Re: Wasn't v. Helmholtz right? (Eckard Blumschein )

Subject: Re: Wasn't v. Helmholtz right?
From:    Eckard Blumschein  <Eckard.Blumschein(at)E-TECHNIK.UNI-MAGDEBURG.DE>
Date:    Tue, 23 May 2000 08:39:49 +0200

Dear Bill,
thank you for the address! My question rather implicated a judgement by Roy
Patterson, since I was aware of a poster by S. Fobel, St. Uppenkampf, R.
Patterson, and B. Kollmeier, entitled Asymmetry in Perception of Short
Chirp Cignals, presented in Oldenburg, and dealing with two types of
stimuli. Chirps with rising frequency were calculated to compensate for the
dispersion of traveling wave. Dau postulated that this up-chirping will
sound more compact than an ordinary click and much more compact than chirps
with falling frequency. The opposite seems to be true.
Concerning the reply by Jont Allen, I feel a little bit embarrassed.
Fortunately, I have no idea who is suggested to die and why.
- Eckard