Re: Topics for discussion (Diana Deutsch )


Subject: Re: Topics for discussion
From:    Diana Deutsch  <ddeutsch@xxxxxxxx>
Date:    Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:41:28 -0700
List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>

--Apple-Mail-1-662595917 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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@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 > --Apple-Mail-1-662595917 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; = -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">I agree - I've learned a lot = about this very important topic over the last &nbsp;few days, and thank = the contributors for their thoughtful, detailed and forthright postings. = &nbsp;We can't expect to understand higher-level auditory processing = completely if we turn deaf ears to what goes on at the = periphery.&nbsp;<div><br></div><div>Diana = Deutsch<br><div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>On Mar = 17, 2010, at 6:55 PM, Margaret Mortz wrote:</div><br = class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type=3D"cite">I would = like to second Etienne's request to keep the cochlear amplifier = discussion on the AUDITORY list.&nbsp; <br><br> 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.&nbsp;&nbsp; .<br><br>I find this thread to be very = interesting.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; It seems to be far more complicated than I realized.&nbsp; = <br> <br>Margaret Mortz<br><br><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On = Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Etienne Gaudrain <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a = href=3D"mailto:et.gaudrain@xxxxxxxx">et.gaudrain@xxxxxxxx</a>&gt;</span> = wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt = 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> = Dear Professor Bregman, dear list,<br> <br> 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.<br> <br> 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.<br> <br> 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...<br> <br> 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: <a = href=3D"http://csd.mta.ca/html_pages/thunderbird/Filters.htm" = target=3D"_blank">http://csd.mta.ca/html_pages/thunderbird/Filters.htm</a>= . 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...<br> <br> So please, mechanical cochlear = modellers, do come back.<br> <br> -Etienne<div><div></div><div = class=3D"h5"><br> <br> <br> <br> On 16/03/2010 22:34, Al Bregman = wrote:<br> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0pt 0pt = 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: = 1ex;"> Dear list,<br> <br> I would like to remind everyone that the = AUDITORY list members come<br> from a variety of disciplines including = experimental psychology,<br> linguistics (especially phonology), infant = development, brain<br> sciences, music and other sonic arts, audio = technology, artificial<br> intelligence, robotics, computer science, and = speech and hearing<br> science. &nbsp;For the last little while, the = postings seem to have focused<br> heavily on a rather technical and = heated discussion of the mechanics<br> of the cochlea. &nbsp;It is = impressive to see the enthusiasm of researchers<br> on this topic, but I = hope that other people will not be discouraged<br> from interrupting = this discussion with questions, announcements, and<br> messages on other = topics.<br> <br> Perhaps it would be a good idea if, when any group = wishes to have a<br> prolonged discussion of a highly specialized topic, = they form a<br> discussion group of interested parties. &nbsp;It would = then be of great<br> interest for the list as a whole to be brought up = to date on the<br> thoughts, and maybe conclusions, of this specialized = group if any of<br> its members were willing to take the trouble to = write up summaries<br> from time to time.<br> <br> Best to all,<br> <br> = Al<br> <br> = --------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---<br> Albert S. Bregman, Emeritus Professor<br> Psychology Department, = McGill University<br> 1205 Docteur Penfield Avenue<br> Montreal, QC, = Canada H3A 1B1.<br> Office: &nbsp;Phone: (514) 398-6103, Fax: (514) = 398-4896<br> <a = href=3D"http://webpages.mcgill.ca/staff/Group2/abregm1/web/" = target=3D"_blank">http://webpages.mcgill.ca/staff/Group2/abregm1/web/</a><= br> = --------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---<br> &nbsp;<br> </blockquote> <br></div></div><font color=3D"#888888"> = -- <br> Etienne Gaudrain, PhD<br> MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences = Unit<br> 15 Chaucer Road<br> Cambridge, CB2 7EF<br> UK<br> Phone: +44 = 1223 273 664<br> Fax (unit): +44 1223 359 062<br> = </font></blockquote></div><br></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>= --Apple-Mail-1-662595917--


This message came from the mail archive
/home/empire6/dpwe/public_html/postings/2010/
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <dpwe@ee.columbia.edu>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University