Audiophilia Syndrome

[christopher3393]

"This is the first time a study has demonstrated that when we imagine music in our heads, the auditory cortex and other parts of the brain process auditory information, such as high and low frequencies, in the same way as they do when stimulated by real sound."

 

https://actu.epfl.ch/news/that-music-playing-in-your-head-a-real-conundrum-f/

 

Abstract

Despite many behavioral and neuroimaging investigations, it remains unclear how the human cortex represents spectrotemporal sound features during auditory imagery, and how this representation compares to auditory perception. To assess this, we recorded electrocorticographic signals from an epileptic patient with proficient music ability in 2 conditions. First, the participant played 2 piano pieces on an electronic piano with the sound volume of the digital keyboard on. Second, the participant replayed the same piano pieces, but without auditory feedback, and the participant was asked to imagine hearing the music in his mind. In both conditions, the sound output of the keyboard was recorded, thus allowing precise time-locking between the neural activity and the spectrotemporal content of the music imagery. This novel task design provided a unique opportunity to apply receptive field modeling techniques to quantitatively study neural encoding during auditory mental imagery. In both conditions, we built encoding models to predict high gamma neural activity (70–150 Hz) from the spectrogram representation of the recorded sound. We found robust spectrotemporal receptive fields during auditory imagery with substantial, but not complete overlap in frequency tuning and cortical location compared to receptive fields measured during auditory perception.

 

https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article-abstract/doi/10.1093/cercor/bhx277/4566611?redirectedFrom=fulltext

 

Next up: "How to get audiophile quality from imaginary sound"

 

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Interesting but hardly surprising.

[Indydan]

On 3/16/2018 at 10:23 PM, Fluffytime said:

 

You're so cute.

 

Can we date? I promise I'll make you feel special. Like really special.

 

I am always moved when I see two people find true love. :-)

[christopher3393]

1 hour ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Interesting but hardly surprising.

 

Are you thinking of some of the neuroscience and music literature?

[Kal Rubinson]

Neuroscience.  Mirror neurons.

[semente]

 

 

I'm sure most of you has seen this...

 

[Nordkapp]

34 minutes ago, semente said:

 

 

I'm sure most of you has seen this...

 

Haha. @semente. Thank you for sharing this. Have not laughed this hard in a while. @4:50 min- "could you listen to music during an earthquake? "- "yes I can". Lmao. 17:00 minutes-"I ask myself every day If I am crazy". I can relate to that. Love it!!

[semente]

9 minutes ago, Nordkapp said:

Thank you for sharing this. Have not laughed this hard in a while

[audiobomber]

Men have hobbies. Hobbies are often expensive. 

• My brother-in-law's hobby is fishing for salmon on Lake Huron. He bought a 26' powerboat, downriggers, fish-finding radar, GPS, rods and reels, a boatload of tackle, etc. This stuff cost over $100,000. Should people laugh at him?
• Golf equipment is relatively inexpensive. OTOH, annual green fees at a prestige club run well into 6 figures and that's only after after your initial joining fee.
• Do musicians really need a Martin D45?  "Vintage Guitar ranking of valuable guitars saw the D-45 (models made between 1936 and 1942) in first place, worth between $250,000 and $400,000".  "pre-war D-45s fetch "more than 20 times as much as a recent issue D-45, even though there is relatively little difference in design"

 

Audiophilia is obsessive-compulsive behaviour. If it is harming your life, then it is a problem. If it is not causing harm, then it's just a hobby. Relax, enjoy the endorphins.

 

Some people's hobby is trolling on the internet. I believe the initial post in this thread is a good example. 

 

[marce]

19 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

Men have hobbies. Hobbies are often expensive. 

• My brother-in-law's hobby is fishing for salmon on Lake Huron. He bought a 26' powerboat, downriggers, fish-finding radar, GPS, rods and reels, a boatload of tackle, etc. This stuff cost over $100,000. Should people laugh at him?
• Golf equipment is relatively inexpensive. OTOH, annual green fees at a prestige club run well into 6 figures and that's only after after your initial joining fee.
• Do musicians really need a Martin D45?  "Vintage Guitar ranking of valuable guitars saw the D-45 (models made between 1936 and 1942) in first place, worth between $250,000 and $400,000".  "pre-war D-45s fetch "more than 20 times as much as a recent issue D-45, even though there is relatively little difference in design"

 

Audiophilia is obsessive-compulsive behaviour. If it is harming your life, then it is a problem. If it is not causing harm, then it's just a hobby. Relax, enjoy the endorphins.

 

Some people's hobby is trolling on the internet. I believe the initial post in this thread is a good example. 

 

No the OP was a bit of light hearted humour, like Chris said it helps to be able to laugh at yourself... Try it.

[audiobomber]

1 hour ago, marce said:

No the OP was a bit of light hearted humour, like Chris said it helps to be able to laugh at yourself... Try it.

Your objection would be correct, if Ralf11 had audiophile tendencies. He does not, in fact his main reason for being here seems to be to tell people they can't possibly hear what they say they hear, that they are wasting money on wires and other nonsense and they reject science. He is an anti-audiophile, therefore the point of the thread is to taunt.

 

I am laughing,  but I can poke back, no? I really enjoyed the Ken Barnes video. I hadn't seen it before. I'd love to hear some of those systems. My wife laughs at me when I have my audiophile friends over. She mimics us sitting on the couch, eyes closed, bobbing our heads in time. It is pretty funny.

[Ralf11]

audiobumbler could not be more wrong

 

you also seem to equate audiophilia with unicorns and magik

 

 

[audiobomber]

19 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

audiobumbler could not be more wrong

 

you also seem to equate audiophilia with unicorns and magik

 

 

I listen and tweak and listen some more. That makes me an audiophile. 

You read the spec sheet and think it tells the whole story. That makes you not an audiophile. 

[mansr]

4 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

I listen and tweak and listen some more. That makes me an audiophile. 

You read the spec sheet and think it tells the whole story. That makes you not an audiophile. 

Are you related to GUTB?

[mav52]

18 minutes ago, mansr said:

Are you related to GUTB?

Darn it you beat me to it.

[GUTB]

He noticed some people aren’t audiophiles and that makes him me?

[pkane2001]

21 minutes ago, GUTB said:

He noticed some people aren’t audiophiles and that makes him me?

 

What makes you two similar is the unreasonably narrow definition of 'audiophile' that excludes way too many of us. 

 

[audiobomber]

People who believe that it's all just ones and zeroes, expensive cables are foolish, competently designed equipment (amps, cd players, etc.) all sound the same, and double blind testing is the only standard, do not want to be called audiophiles, and mostly use the term pejoratively. That sentiment comes across clearly in the OP.

[pkane2001]

36 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

People who believe that it's all just ones and zeroes, expensive cables are foolish, competently designed equipment (amps, cd players, etc.) all sound the same, and double blind testing is the only standard, do not want to be called audiophiles, and mostly use the term pejoratively. That sentiment comes across clearly in the OP.

 

Again, you're just picking an arbitrary distinction and presuming to know what others think. I may not fit your definition of audiophile, but I am, and have been for 30+ years. Because I understand something about the underlying technology and chose my components carefully and deliberately does not make me less of an audiophile than you or GUTB. 

 

Now, if you were to call me an audiophiliac then I may have to disagree. I've recovered from that disease a long time ago 

 

[Summit]

Sure Audiophilia can get out of hand and become an obsessive-compulsive behaviour.

 

We also have some people that seems to be obsessive with everything that they consider to be snake oil products.  

[mansr]

51 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

People who believe that it's all just ones and zeroes, expensive cables are foolish, competently designed equipment (amps, cd players, etc.) all sound the same, and double blind testing is the only standard, do not want to be called audiophiles, and mostly use the term pejoratively. That sentiment comes across clearly in the OP.

I think you are confusing the terms audiophile and audiophool.

[pkane2001]

5 minutes ago, Summit said:

Sure Audiophilia can get out of hand and become an obsessive-compulsive behaviour.

 

We also have some people that seems to be obsessive with everything that they consider to be snake oil products.  

 

There are certainly folks at both extremes. What I often find is that the people near the middle get pushed into one of the extreme groups, just because it makes it easier to classify them this way. That's not fair to them.

[Summit]

5 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

There are certainly folks at both extremes. What I often find is that the people near the middle get pushed into one of the extreme groups, just because it makes it easier to classify them this way. That's not fair to them.

 

Yep, that’s probably true.

[Ralf11]

3 hours ago, audiobomber said:

I listen and tweak and listen some more. That makes me an audiophile. 

You read the spec sheet and think it tells the whole story. That makes you not an audiophile. 

 

you sound a LOT like GUTBS troll

 

I have no idea where you got the notion I think a spec. sheet tells the whole story -- maybe your unicorn whispered it into your ear?

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, audiobomber said:

People who believe that it's all just ones and zeroes, expensive cables are foolish, competently designed equipment (amps, cd players, etc.) all sound the same, and double blind testing is the only standard, do not want to be called audiophiles, and mostly use the term pejoratively. That sentiment comes across clearly in the OP.

 

 

ok, muffy - I am not paid to teach anymore, but here is some education for you, gratis: 

 

Digital audio IS just ones and zeroes (of course, it has to be turned into analog)

 

expensive cables ARE foolish - you can get different sounds from inexpensive cables however

 

competently designed equipment (amps, .... etc.) SHOULD all sound the same - but tube gear often has a euphonic coloration (which I like)

 

double blind testing is the only standard - that fully controls for expectation bias

 

sentiment - I am not that sentimental, esp. with respect to gear

 

I am not going to be able to give you much help in getting a basic working knowledge of the modern world over the internet, but I hope you can find something useful to do with your degree in the deconstructivist basket-weaving of the Azahar tribe in mid16th century Kuwhutistan and its effect on non-polar gender dynamics.