[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Topics for discussion
Dear List,
Although many subscribers to the Auditory list are interested in cochlear
matters, there are evidently some who are turned off by it. There
also seems to be a distinct danger of the current very active (and
passionate) discussion of the cochlea overwhelming this list.
The Cochlear Amplifier list exists for discussion on cochlear
processes. By now any member of the Auditory list who has been
following cochlea-related topics on this list it in recent weeks should
know of the existence of this other list and can join it if they want to
(
http://cochlearamplifier.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cochlear-amplifier
).
Harvey
Holmes
At 13:41 18/03/2010, Diana Deutsch wrote:
I agree - I've learned a lot
about this very important topic over the last few days, and thank
the contributors for their thoughtful, detailed and forthright
postings. We can't expect to understand higher-level auditory
processing completely if we turn deaf ears to what goes on at the
periphery.
Diana Deutsch
On Mar 17, 2010, at 6:55 PM, Margaret Mortz wrote:
I would like to second Etienne's
request to keep the cochlear amplifier discussion on the AUDITORY
list.
I receive the email responses separately rather than as a long composite
digest, so it is easier to segregate topics As long as the subject line
contains the topic, I can easily bypass topics that I am not interested
in. .
I find this thread to be very interesting. I have a special
interest in learning about how the brain gives feedback to the cochlear
active listening process via OHC. Obviously, I need to also learn about
the cochlea's passive dynamics itself. It seems to be far more
complicated than I realized.
Margaret Mortz
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Etienne Gaudrain
<et.gaudrain@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
- Dear Professor Bregman, dear list,
- I am very glad you pointed out that the AUDITORY list is a place that
reflects the diversity of auditory research. I would like to add that the
interaction between researchers of various backgrounds is essential in
that field of research, and the AUDITORY list certainly helps a lot in
that regard.
- If each specialized group of interest werÐî e to create their own
list, how could transversal communication take place? We would just end
up with a very scattered landscape of auditory research, and one would
have to spend hours on the web to find and reconnect all the pieces.
- So, although I understand that some people could be annoyed by the
discussion, there is no strong reason why cochlear-modellers in
particular should not be welcomed on the list. It seems more obvious that
there are strong reasons why they should stay and share there debate They
are good guys, they contribute a lot! Otherwise we can also politely ask
the people who wonder about "timbre" to wonder elsewhere. Or
what about those who ask questions about sound cards... I mean who cares?
Worst than everything, those who request papers... can't they just pay
for it?! The final blow: the improbable conference announcements (even
seen a call for a French meeting for PhD students... which would concern,
what, 50 people? ever seen an ASA meeting announced here?)... And
probably the people that are a tiny bit sarcastic should also be banned
from the list...
- In the real world you can't suppress the sound of people arguing in
the street by any other mean than earplugs that will also suppress the
lovely music you were listening to. You may have heard of this: the
auditory scene analysis problem, nicely formulated by a great guy in
Canada, can't remember his name. Well, on the Internet, you can actually
very easily filter out just the electronic messages you don't want as
long as you can describe what they look like (as already suggested by
Keith Kluender and others). This is a bit sad but, on the Internet, the
scene analysis problem has been solved some time ago. For those of you
who don't know how, here is a quick tutorial for Thunderbird:
http://csd.mta.ca/html_pages/thunderbird/Filters.htm. I'm sure
similar tutorials can be found for Outlook, or any modern email software
your using. Silent readerÐî s of the list shouldn't be deprived of an
interesting debate (although sometime a bit over-enthusiastic, but then,
normally, adults know that people are making a bit a fool of themselves
when they are rude in public for dull reasons) because some less silent
readers do not like it. I wouldn't sign a petition to close a TV channel
because they show too boring programs between 2 and 4 am...
- So please, mechanical cochlear modellers, do come back.
- -Etienne
- On 16/03/2010 22:34, Al Bregman wrote:
- Dear list,
- I would like to remind everyone that the AUDITORY list members come
- from a variety of disciplines including experimental psychology,
- linguistics (especially phonology), infant development, brain
- sciences, music and other sonic arts, audio technology, artificial
- intelligence, robotics, computer science, and speech and hearing
- science. For the last little while, the postings seem to have
focused
- heavily on a rather technical and heated discussion of the mechanics
- of the cochlea. It is impressive to see the enthusiasm of
researchers
- on this topic, but I hope that other people will not be discouraged
- from interrupting this discussion with questions, announcements, and
- messages on other topics.
- Perhaps it would be a good idea if, when any group wishes to have a
- prolonged discussion of a highly specialized topic, they form a
- discussion group of interested parties. It would then be of
great
- interest for the list as a whole to be brought up to date on the
- thoughts, and maybe conclusions, of this specialized group if any of
- its members were willing to take the trouble to write up summaries
- from time to time.
- Best to all,
- Al
-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------<Ðî
br> Albert S. Bregman, Emeritus Professor
- Psychology Department, McGill University
- 1205 Docteur Penfield Avenue
- Montreal, QC, Canada H3A 1B1.
- Office: Phone: (514) 398-6103, Fax: (514) 398-4896
-
http://webpages.mcgill.ca/staff/Group2/abregm1/web/
-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
--
Etienne Gaudrain, PhD
MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit
15 Chaucer Road
Cambridge, CB2 7EF
UK
Phone: +44 1223 273 664
Fax (unit): +44 1223 359 062