) Speech intelligibility requires the ability to hear clearly
between 300 Hz. and 3 kHz. (+ or - 3dB.) as far as the old BT system
requirements were concerned so this was the required operating range for
telephone communications systems.
For male voices, needless to say. (Also Western.)
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
through calibrated transducers. The average television loudspeaker may well
not be calibrated and unlikely to have a linear frequency response even
when tested in an anechoic chamber, let alone a sitting room / kitchen /
bedroom etc. the result of this being that the output of the loudspeaker is
unlikely to be ‘flat’ and may well be ‘tilted up’ towards the
higher end of
the frequency range. Assuming the volume of the television is set high
enough, it is quite possible that higher frequencies will still be audible
but, if the volume level is lowered, those higher frequencies will be
‘lost’ to that same ear or ears.
So, in summary, higher frequencies require higher levels relative to lower
ones to be audible to a person with hearing loss.
So, basically, you're saying that Nick's TV (or the complete chain, from
original source all the way through to Nick's sound system in his room)
might have significantly higher gain in the low kHz range than the
flatness of "real life" when Nick plays his own piano.
The TV in question is plugged into the av(0)input of a very nice hi-fi
separates set-up(1) With all the equalisation set in the middle notch
I trust the hi-fi to be sending a flat signal to the speakers - which
I also trust to be doing their job without boosting or attenuating
frequencies. I am sure the microphones in the hall are organised so
that they do not pick up the piano mechanics and have a wider
frequency range than the instruments so whilst I would not expect to
hear the action, I would expect the high notes to be, at the very
least, quieter or more dull(2)
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
(Nick, when you do that, can you hear the notes _at all_, if you really
play them loudly, or do you just hear louder thunks from the
action/mechanism? If the latter, then I don't think system non-linearity
is the explanation [of why Nick could hear upper piano from the TV].)
I can hear nothing extra from the Electric Baby Grand. With the
Concert Grand I hear nothing extra but I am aware of a shivering of
the bodywork which tells me something is vibrating(3)
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
N.B. I have deliberately not muddied the waters by referring to such
factors as ‘loudness control’ featured on some amplifiers,
‘equal loudness
curves’, ‘A, B or C weighting’ or any other wibbling tools.
(-: I like a good wibbling tool.
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
*this assumes other factors are equal.
THBAVBPSA.
HTH, HAND.
Might be worth adding that middle C is (for concert pitch anyway), 440 Hz.
An octave above middle C =880 Hz., 2 octaves above = 1760 Hz. and so on.
A I think? C is 256 Hz on some early synthesized systems, as easy to
generate from easily-available references. (Then we get into top-octave
synthesizers ...)
Nick
(0)Which I trust stands for audio-visual device
(1)Even the speaker leads would make Russ Andrews jealous
(2)I know hearing does not just cut off - there is a bell curve effect
so a lot of things I could not hear ordinarily might well be available
to me if the volume were turned up higher. But we are not listening
with excessive volume and the high highs from that piano recording
sound proportionate to the rest of the notes.
(3)Users of Stratocaster electric guitars can get the same experience
by holding the instrument and slapping it on the base (not bass) and
feeling the tremolo springs shiver in response.
BrritSki
2020-07-05 20:46:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Odell
by holding the instrument and slapping it on the base (not bass) and
feeling the tremolo springs shiver in response.
Steady on Nick, this is a family newsgroup you know...
Sid Nuncius
2020-07-06 04:32:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Nick Odell
by holding the instrument and slapping it on the base (not bass) and
feeling the tremolo springs shiver in response.
Steady on Nick, this is a family newsgroup you know...
Nugger. *Always* read to the end of the thread before posting.

Sorry, Britters.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
BrritSki
2020-07-06 07:23:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Nick Odell
by holding the instrument and slapping it on the base (not bass) and
feeling the tremolo springs shiver in response.
Steady on Nick, this is a family newsgroup you know...
Nugger.  *Always* read to the end of the thread before posting.
Sorry, Britters.
:)
Mike
2020-07-06 07:44:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by BrritSki
Post by Nick Odell
by holding the instrument and slapping it on the base (not bass) and
feeling the tremolo springs shiver in response.
Steady on Nick, this is a family newsgroup you know...
Nugger. *Always* read to the end of the thread before posting.
Sorry, Britters.
You can always rely on Britters....
--
Toodle Pip
Sid Nuncius
2020-07-06 04:31:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Odell
(3)Users of Stratocaster electric guitars can get the same experience
by holding the instrument and slapping it on the base (not bass) and
feeling the tremolo springs shiver in response.
I was going to post something in response, but on second thoughts I'll
leave it to Brritski.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Mike
2020-07-06 08:32:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Odell
On Sun, 5 Jul 2020 20:25:41 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by Nick Odell
I think I have mentioned this before: I can measure the frequency
range of my hearing by noting how far I can go up the piano keyboard
before the notes change from do, re, mi to the clunk, clunk, clunk of
the action.
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by Nick Odell
the place. Including some tricky bits on the last octave.
Hang on a moment, I said to myself. I can hear that. And yes, I could
hear the notes tinkling away in the last octave.
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
lower, (8kHz.) Speech intelligibility requires the ability to hear clearly
between 300 Hz. and 3 kHz. (+ or - 3dB.) as far as the old BT system
requirements were concerned so this was the required operating range for
telephone communications systems.
For male voices, needless to say. (Also Western.)
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
through calibrated transducers. The average television loudspeaker may well
not be calibrated and unlikely to have a linear frequency response even
when tested in an anechoic chamber, let alone a sitting room / kitchen /
bedroom etc. the result of this being that the output of the loudspeaker is
unlikely to be ‘flat’ and may well be ‘tilted up’ towards the
higher end of
the frequency range. Assuming the volume of the television is set high
enough, it is quite possible that higher frequencies will still be audible
but, if the volume level is lowered, those higher frequencies will be
‘lost’ to that same ear or ears.
So, in summary, higher frequencies require higher levels relative to lower
ones to be audible to a person with hearing loss.
So, basically, you're saying that Nick's TV (or the complete chain, from
original source all the way through to Nick's sound system in his room)
might have significantly higher gain in the low kHz range than the
flatness of "real life" when Nick plays his own piano.
The TV in question is plugged into the av(0)input of a very nice hi-fi
separates set-up(1) With all the equalisation set in the middle notch
I trust the hi-fi to be sending a flat signal to the speakers - which
I also trust to be doing their job without boosting or attenuating
frequencies. I am sure the microphones in the hall are organised so
that they do not pick up the piano mechanics and have a wider
frequency range than the instruments so whilst I would not expect to
hear the action, I would expect the high notes to be, at the very
least, quieter or more dull(2)
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
(Nick, when you do that, can you hear the notes _at all_, if you really
play them loudly, or do you just hear louder thunks from the
action/mechanism? If the latter, then I don't think system non-linearity
is the explanation [of why Nick could hear upper piano from the TV].)
I can hear nothing extra from the Electric Baby Grand. With the
Concert Grand I hear nothing extra but I am aware of a shivering of
the bodywork which tells me something is vibrating(3)
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
N.B. I have deliberately not muddied the waters by referring to such
factors as ‘loudness control’ featured on some amplifiers,
‘equal loudness
curves’, ‘A, B or C weighting’ or any other wibbling tools.
(-: I like a good wibbling tool.
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
*this assumes other factors are equal.
THBAVBPSA.
HTH, HAND.
Might be worth adding that middle C is (for concert pitch anyway), 440 Hz.
An octave above middle C =880 Hz., 2 octaves above = 1760 Hz. and so on.
A I think? C is 256 Hz on some early synthesized systems, as easy to
generate from easily-available references. (Then we get into top-octave
synthesizers ...)
Nick
(0)Which I trust stands for audio-visual device
(1)Even the speaker leads would make Russ Andrews jealous
(2)I know hearing does not just cut off - there is a bell curve effect
so a lot of things I could not hear ordinarily might well be available
to me if the volume were turned up higher. But we are not listening
with excessive volume and the high highs from that piano recording
sound proportionate to the rest of the notes.
(3)Users of Stratocaster electric guitars can get the same experience
by holding the instrument and slapping it on the base (not bass) and
feeling the tremolo springs shiver in response.
Nick, by no means a complete explanation, but, this might be a starting
point for you:

https://usabilitygeek.com/improve-sound-understanding-room-acoustics/
--
Toodle Pip
Nick Odell
2020-07-07 00:01:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Nick Odell
On Sun, 5 Jul 2020 20:25:41 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by Nick Odell
I think I have mentioned this before: I can measure the frequency
range of my hearing by noting how far I can go up the piano keyboard
before the notes change from do, re, mi to the clunk, clunk, clunk of
the action.
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by Nick Odell
the place. Including some tricky bits on the last octave.
Hang on a moment, I said to myself. I can hear that. And yes, I could
hear the notes tinkling away in the last octave.
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
lower, (8kHz.) Speech intelligibility requires the ability to hear clearly
between 300 Hz. and 3 kHz. (+ or - 3dB.) as far as the old BT system
requirements were concerned so this was the required operating range for
telephone communications systems.
For male voices, needless to say. (Also Western.)
[]
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
through calibrated transducers. The average television loudspeaker may well
not be calibrated and unlikely to have a linear frequency response even
when tested in an anechoic chamber, let alone a sitting room / kitchen /
bedroom etc. the result of this being that the output of the loudspeaker is
unlikely to be ?flat? and may well be ?tilted up? towards the
higher end of
the frequency range. Assuming the volume of the television is set high
enough, it is quite possible that higher frequencies will still be audible
but, if the volume level is lowered, those higher frequencies will be
?lost? to that same ear or ears.
So, in summary, higher frequencies require higher levels relative to lower
ones to be audible to a person with hearing loss.
So, basically, you're saying that Nick's TV (or the complete chain, from
original source all the way through to Nick's sound system in his room)
might have significantly higher gain in the low kHz range than the
flatness of "real life" when Nick plays his own piano.
The TV in question is plugged into the av(0)input of a very nice hi-fi
separates set-up(1) With all the equalisation set in the middle notch
I trust the hi-fi to be sending a flat signal to the speakers - which
I also trust to be doing their job without boosting or attenuating
frequencies. I am sure the microphones in the hall are organised so
that they do not pick up the piano mechanics and have a wider
frequency range than the instruments so whilst I would not expect to
hear the action, I would expect the high notes to be, at the very
least, quieter or more dull(2)
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
(Nick, when you do that, can you hear the notes _at all_, if you really
play them loudly, or do you just hear louder thunks from the
action/mechanism? If the latter, then I don't think system non-linearity
is the explanation [of why Nick could hear upper piano from the TV].)
I can hear nothing extra from the Electric Baby Grand. With the
Concert Grand I hear nothing extra but I am aware of a shivering of
the bodywork which tells me something is vibrating(3)
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
N.B. I have deliberately not muddied the waters by referring to such
factors as ?loudness control? featured on some amplifiers,
?equal loudness
curves?, ?A, B or C weighting? or any other wibbling tools.
(-: I like a good wibbling tool.
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
*this assumes other factors are equal.
THBAVBPSA.
HTH, HAND.
Might be worth adding that middle C is (for concert pitch anyway), 440 Hz.
An octave above middle C =880 Hz., 2 octaves above = 1760 Hz. and so on.
A I think? C is 256 Hz on some early synthesized systems, as easy to
generate from easily-available references. (Then we get into top-octave
synthesizers ...)
Nick
(0)Which I trust stands for audio-visual device
(1)Even the speaker leads would make Russ Andrews jealous
(2)I know hearing does not just cut off - there is a bell curve effect
so a lot of things I could not hear ordinarily might well be available
to me if the volume were turned up higher. But we are not listening
with excessive volume and the high highs from that piano recording
sound proportionate to the rest of the notes.
(3)Users of Stratocaster electric guitars can get the same experience
by holding the instrument and slapping it on the base (not bass) and
feeling the tremolo springs shiver in response.
Nick, by no means a complete explanation, but, this might be a starting
https://usabilitygeek.com/improve-sound-understanding-room-acoustics/
Thanks Mike, an interesting article though not a lot there that I have
not already done to help other people with their amplification
problems over the years.

Last night the concert from Teatro Colon featured Martha Argerich. My
eyes were metaphorically glued to her fingers but sadly she did not
play anything that wandered into the final octave so I could compare
-erme- notes.

Nick
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2020-07-06 22:56:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 at 21:01:03, Nick Odell
<***@themusicworkshop.plus.com> wrote:
[]
Post by Nick Odell
Last night the concert from Teatro Colon featured Martha Argerich. My
eyes were metaphorically glued to her fingers but sadly she did not
play anything that wandered into the final octave so I could compare
-erme- notes.
Nick
Perhaps UMRAts would care to nominate various performances with
something in the top octave for Nick to try? I'll start the ball rolling
- this is a wide variety of ages of recording, too (and pianos):


Lisitsa Liszt HR2 (great fun) - from about 2:00, 5:15, 6:19, 7:09, 7:43,
8:16, and particularly 8:53


The Poor People of Paris (lots of top in that)


Polonaise - there's a good rising scale at 5:20


Pesce Birthday - 3:20


LDI (B&F) - just two places, 0:37 and 5:12
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

For this star a "night on the tiles" means winning at Scrabble - Kathy Lette
(on Kylie), RT 2014/1/11-17
Nick Odell
2020-07-07 21:37:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 23:56:34 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 at 21:01:03, Nick Odell
[]
Post by Nick Odell
Last night the concert from Teatro Colon featured Martha Argerich. My
eyes were metaphorically glued to her fingers but sadly she did not
play anything that wandered into the final octave so I could compare
-erme- notes.
Nick
Perhaps UMRAts would care to nominate various performances with
something in the top octave for Nick to try? I'll start the ball rolling
http://youtu.be/LdH1hSWGFGU
Lisitsa Liszt HR2 (great fun) - from about 2:00, 5:15, 6:19, 7:09, 7:43,
8:16, and particularly 8:53
http://youtu.be/eY_PabVEUbY
The Poor People of Paris (lots of top in that)
http://youtu.be/3OTRa2FeSGs
Polonaise - there's a good rising scale at 5:20
http://youtu.be/S75gYhODS0M
Pesce Birthday - 3:20
http://youtu.be/uSBuPTLh8BE
LDI (B&F) - just two places, 0:37 and 5:12
That was fun! Thank you, John!

As you said, the Winifred Atwell had lots of top - even across all of
the bass range! I will come back to that...

One or two I could not not see where the fingers were at the right
moment - that included the WA. I could hear the high notes better
there. The others were interesting because as I watched I could or
could not hear the high notes as they were played or maybe heard them
more weakly than the rest.

I am coming to the conclusion that some psycology is at play here. One
little game I have played with people is to ask them to listen to
something like Fleetwood Mac "The Chain" on a transistor radio with a
2" speaker. Fantastic bass notes, no? Well... no. That speaker has no
meaningful function below 300Hz so what you are listening to are the
overtones or harmonics of the bass but the brain knows they are
harmonics and pencills in the missing bits so you "hear" the
fundamental.

Could this be happening to me the opposite way around? Could it be
that I can hear the first and the third of a chord and so I know where
the fifth and the octave ought to be and, with help of a little
harmonic content from elsewhere, my brain fills in the gaps? Would
that go some way to explaining why I thought I could hear what I could
not see but experienced loss when I was looking at the fingers? The WA
was just a jangle of brightness and such a harmonic overload that she
could have been playing almost anything in any part of the keyboard.
But I am still left wondering about the performance that started all
this off....

Nick
Penny
2020-07-07 19:22:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 07 Jul 2020 18:37:48 -0300, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
I am coming to the conclusion that some psycology is at play here. One
little game I have played with people is to ask them to listen to
something like Fleetwood Mac "The Chain" on a transistor radio with a
2" speaker. Fantastic bass notes, no? Well... no. That speaker has no
meaningful function below 300Hz so what you are listening to are the
overtones or harmonics of the bass but the brain knows they are
harmonics and pencills in the missing bits so you "hear" the
fundamental.
Could this be happening to me the opposite way around? Could it be
that I can hear the first and the third of a chord and so I know where
the fifth and the octave ought to be and, with help of a little
harmonic content from elsewhere, my brain fills in the gaps? Would
that go some way to explaining why I thought I could hear what I could
not see but experienced loss when I was looking at the fingers?
That was my thinking.
Brains are good at filling in the gaps.
They don't always get them right but can be very convincing.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2020-07-07 20:04:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 18:37:48, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 23:56:34 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
[]
Post by Nick Odell
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Perhaps UMRAts would care to nominate various performances with
something in the top octave for Nick to try? I'll start the ball rolling
http://youtu.be/LdH1hSWGFGU
Lisitsa Liszt HR2 (great fun) - from about 2:00, 5:15, 6:19, 7:09, 7:43,
8:16, and particularly 8:53
http://youtu.be/eY_PabVEUbY
The Poor People of Paris (lots of top in that)
http://youtu.be/3OTRa2FeSGs
Polonaise - there's a good rising scale at 5:20
http://youtu.be/S75gYhODS0M
Pesce Birthday - 3:20
http://youtu.be/uSBuPTLh8BE
LDI (B&F) - just two places, 0:37 and 5:12
That was fun! Thank you, John!
Well, they're obviously pieces - and performances - that I like. Lisitsa
is just fun to watch, and of course HR2 - especially from 6 minutes in
when you get to the bit everyone knows - is a fun piece. (Also referred
to in "Lobachevsky".) The WA one I really wanted was one where she plays
Waltzing Matilda on the building site of the Sydney Opera House (same
piano; they dragged it thither) to the obvious bemusement of some of the
builders; you _can_ see when she's in the top octave there. But I
couldn't find it on YouTube now - I can certainly email it. The
Polonaise I just like the piece, and the performer was historically
interesting/significant. Pesce is fun for obvious reasons, and when I
found it _did_ include some top-octave notes, I had to include it. And
who doesn't love Barry and Freda - actually not my favourite recording,
that's the one with the small band including (tubular I think) bells,
but I couldn't see her fingers in that.
Post by Nick Odell
As you said, the Winifred Atwell had lots of top - even across all of
the bass range! I will come back to that...
(I actually meant she plays near the top end a lot, more than I felt
like noting the times.)
Well, it's "her other piano" - well-worn, hardened hammers and worn
dampers, basically "honky-tonk" - and also the age of the recording
probably had some bearing on that.
Post by Nick Odell
One or two I could not not see where the fingers were at the right
moment - that included the WA. I could hear the high notes better
there. The others were interesting because as I watched I could or
could not hear the high notes as they were played or maybe heard them
more weakly than the rest.
I am coming to the conclusion that some psycology is at play here. One
little game I have played with people is to ask them to listen to
Auditory psychology is fascinating. It's what allows MP3 (and some of
the others) to compress as they do; it's fun to compare a spectrogram of
an original .wav with that of the same piece at various levels of MP3
compression (and sample rates). Sometimes, even though I both _know_ and
can see that the encoding has left bits out, I can't hear the
difference! (Equally, sometimes I can even if I _can't_ see the
difference.)
Post by Nick Odell
something like Fleetwood Mac "The Chain" on a transistor radio with a
Better known - assuming you mean the end part - as Formula 1 (not the
current version - the one that starts with about nine notes on bass [!]
guitar, and later has screaming guitar). I have read discussions -
apparently that's a product of processing - change of attack and eq.;
apparently Umbrella himself can't reproduce it by just playing.
Post by Nick Odell
2" speaker. Fantastic bass notes, no? Well... no. That speaker has no
meaningful function below 300Hz so what you are listening to are the
overtones or harmonics of the bass but the brain knows they are
harmonics and pencills in the missing bits so you "hear" the
fundamental.
Same with a lot of actual pianos: in very few - mainly some Bosendorfer
ones - are the fundamentals of the notes right at the bottom, of greater
magnitude than the harmonics. But the brain inserts them (or increases
their magnitude). Similarly with organ pieces (the obvious Bach, though
I actually slightly prefer the Widor) - there, it's usually the
reproduction equipment you're listening on that can't do the bass, but
as long as it does a _reasonable_ job, the brain fills it in.

(Actually, that Widor might be good for the current discussion - it has
some high notes too. And any well-known piece with a lot of triangle in
it.)
Post by Nick Odell
Could this be happening to me the opposite way around? Could it be
that I can hear the first and the third of a chord and so I know where
the fifth and the octave ought to be and, with help of a little
harmonic content from elsewhere, my brain fills in the gaps? Would
I can't see how that could happen from first principles; however, if
it's a piece you _know_ (or can _see_ that the pianist is playing such a
chord), I could imagine brain-fill could do it. As Penny says, the brain
_is_ very clever at filling in such.
[]
Post by Nick Odell
But I am still left wondering about the performance that started all
this off....
Nick
John
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first
duty of intelligent men. In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will
be a revolutionary act - Orwell
Penny
2020-07-05 22:54:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 05 Jul 2020 08:42:28 GMT, Mike <***@ntlworld.com> scrawled
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Thereby hangs a long very shaggy tail...
I have read the problem, I have read the response and may even have
understood some of it. I now wish to ask a question of my own.

I complained a while back (probably a few months) that the continuity
announcers of BBC Wales always sound as if they are talking through cotton
wool - I hadn't noticed this on other stations and was thinking of putting
in a complaint.

This is still the case but I have been paying a little more attention and
realise many of the announcers on TV are male - I have no trouble with
them. BBC Wales uses several female CAs, maybe it's something to do with
pitch. I'm starting to get the same problem with other female voices on TV,
it's very annoying.

I've tried to adjust the TV sound - my tendency has always been to increase
the bass and decrease the top end to get rid of tinniness (Ray used to
complain about the settings I used) - but it hasn't helped at all.
I suppose I have now lost my ability to hear tinniness. What can I do about
this? Would plugging in other speakers help?
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Steve Hague
2020-07-06 07:21:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Thereby hangs a long very shaggy tail...
I have read the problem, I have read the response and may even have
understood some of it. I now wish to ask a question of my own.
I complained a while back (probably a few months) that the continuity
announcers of BBC Wales always sound as if they are talking through cotton
wool - I hadn't noticed this on other stations and was thinking of putting
in a complaint.
This is still the case but I have been paying a little more attention and
realise many of the announcers on TV are male - I have no trouble with
them. BBC Wales uses several female CAs, maybe it's something to do with
pitch. I'm starting to get the same problem with other female voices on TV,
it's very annoying.
I've tried to adjust the TV sound - my tendency has always been to increase
the bass and decrease the top end to get rid of tinniness (Ray used to
complain about the settings I used) - but it hasn't helped at all.
I suppose I have now lost my ability to hear tinniness. What can I do about
this? Would plugging in other speakers help?
I've no personal experience, but customers with hearing loss have told
me in the past that wireless headphones help enormously.
Steve
Penny
2020-07-06 08:14:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 08:21:34 +0100, Steve Hague <***@gmail.com>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Steve Hague
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Thereby hangs a long very shaggy tail...
I have read the problem, I have read the response and may even have
understood some of it. I now wish to ask a question of my own.
I complained a while back (probably a few months) that the continuity
announcers of BBC Wales always sound as if they are talking through cotton
wool - I hadn't noticed this on other stations and was thinking of putting
in a complaint.
This is still the case but I have been paying a little more attention and
realise many of the announcers on TV are male - I have no trouble with
them. BBC Wales uses several female CAs, maybe it's something to do with
pitch. I'm starting to get the same problem with other female voices on TV,
it's very annoying.
I've tried to adjust the TV sound - my tendency has always been to increase
the bass and decrease the top end to get rid of tinniness (Ray used to
complain about the settings I used) - but it hasn't helped at all.
I suppose I have now lost my ability to hear tinniness. What can I do about
this? Would plugging in other speakers help?
I've no personal experience, but customers with hearing loss have told
me in the past that wireless headphones help enormously.
Steve
Would that require some sort of bluetooth function on the TV? I don't think
my 12 year-old set has that.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Jenny M Benson
2020-07-06 09:34:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
Post by Steve Hague
I've no personal experience, but customers with hearing loss have told
me in the past that wireless headphones help enormously.
Steve
Would that require some sort of bluetooth function on the TV? I don't think
my 12 year-old set has that.
I used to have wireless headphones for my TV. (It would have been about
12 years ago, so older TV than yours) There was a "base unit" which
plugged into the earphone socket on the TV and the headphones were hung
on that to recharge when not in use.
--
Jenny M Benson
Wrexham, UK
Penny
2020-07-06 14:40:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 10:34:49 +0100, Jenny M Benson <***@hotmail.co.uk>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Jenny M Benson
Post by Penny
Post by Steve Hague
I've no personal experience, but customers with hearing loss have told
me in the past that wireless headphones help enormously.
Steve
Would that require some sort of bluetooth function on the TV? I don't think
my 12 year-old set has that.
I used to have wireless headphones for my TV. (It would have been about
12 years ago, so older TV than yours) There was a "base unit" which
plugged into the earphone socket on the TV and the headphones were hung
on that to recharge when not in use.
Hm, no earphone socket here, though there are two sets of twin audio
sockets and only one pair is labelled 'in' so if it comes with twin jacks
those might work.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Steve Hague
2020-07-07 07:06:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Jenny M Benson
Post by Penny
Post by Steve Hague
I've no personal experience, but customers with hearing loss have told
me in the past that wireless headphones help enormously.
Steve
Would that require some sort of bluetooth function on the TV? I don't think
my 12 year-old set has that.
I used to have wireless headphones for my TV. (It would have been about
12 years ago, so older TV than yours) There was a "base unit" which
plugged into the earphone socket on the TV and the headphones were hung
on that to recharge when not in use.
Hm, no earphone socket here, though there are two sets of twin audio
sockets and only one pair is labelled 'in' so if it comes with twin jacks
those might work.
Those sockets would be phono rather than jack, so unsuitable without
extra equipment.
Steve
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2020-07-07 14:30:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Hague
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Jenny M Benson
Post by Penny
Post by Steve Hague
I've no personal experience, but customers with hearing loss have told
me in the past that wireless headphones help enormously.
Steve
Would that require some sort of bluetooth function on the TV? I don't think
my 12 year-old set has that.
I used to have wireless headphones for my TV. (It would have been about
12 years ago, so older TV than yours) There was a "base unit" which
plugged into the earphone socket on the TV and the headphones were hung
on that to recharge when not in use.
Hm, no earphone socket here, though there are two sets of twin audio
sockets and only one pair is labelled 'in' so if it comes with twin jacks
those might work.
Those sockets would be phono rather than jack, so unsuitable without
extra equipment.
Steve
Provided they are actually outputs, they'd probably work with most
wireless headphones; the base unit in those doesn't necessarily have a
low-impedance input. (It might, but I'd be surprised; even if it did,
I'd be surprised if it wasn't just resistors that could be removed,
though that would invalidate the guarantee.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

It is important to write so that you can be understood. It is far more
important to write so that you cannot be misunderstood.
krw
2020-07-07 10:05:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Hague
I've no personal experience, but customers with hearing loss have told
me in the past that wireless headphones help enormously.
Why wireless and not wired?
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Penny
2020-07-07 12:48:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 11:05:35 +0100, krw <***@whitnet.uk> scrawled in the
dust...
Post by krw
Post by Steve Hague
I've no personal experience, but customers with hearing loss have told
me in the past that wireless headphones help enormously.
Why wireless and not wired?
Presumably for practical reasons, I sit about 11 ft from my TV.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
krw
2020-07-07 18:21:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
dust...
Post by krw
Post by Steve Hague
I've no personal experience, but customers with hearing loss have told
me in the past that wireless headphones help enormously.
Why wireless and not wired?
Presumably for practical reasons, I sit about 11 ft from my TV.
Ahh I had assumed there was some technical reason behind the suggestion.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Steve Hague
2020-07-08 07:46:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by krw
Post by Penny
dust...
Post by krw
Post by Steve Hague
I've no personal experience, but customers with hearing loss have told
me in the past that wireless headphones help enormously.
Why wireless and not wired?
Presumably for practical reasons, I sit about 11 ft from my TV.
Ahh I had assumed there was some technical reason behind the suggestion.
No, just the lack of a tether.
Steve
Mike
2020-07-06 07:43:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Thereby hangs a long very shaggy tail...
I have read the problem, I have read the response and may even have
understood some of it. I now wish to ask a question of my own.
I complained a while back (probably a few months) that the continuity
announcers of BBC Wales always sound as if they are talking through cotton
wool - I hadn't noticed this on other stations and was thinking of putting
in a complaint.
This is still the case but I have been paying a little more attention and
realise many of the announcers on TV are male - I have no trouble with
them. BBC Wales uses several female CAs, maybe it's something to do with
pitch. I'm starting to get the same problem with other female voices on TV,
it's very annoying.
I've tried to adjust the TV sound - my tendency has always been to increase
the bass and decrease the top end to get rid of tinniness (Ray used to
complain about the settings I used) - but it hasn't helped at all.
I suppose I have now lost my ability to hear tinniness. What can I do about
this? Would plugging in other speakers help?
As it is the higher registers that are ‘falling off, I think you need to at
least remove the decrease in the top end and you might also find setting
the bass to neutral setting would help, the ‘eq’ you are currently using is
probably making matters worse.
--
Toodle Pip
Penny
2020-07-06 08:16:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 06 Jul 2020 07:43:02 GMT, Mike <***@ntlworld.com> scrawled
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Thereby hangs a long very shaggy tail...
I have read the problem, I have read the response and may even have
understood some of it. I now wish to ask a question of my own.
I complained a while back (probably a few months) that the continuity
announcers of BBC Wales always sound as if they are talking through cotton
wool - I hadn't noticed this on other stations and was thinking of putting
in a complaint.
This is still the case but I have been paying a little more attention and
realise many of the announcers on TV are male - I have no trouble with
them. BBC Wales uses several female CAs, maybe it's something to do with
pitch. I'm starting to get the same problem with other female voices on TV,
it's very annoying.
I've tried to adjust the TV sound - my tendency has always been to increase
the bass and decrease the top end to get rid of tinniness (Ray used to
complain about the settings I used) - but it hasn't helped at all.
I suppose I have now lost my ability to hear tinniness. What can I do about
this? Would plugging in other speakers help?
As it is the higher registers that are ‘falling off, I think you need to at
least remove the decrease in the top end and you might also find setting
the bass to neutral setting would help, the ‘eq’ you are currently using is
probably making matters worse.
I'll try it again but the adjustments I made were to more or less reverse
the settings I'd been using which should have reduced the bass and
increased the top end.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Mike
2020-07-06 08:25:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Thereby hangs a long very shaggy tail...
I have read the problem, I have read the response and may even have
understood some of it. I now wish to ask a question of my own.
I complained a while back (probably a few months) that the continuity
announcers of BBC Wales always sound as if they are talking through cotton
wool - I hadn't noticed this on other stations and was thinking of putting
in a complaint.
This is still the case but I have been paying a little more attention and
realise many of the announcers on TV are male - I have no trouble with
them. BBC Wales uses several female CAs, maybe it's something to do with
pitch. I'm starting to get the same problem with other female voices on TV,
it's very annoying.
I've tried to adjust the TV sound - my tendency has always been to increase
the bass and decrease the top end to get rid of tinniness (Ray used to
complain about the settings I used) - but it hasn't helped at all.
I suppose I have now lost my ability to hear tinniness. What can I do about
this? Would plugging in other speakers help?
As it is the higher registers that are ‘falling off, I think you need to at
least remove the decrease in the top end and you might also find setting
the bass to neutral setting would help, the ‘eq’ you are currently using is
probably making matters worse.
I'll try it again but the adjustments I made were to more or less reverse
the settings I'd been using which should have reduced the bass and
increased the top end.
Wot you sed woz, ‘to increase the bass and decrease the top end to get rid
of tinniness’; this would have done the opposite to that which you require!
--
Toodle Pip
Penny
2020-07-06 14:35:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 06 Jul 2020 08:25:18 GMT, Mike <***@ntlworld.com> scrawled
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
I've tried to adjust the TV sound - my tendency has always been to increase
the bass and decrease the top end to get rid of tinniness (Ray used to
complain about the settings I used) - but it hasn't helped at all.
I suppose I have now lost my ability to hear tinniness. What can I do about
this? Would plugging in other speakers help?
As it is the higher registers that are ‘falling off, I think you need to at
least remove the decrease in the top end and you might also find setting
the bass to neutral setting would help, the ‘eq’ you are currently using is
probably making matters worse.
I'll try it again but the adjustments I made were to more or less reverse
the settings I'd been using which should have reduced the bass and
increased the top end.
Wot you sed woz, ‘to increase the bass and decrease the top end to get rid
of tinniness’; this would have done the opposite to that which you require!
Yes, that was the settings I had them on when I set it up when it was new,
before recent adjustment.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Penny
2020-07-08 14:23:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 06 Jul 2020 07:43:02 GMT, Mike <***@ntlworld.com> scrawled
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
I've tried to adjust the TV sound - my tendency has always been to increase
the bass and decrease the top end to get rid of tinniness (Ray used to
complain about the settings I used) - but it hasn't helped at all.
I suppose I have now lost my ability to hear tinniness. What can I do about
this? Would plugging in other speakers help?
As it is the higher registers that are ‘falling off, I think you need to at
least remove the decrease in the top end and you might also find setting
the bass to neutral setting would help, the ‘eq’ you are currently using is
probably making matters worse.
The problem with making adjustments is the need for a consistent 'fuzzy'
voice for more than a few seconds while you mess around. A 'fuzzy' chap
turned up on a news programme yesterday and I ran down the presets while he
was talking. The 'Sports' setting gave the best result so I've left it
there to see how I get on. It's annoying that the presets don't display as
various ranges (as the 'user' adjuster does) or I'd be able to take that as
a base-line and tweak from there.

There does seem to be much more to it than pitch but with programmes coming
from so many different sources all probably using different tech and
handling it differently, it's a wonder anyone outside the 'trained ear'
manages to hear anything.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Vicky Ayech
2020-07-06 08:17:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Thereby hangs a long very shaggy tail...
I have read the problem, I have read the response and may even have
understood some of it. I now wish to ask a question of my own.
I complained a while back (probably a few months) that the continuity
announcers of BBC Wales always sound as if they are talking through cotton
wool - I hadn't noticed this on other stations and was thinking of putting
in a complaint.
This is still the case but I have been paying a little more attention and
realise many of the announcers on TV are male - I have no trouble with
them. BBC Wales uses several female CAs, maybe it's something to do with
pitch. I'm starting to get the same problem with other female voices on TV,
it's very annoying.
I've tried to adjust the TV sound - my tendency has always been to increase
the bass and decrease the top end to get rid of tinniness (Ray used to
complain about the settings I used) - but it hasn't helped at all.
I suppose I have now lost my ability to hear tinniness. What can I do about
this? Would plugging in other speakers help?
I find the ability to hear voices clearly varies from presenter to
presenter and accents make a difference now. Also whether I am wearing
hearing aids or not. I don't when listening via Alexa in bed. She can
do louder or quieter but no other setting and I can make the tv louder
in the same way. Accompanying music really gets in the way.
Mike
2020-07-06 08:28:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Mike
Thereby hangs a long very shaggy tail...
I have read the problem, I have read the response and may even have
understood some of it. I now wish to ask a question of my own.
I complained a while back (probably a few months) that the continuity
announcers of BBC Wales always sound as if they are talking through cotton
wool - I hadn't noticed this on other stations and was thinking of putting
in a complaint.
This is still the case but I have been paying a little more attention and
realise many of the announcers on TV are male - I have no trouble with
them. BBC Wales uses several female CAs, maybe it's something to do with
pitch. I'm starting to get the same problem with other female voices on TV,
it's very annoying.
I've tried to adjust the TV sound - my tendency has always been to increase
the bass and decrease the top end to get rid of tinniness (Ray used to
complain about the settings I used) - but it hasn't helped at all.
I suppose I have now lost my ability to hear tinniness. What can I do about
this? Would plugging in other speakers help?
I find the ability to hear voices clearly varies from presenter to
presenter and accents make a difference now. Also whether I am wearing
hearing aids or not. I don't when listening via Alexa in bed. She can
do louder or quieter but no other setting and I can make the tv louder
in the same way. Accompanying music really gets in the way.
According to Amazon, there are ‘equalisation’ settings for the Echo units,
but I think they are very crude and not very effective.
--
Toodle Pip
krw
2020-07-07 10:55:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
Accompanying music really gets in the way.
Talking of which we had a discussion hereabouts some months ago when I
said the music on The Chase is not a problem and an umrat (apologies for
not recalling identity said it was).

When I playing the tv sound through our ancient flat screen but notsmart
tv the words are clear and the music is in the background.

The sky box is hooked up to the dvd player with surround sound and I can
divert the sound to the dvd player and the picture to the tv for films.

When I do this and watch the chase the music is far too loud for the
words and questions and answers are no longer clear.

So apologies to umrat. And can anyone explain this stupidity?
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
BrritSki
2020-07-07 10:58:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by krw
Post by Vicky Ayech
Accompanying music really gets in the way.
Talking of which we had a discussion hereabouts some months ago when I
said the music on The Chase is not a problem and an umrat (apologies for
not recalling identity said it was).
When I playing the tv sound through our ancient flat screen but notsmart
tv the words are clear and the music is in the background.
The sky box is hooked up to the dvd player with surround sound and I can
divert the sound to the dvd player and the picture to the tv for films.
When I do this and watch the chase the music is far too loud for the
words and questions and answers are no longer clear.
So apologies to umrat.  And can anyone explain this stupidity?
It's only really stupidity if you keep doing it knowing that it annoys
you ;)
krw
2020-07-07 12:28:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by krw
Post by Vicky Ayech
Accompanying music really gets in the way.
Talking of which we had a discussion hereabouts some months ago when I
said the music on The Chase is not a problem and an umrat (apologies
for not recalling identity said it was).
When I playing the tv sound through our ancient flat screen but
notsmart tv the words are clear and the music is in the background.
The sky box is hooked up to the dvd player with surround sound and I
can divert the sound to the dvd player and the picture to the tv for
films.
When I do this and watch the chase the music is far too loud for the
words and questions and answers are no longer clear.
So apologies to umrat.  And can anyone explain this stupidity?
It's only really stupidity if you keep doing it knowing that it annoys
you  ;)
I don't - I have gone back to the tv speakers only. Which is silly
really with all that expensive kit sitting there largely unused. I
suppose it keeps the electrickery bill down.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2020-07-07 14:38:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
Post by krw
Post by Vicky Ayech
Accompanying music really gets in the way.
Talking of which we had a discussion hereabouts some months ago when
I said the music on The Chase is not a problem and an umrat
(apologies for not recalling identity said it was).
When I playing the tv sound through our ancient flat screen but
notsmart tv the words are clear and the music is in the background.
The sky box is hooked up to the dvd player with surround sound and I
can divert the sound to the dvd player and the picture to the tv for
films.
When I do this and watch the chase the music is far too loud for the
words and questions and answers are no longer clear.
So apologies to umrat.  And can anyone explain this stupidity?
The speakers that are built into most flat screen TVs are small, and
don't have much base; I'm surprised how much they _do_ manage, actually.
It's almost certainly the base (bass? I'm never sure) that's overloading
your ears anyway.
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
It's only really stupidity if you keep doing it knowing that it
annoys you  ;)
I don't - I have gone back to the tv speakers only. Which is silly
really with all that expensive kit sitting there largely unused. I
I suppose you can use it for concerts (rock or classical as suits your
preference) where the music _is_ the thing.
Post by krw
suppose it keeps the electrickery bill down.
(-: [probably doesn't use much anyway]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

It is important to write so that you can be understood. It is far more
important to write so that you cannot be misunderstood.
Peter
2020-07-07 14:56:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
It's almost certainly the base (bass? I'm never sure) that's overloading
`Bass' bro. See

the Omrud
2020-07-07 16:23:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
It's almost certainly the base (bass? I'm never sure) that's overloading
`Bass' bro.  See http://youtu.be/iyTTX6Wlf1Y
Hello? Did somebody call?

https://davidchoral.wordpress.com/
--
David
Peter
2020-07-07 16:51:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
It's almost certainly the base (bass? I'm never sure) that's overloading
`Bass' bro.  See http://youtu.be/iyTTX6Wlf1Y
Hello?  Did somebody call?
https://davidchoral.wordpress.com/
I see no shapely derrieres there old biscuit!
Tony Smith Gloucestershire
2020-07-07 20:04:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
It's almost certainly the base (bass? I'm never sure) that's overloading
`Bass' bro.  See http://youtu.be/iyTTX6Wlf1Y
Hello?  Did somebody call?
https://davidchoral.wordpress.com/
<snipped>

derrieres

<snipped>

Or Londonderrieres as some people say.
Mike
2020-07-08 07:18:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony Smith Gloucestershire
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
It's almost certainly the base (bass? I'm never sure) that's overloading
`Bass' bro.  See http://youtu.be/iyTTX6Wlf1Y
Hello?  Did somebody call?
https://davidchoral.wordpress.com/
<snipped>
derrieres
<snipped>
Or Londonderrieres as some people say.
Oh Danny Boy!
--
Toodle Pip
Peter
2020-07-06 20:01:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Odell
I think I have mentioned this before: I can measure the frequency
range of my hearing by noting how far I can go up the piano keyboard
before the notes change from do, re, mi to the clunk, clunk, clunk of
the action.
We were watching the streaming service, Teatro Colon en Casa,
Prokofiev, Romeo y Julieta(1) and in the interval they played promos
for other concerts in the season. In one of the promos, this
twelve-year-old(3) sat down at the piano and was dashing away all over
the place. Including some tricky bits on the last octave.
Hang on a moment, I said to myself. I can hear that. And yes, I could
hear the notes tinkling away in the last octave.
So how did that happen then? Cunning use of EQ before the signal was
broadcast? Harmonics generated on other strings which are actually
lower but which make me think I can hear the real notes? Or what? For
the avoidance of doubt, I do not think my hearing has suddenly come
back: I still can not hear the highest notes on either an acoustic
concert grand or an electric baby grand played live.
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Nick
(1)Synopsis: Middle-aged woman and forgetful old man(2)meet and fall
in love. It ends badly.
(2)He forgot to put on his trousers before he came on stage
That's something we've all done.
Post by Nick Odell
(3)Ooh! I have come on all Ed Reardon!
Loading...