Subject: Re: [Cochlea-amp.] [AUDITORY] Topics for discussion From: Matt Flax <flatmax@xxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 13:08:47 +1100 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>Please don't cross post and keep this thread related to AUDITORY on the AUDITORY list. thanks Matt On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 18:55 -0700, 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@xxxxxxxx> 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 were 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 readers 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 > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Cochlear-amplifier mailing list > Cochlear-amplifier@xxxxxxxx > http://cochlearamplifier.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cochlear-amplifier