🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Nov17.153055.54833@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> gw214790@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Galen Watts) writes:
>In article <1992Nov17.012614.20277@athena.mit.edu> philo@athena.mit.edu (philo) writes:
>>lecturer once. One of the things that he said was that a spectrum analysis of the
>>speach right near the ear of the listener did not agree with the spectrum of the
>>sound as it left the mouth of the person who is talking. However, the fourrier
>>components agreed to a large degree.
>>
>>Does any one have a better understanding of this concept that I do? I think
>>this could be a very interesting question.
>>-philo.
>>dakhlak.... hawn nazl s suruur?
>>				(Ziad)
>
>
>Unless you were in an anechoic chamber, the reverberent field will always
>change the frequency content of any acoustic signal.  High frequencies will
>be attenuated by the air in the path from source to ear.  Also, the microphone
>used to get the acoustic signal into the Fourier analyzer has a non-flat
>frequency response.

Any respectable lab setup will use a calibrated mic, and correct for
that in the measurements.

Of course, even ignoring all the other effects, there's the very real
effect that the body (and head, for that matter) have on the
percieved signal, as well as relative position and orientation of
speaker and listener, all of which effect the spectrum of the signal
in the ear.
-- 
Jonathan E. Quist                              INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation
jeq@i88.isc.com  '71 CL450-K4 "Gleep", DoD #094        Naperville, IL
        There are many things a person should experience in a lifetime.
       Among them are an infant's first cry, and an infant's first laugh.