source file: mills2.txt Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 07:03:28 -0700 From: "John H. Chalmers" From: mclaren Subject: trivial errata in the series of psychoacoustics posts --- As some of you might have guessed, my series of 25 psychoacoustics posts constitute a distilled and simplified early version of a significantly longer and more detailed monograph on tuning and psychoacoustics. This paper should appear in Xenharmonikon 18, perhaps in 1997. Until then, it behooves me to point out that some errors crept into the posts--some apparently due to end-of-line word deletions during uploads, etc. Other errors are entirely my own fault. In Topic 8 of Digest 508 a dropped word at the end of a line produced a significant distortion of the intended meaning. The full and accurate text is: --- It is well known that the description of the ear to which Doty, Worrall and Alves (known as the place theory of hearing) refer is incomplete and conflicts with much of the psychoacoustic evidence. "A second difficulty with the place theory lies in the fact that, in complex sounds, components are often heard that are NOT present in the Fourier analysis. Or loudness judgments of components may be made which do not agree with the amplitudes obtained for Fourier components. It is certainly true that there are phenomena which cannot at the present time be explained by the plaheory of hearing." [von Bekesy, Georg, "Hearing Theories and Complex Sounds," Journ. of the Acoust. Soc. Am, 35(4), April 1963, pg. 589] Be it noted that von Bekesy is the researcher most responsible for compiling experimental evidence for the place theory. (In fact he won the Nobel prize for it.) --- Leaving out the italicized word "NOT" from the posted text produces a distinctly false impression. Mea culpa. --- Several other errata appeared in Digest 511, topic 6: The title of the reference listed as [5] should be "The Physics and Psychophysics of Music" by Juan Roederer, 2nd ed., 1973. (There is now a third edition, 1995, same author, same title.) My post incorrectly listed the title as "Introduction to the Physics and Psychophysics of Music," etc. Important if you try to look up the book in a computerized library system! Under the reference listed as [6] the sentence should read "...more detailed than any text but Pierce (1992)." This is my flub. Because John R. Pierce's "The Science of Musical Sound" from 1992 has a virtually *identical* title to Johan Sundberg's "The Science of Musical SoundS" (S on the end) *ALSO* published in 1992, I confuted them here. The sense of the paragraph is that Sundberg's 1992 book offers more complete references and a wider consideration of psychoacoustic ear/brain models than any general-reading text other than Pierce's book (also from 1992). --mclaren Received: from eartha.mills.edu [144.91.3.20] by vbv40.ezh.nl with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 18:33 +0100 Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI) for id JAA22990; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 09:32:38 -0700 Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 09:32:38 -0700 Message-Id: Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu