[AUDITORY] Sound proof booth and EEG recording (Tom Campbell )


Subject: [AUDITORY] Sound proof booth and EEG recording
From:    Tom Campbell  <tom_campbell75@xxxxxxxx>
Date:    Fri, 7 Jun 2013 06:46:16 +0000
List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>

--_f6b8a358-056d-4ce8-86d5-16c33d9170de_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Massimo=2C What I would suggest is to have one hole in the wall for DC cab= les (and any wires carrying EEG signals out of the cage=3B a fibre optic wo= uld be preferable=2C but this depends on your EEG equipment) and one distan= t hole for any necessary AC cables. Putting a bit of distance between AC in= terference and EEG signal puts colomb's law on your side. Make both holes = near the floor so cables don't have to be longer than needed. I've seen thi= s work well in ETS Lindgren shielded rooms with IAC sound attenuation. Use = a common ground for all electrical equipment. Avoid making induction loops = through coils in long cables. Use sandbags to plug the holes when you have = the wires in place. T. > Date: Wed=2C 5 Jun 2013 12:12:46 +0200 > From: Massimo Grassi <massimo.grassi@xxxxxxxx> > Subject: Sound proof booth and EEG recording >=20 > Dear list members=2C >=20 > we are about to buy a IAC soundproof booth and=2C because here many peopl= e=20 > do EEG recordings=2C we were thinking to have the booth electrically=20 > shielded. The booth will be used to run psychoacoustics=2C cognitive=20 > science and neuroscience experiments. >=20 > Here comes the problem. What is the best way to carry the EEG-signal=20 > from the inside of the booth to the outside of the booth? >=20 > So far we thought two possible solutions. > 1. Place a panel on the booth's wall that has (inside and outside) the=20 > specific plug of the signal cable that comes out of EEG amplifier. In=20 > practice=2C we interrupt the signal cable at the booth's wall. > 2. Make a hole on the booth's wall. The hole starts high in the inside=20 > of the booth=2C runs downward inside the booth's wall and arrives low at= =20 > the outside of the booth. I this way the booth is acoustically safe=20 > because the hole is not direct and the EEG-signal cable is not=20 > interrupted=2C but it needs to be very long (wild guess about 6/8 meters)= . >=20 > Some of my EEG colleagues are unhappy with both solutions because: > 1. You interrupt the signal cable and this interruption could introduce=20 > artefacts in the EEG-signal. > 2. The cable is too long and this could introduce artefacts in the=20 > EEG-signal. >=20 > Is there anybody out there that had this same problem and that can=20 > suggest me which is the best way to solve it? >=20 > All the best=2C > m > --=20 > http://www.psy.unipd.it/~grassi/ > http://www.springer.com/978-1-4614-2196-2 > http://www.finveneto.it/nuoto_schedaatleta.php?id_atleta=3D73076 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > Date: Wed=2C 5 Jun 2013 06:55:53 +0100 > From: =3D?iso-8859-1?Q?fr=3DE9d=3DE9ric_maintenant?=3D <fmaintenant@xxxxxxxx= HOO.FR> > Subject: Re: SV: RE: Perceptual basis of evolving western musical styles >=20 > ---1690458260-1672112700-1370411753=3D:90110 > Content-Type: text/plain=3B charset=3Diso-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >=20 > Sorry to interrupt again. Would you see any difference in the evolution o= f =3D > western musical style between 1960s and 1980s? or 1900s and 1920s? FM=3D0= A=3D0A=3D > =3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A________________________________=3D0A De=3DA0: Pablo = Hern=3DE1n Rodri=3D > guez Zivic <elsonidoq@xxxxxxxx>=3D0A=3DC0=3DA0: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx= =3D0AEnvo=3D > y=3DE9 le : Mardi 4 juin 2013 14h33=3D0AObjet=3DA0: Re: SV: RE: Perceptua= l basis =3D > of evolving western musical styles=3D0A =3D0A=3D0A=3D0AHi David=2C=3D0A= =3D0AThank you!=3DA0=3D > =3D0AI'm glad that both=2C Eric has a concern about my analysis=2C and yo= u don't.=3D > Otherwise=2C there would be no discussion :).=3D0A=3D0AWith respect to t= he selec=3D > tion bias of the corpus=2C it may be. However=2C if you look in the Suppo= rting =3D > Information=2C we did a control by projecting another corpus (the Alicant= e's =3D > 9GDB) into the factors=2C and we found very similar results. However=2C I= don't=3D > exactly recall how the projection values where for the 9GDB corpus with = re=3D > spect to the IR principles.=3DA0=3D0A=3D0AYou are right with respect to t= he Baroq=3D > ue overshoot. Yet=2C the end of the Baroque is a very arbitrary date as w= ell=2C=3D > since it's the year of Bach's death. So=2C it could be the case that for= 20 =3D > years after Bach died=2C similar music was still been written (maybe some= one =3D > who knows more about music history can tell me if this make sense).=3D0A= =3D0AAn=3D > yway=2C thanks for your comments!!=3D0A=3D0APablo=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0= AOn Mon=2C Jun 3=2C 20=3D > 13 at 7:50 AM=2C David Morris <dmorris@xxxxxxxx> wrote:=3D0A=3D0AHi Pabl= o=2C=3D0A>=3D > =3D0A>I don't share Eric's concern about a drawback and found this articl= e de=3D > finitely worthy of your shameless self-promotion. =3DA0Congratulations. = =3DA0It=3D > 's perplexing that the closure projection results for the Classical perio= d =3D > are so low. =3DA0I would have ex=3DE5ected them to be amongst the highest= . =3DA0C=3D > ould this relate to selection bias in the corpus=2C or does it have to do= wit=3D > h the definition (as per the Carol and Krumhansl reference which I should= p=3D > robably try and wrap my feeble mind around). =3DA0Also=2C on account of t= he two=3D > deaths that occured=2C I think that the second year overshoots the end o= f th=3D > e Baroque by 20 years=2C but that doesn't effect your analysis.=3D0A>=3D0= A>All th=3D > e best=3D0A>=3D0A>David=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A-- =3D0Ahttp://pablozivic.com.ar/=20 > ---1690458260-1672112700-1370411753=3D:90110 > Content-Type: text/html=3B charset=3Diso-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >=20 > <html><body><div style=3D3D"color:#000=3B background-color:#fff=3B font-f= amily:Co=3D > urier New=2C courier=2C monaco=2C monospace=2C sans-serif=3Bfont-size:12p= t"><font siz=3D > e=3D3D"2">Sorry to interrupt again. Would you see any difference in the e= volu=3D > tion of western musical style between 1960s and 1980s? or 1900s and 1920s= ? =3D > FM<br></font><font face=3D3D"Arial" size=3D3D"2"><br></font><div><span><b= r></sp=3D > an></div><div><br></div> <div style=3D3D"font-family: Courier New=2C cou= rier=2C =3D > monaco=2C monospace=2C sans-serif=3B font-size: 12pt=3B"> <div style=3D3D= "font-family=3D > : times new roman=2C new york=2C times=2C serif=3B font-size: 12pt=3B"> <= div dir=3D3D"l=3D > tr"> <hr size=3D3D"1"> <font face=3D3D"Arial" size=3D3D"2"> <b><span sty= le=3D3D"fo=3D > nt-weight:bold=3B">De&nbsp=3B:</span></b> Pablo Hern=3DE1n Rodriguez Zivi= c &lt=3Bel=3D > sonidoq@xxxxxxxx&gt=3B<br> <b><span style=3D3D"font-weight: bold=3B">=3D= C0&nbsp=3B:<=3D > /span></b> AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx <br> <b><span style=3D3D"font-weight:= bol=3D > d=3B">Envoy=3DE9 le :</span></b> Mardi 4 juin 2013 14h33<br> <b><span sty= le=3D3D"=3D > font-weight: > bold=3B">Objet&nbsp=3B:</span></b> Re: SV: RE: Perceptual basis of evolv= ing we=3D > stern musical styles<br> </font> </div> <div class=3D3D"y_msg_container">= <br>=3D > <div id=3D3D"yiv3572727833"><div dir=3D3D"ltr">Hi David=2C<div><br></div>= <div sty=3D > le=3D3D"">Thank you!&nbsp=3B</div><div style=3D3D"">I'm glad that both=2C= Eric has =3D > a concern about my analysis=2C and you don't. Otherwise=2C there would be= no di=3D > scussion :).</div><div style=3D3D""><br>=3D0A=3D0A</div><div style=3D3D""= >With resp=3D > ect to the selection bias of the corpus=2C it may be. However=2C if you l= ook in=3D > the Supporting Information=2C we did a control by projecting another cor= pus =3D > (the Alicante's 9GDB) into the factors=2C and we found very similar resul= ts. =3D > However=2C I don't exactly recall how the projection values where for the= 9GD=3D > B corpus with respect to the IR principles.&nbsp=3B</div>=3D0A=3D0A<div s= tyle=3D3D"=3D > "><br></div><div style=3D3D"">You are right with respect to the Baroque o= vers=3D > hoot. Yet=2C the end of the Baroque is a very arbitrary date as well=2C s= ince i=3D > t's the year of Bach's death. So=2C it could be the case that for 20 year= s af=3D > ter Bach died=2C similar music was still been written (maybe someone who = know=3D > s more about music history can tell me if this make sense).</div>=3D0A=3D= 0A<div=3D > style=3D3D""><br></div><div style=3D3D"">Anyway=2C thanks for your comme= nts!!</d=3D > iv><div style=3D3D""><br></div><div style=3D3D"">Pablo</div><div style=3D= 3D""><br=3D > ></div></div><div class=3D3D"yiv3572727833gmail_extra"><br><br><div class= =3D3D"=3D > yiv3572727833gmail_quote">On Mon=2C Jun 3=2C 2013 at 7:50 AM=2C David Mor= ris <spa=3D > n dir=3D3D"ltr">&lt=3B<a rel=3D3D"nofollow" ymailto=3D3D"mailto:dmorris@xxxxxxxx= um.ku.dk" =3D > target=3D3D"_blank" href=3D3D"mailto:dmorris@xxxxxxxx">dmorris@xxxxxxxx= </a>&g=3D > t=3B</span> wrote:<br>=3D0A=3D0A<blockquote class=3D3D"yiv3572727833gmail= _quote" st=3D > yle=3D3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex=3Bborder-left:1px #ccc solid=3Bpadding-left:1e= x=3B">Hi P=3D > ablo=2C<br>=3D0A<br>=3D0AI don't share Eric's concern about a drawback an= d found =3D > this article definitely worthy of your shameless self-promotion. &nbsp=3B= Cong=3D > ratulations. &nbsp=3BIt's perplexing that the closure projection results = for =3D > the Classical period are so low. &nbsp=3BI would have ex=3DE5ected them t= o be a=3D > mongst the highest. &nbsp=3BCould this relate to selection bias in the co= rpus=3D > =2C or does it have to do with the definition (as per the Carol and Krumh= ansl=3D > reference which I should probably try and wrap my feeble mind around). &= nb=3D > sp=3BAlso=2C on account of the two deaths that occured=2C I think that th= e second=3D > year overshoots the end of the Baroque by 20 years=2C but that doesn't e= ffec=3D > t your analysis.<br>=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A<br>=3D0AAll the best<br>=3D0A<span cl= ass=3D3D"yiv35=3D > 72727833HOEnZb"><font color=3D3D"#888888"><br>=3D0ADavid</font></span></b= lockqu=3D > ote></div><br><br clear=3D3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br><a rel=3D3D"nofol= low" t=3D > arget=3D3D"_blank" href=3D3D"http://pablozivic.com.ar/">http://pablozivic= .com.a=3D > r/</a>=3D0A</div></div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></body></html> > ---1690458260-1672112700-1370411753=3D:90110-- >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > Date: Thu=2C 6 Jun 2013 09:50:19 +0000 > From: "Faulkner=2C Andrew" <a.faulkner@xxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Sound proof booth and EEG recording >=20 > Dear Massimo > We had IAC UK install an adapted double wall booth for EEG a few years ba= ck=3D > . They added some additional screening through having no window in the do= or=3D > and by electrically bonding all the parts with braiding.=3D20 > We also had DC lighting installed and the facility to kill the ac power i= n =3D > the room. >=20 > For getting EEG/ABR data out of the room had a tube installed through the= w=3D > alls to an adjacent booth to take multicore cables. My understanding is t= ha=3D > t thus tube acts as a waveguide and minimizes interference. > In practice we don't actually use this. Instead we have a Biosemi setup w= it=3D > h the amplifier/converter located inside the room. This is battery powere= d =3D > and connected through the wall by USB cabling to the PC outside. This ki= t =3D > is working really well for us=2C for ABR as well as cortical responses. >=20 > I am happy to get you more details if you are interested >=20 > Dr Andrew Faulkner > Head of Research Department of Speech Hearing and Phonetic Sciences > UCL (University College London) > Rm 314=2C Chandler House=2C 2 Wakefield St > London WC1N 1PF > tel 44 (0)20 7679 4075 (direct) > Internal tel 24075 > Fax: +44 (0)20 7679 4238=3D20 > mailto:a.faulkner@xxxxxxxx > http://www.ucl.ac.uk/psychlangsci/staff/shps-staff/a_faulkner >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: AUDITORY - Research in Auditory Perception [mailto:AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx= CG=3D > ILL.CA] On Behalf Of Massimo Grassi > Sent: 05 June 2013 11:13 > To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx > Subject: [AUDITORY] Sound proof booth and EEG recording >=20 > Dear list members=2C >=20 > we are about to buy a IAC soundproof booth and=2C because here many peopl= e do=3D > EEG recordings=2C we were thinking to have the booth electrically shield= ed. =3D > The booth will be used to run psychoacoustics=2C cognitive science and ne= uros=3D > cience experiments. >=20 > Here comes the problem. What is the best way to carry the EEG-signal from= t=3D > he inside of the booth to the outside of the booth? >=20 > So far we thought two possible solutions. > 1. Place a panel on the booth's wall that has (inside and outside) the sp= ec=3D > ific plug of the signal cable that comes out of EEG amplifier. In practic= e=2C=3D > we interrupt the signal cable at the booth's wall. > 2. Make a hole on the booth's wall. The hole starts high in the inside of= t=3D > he booth=2C runs downward inside the booth's wall and arrives low at the = outs=3D > ide of the booth. I this way the booth is acoustically safe because the h= ol=3D > e is not direct and the EEG-signal cable is not interrupted=2C but it nee= ds t=3D > o be very long (wild guess about 6/8 meters). >=20 > Some of my EEG colleagues are unhappy with both solutions because: > 1. You interrupt the signal cable and this interruption could introduce a= rt=3D > efacts in the EEG-signal. > 2. The cable is too long and this could introduce artefacts in the EEG-si= gn=3D > al. >=20 > Is there anybody out there that had this same problem and that can sugges= t =3D > me which is the best way to solve it? >=20 > All the best=2C > m > -- > http://www.psy.unipd.it/~grassi/ > http://www.springer.com/978-1-4614-2196-2 > http://www.finveneto.it/nuoto_schedaatleta.php?id_atleta=3D3D73076 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > End of AUDITORY Digest - 5 Jun 2013 to 6 Jun 2013 (#2013-132) > ************************************************************* = --_f6b8a358-056d-4ce8-86d5-16c33d9170de_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html> <head> <style><!-- .hmmessage P { margin:0px=3B padding:0px } body.hmmessage { font-size: 12pt=3B font-family:Calibri } --></style></head> <body class=3D'hmmessage'><div dir=3D'ltr'>&nbsp=3B<p>Massimo=2C<p>&nbsp=3B= <p>What I would suggest is to have one hole in the wall for DC cables (and = any&nbsp=3Bwires carrying EEG&nbsp=3Bsignals out of the cage=3B a fibre opt= ic would be preferable=2C but this depends on your EEG equipment)&nbsp=3Ban= d one distant hole&nbsp=3Bfor any necessary&nbsp=3BAC cables.&nbsp=3BPuttin= g a bit of&nbsp=3Bdistance between AC interference and EEG signal puts colo= mb's law on your side.&nbsp=3B&nbsp=3BMake both holes near the floor so cab= les don't have to be longer than needed. I've seen this work well&nbsp=3Bin= ETS Lindgren shielded rooms with IAC sound attenuation.&nbsp=3BUse a commo= n ground for all electrical equipment. Avoid making induction loops through= &nbsp=3Bcoils&nbsp=3Bin long cables. Use&nbsp=3Bsandbags to plug the holes = when you have the wires in place.<p>&nbsp=3B<p>T.<p><br>&gt=3B Date: Wed= =2C 5 Jun 2013 12:12:46 +0200<br>&gt=3B From: Massimo Grassi &lt=3Bmassi= mo.grassi@xxxxxxxx&gt=3B<br>&gt=3B Subject: Sound proof booth and EEG recor= ding<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B Dear list members=2C<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B we are = about to buy a IAC soundproof booth and=2C because here many people <br>&gt= =3B do EEG recordings=2C we were thinking to have the booth electrically <b= r>&gt=3B shielded. The booth will be used to run psychoacoustics=2C cogniti= ve <br>&gt=3B science and neuroscience experiments.<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B He= re comes the problem. What is the best way to carry the EEG-signal <br>&gt= =3B from the inside of the booth to the outside of the booth?<br>&gt=3B <br= >&gt=3B So far we thought two possible solutions.<br>&gt=3B 1. Place a pane= l on the booth's wall that has (inside and outside) the <br>&gt=3B specific= plug of the signal cable that comes out of EEG amplifier. In <br>&gt=3B pr= actice=2C we interrupt the signal cable at the booth's wall.<br>&gt=3B 2. M= ake a hole on the booth's wall. The hole starts high in the inside <br>&gt= =3B of the booth=2C runs downward inside the booth's wall and arrives low a= t <br>&gt=3B the outside of the booth. I this way the booth is acoustically= safe <br>&gt=3B because the hole is not direct and the EEG-signal cable is= not <br>&gt=3B interrupted=2C but it needs to be very long (wild guess abo= ut 6/8 meters).<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B Some of my EEG colleagues are unhappy = with both solutions because:<br>&gt=3B 1. You interrupt the signal cable an= d this interruption could introduce <br>&gt=3B artefacts in the EEG-signal.= <br>&gt=3B 2. The cable is too long and this could introduce artefacts in t= he <br>&gt=3B EEG-signal.<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B Is there anybody out there t= hat had this same problem and that can <br>&gt=3B suggest me which is the b= est way to solve it?<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B All the best=2C<br>&gt=3B m<br>&g= t=3B -- <br>&gt=3B http://www.psy.unipd.it/~grassi/<br>&gt=3B http://www.sp= ringer.com/978-1-4614-2196-2<br>&gt=3B http://www.finveneto.it/nuoto_scheda= atleta.php?id_atleta=3D73076<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B -------------------------= -----<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B Date: Wed=2C 5 Jun 2013 06:55:53 +0100<br>&gt= =3B From: =3D?iso-8859-1?Q?fr=3DE9d=3DE9ric_maintenant?=3D &lt=3Bfmainte= nant@xxxxxxxx&gt=3B<br>&gt=3B Subject: Re: SV: RE: Perceptual basis of evol= ving western musical styles<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B ---1690458260-1672112700-1= 370411753=3D:90110<br>&gt=3B Content-Type: text/plain=3B charset=3Diso-8859= -1<br>&gt=3B Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt= =3B Sorry to interrupt again. Would you see any difference in the evolution= of =3D<br>&gt=3B western musical style between 1960s and 1980s? or 1900s a= nd 1920s? FM=3D0A=3D0A=3D<br>&gt=3B =3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A___________________= _____________=3D0A De=3DA0: Pablo Hern=3DE1n Rodri=3D<br>&gt=3B guez Zivic = &lt=3Belsonidoq@xxxxxxxx&gt=3B=3D0A=3DC0=3DA0: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx = =3D0AEnvo=3D<br>&gt=3B y=3DE9 le : Mardi 4 juin 2013 14h33=3D0AObjet=3DA0: = Re: SV: RE: Perceptual basis =3D<br>&gt=3B of evolving western musical styl= es=3D0A =3D0A=3D0A=3D0AHi David=2C=3D0A=3D0AThank you!=3DA0=3D<br>&gt=3B = =3D0AI'm glad that both=2C Eric has a concern about my analysis=2C and you = don't.=3D<br>&gt=3B Otherwise=2C there would be no discussion :).=3D0A=3D0= AWith respect to the selec=3D<br>&gt=3B tion bias of the corpus=2C it may b= e. However=2C if you look in the Supporting =3D<br>&gt=3B Information=2C we= did a control by projecting another corpus (the Alicante's =3D<br>&gt=3B 9= GDB) into the factors=2C and we found very similar results. However=2C I do= n't=3D<br>&gt=3B exactly recall how the projection values where for the 9G= DB corpus with re=3D<br>&gt=3B spect to the IR principles.=3DA0=3D0A=3D0AYo= u are right with respect to the Baroq=3D<br>&gt=3B ue overshoot. Yet=2C the= end of the Baroque is a very arbitrary date as well=2C=3D<br>&gt=3B since= it's the year of Bach's death. So=2C it could be the case that for 20 =3D<= br>&gt=3B years after Bach died=2C similar music was still been written (ma= ybe someone =3D<br>&gt=3B who knows more about music history can tell me if= this make sense).=3D0A=3D0AAn=3D<br>&gt=3B yway=2C thanks for your comment= s!!=3D0A=3D0APablo=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0AOn Mon=2C Jun 3=2C 20=3D<br>&gt= =3B 13 at 7:50 AM=2C David Morris &lt=3Bdmorris@xxxxxxxx&gt=3B wrote:=3D0A= =3D0AHi Pablo=2C=3D0A&gt=3B=3D<br>&gt=3B =3D0A&gt=3BI don't share Eric's co= ncern about a drawback and found this article de=3D<br>&gt=3B finitely wort= hy of your shameless self-promotion. =3DA0Congratulations. =3DA0It=3D<br>&g= t=3B 's perplexing that the closure projection results for the Classical pe= riod =3D<br>&gt=3B are so low. =3DA0I would have ex=3DE5ected them to be am= ongst the highest. =3DA0C=3D<br>&gt=3B ould this relate to selection bias i= n the corpus=2C or does it have to do wit=3D<br>&gt=3B h the definition (as= per the Carol and Krumhansl reference which I should p=3D<br>&gt=3B robabl= y try and wrap my feeble mind around). =3DA0Also=2C on account of the two= =3D<br>&gt=3B deaths that occured=2C I think that the second year overshoo= ts the end of th=3D<br>&gt=3B e Baroque by 20 years=2C but that doesn't eff= ect your analysis.=3D0A&gt=3B=3D0A&gt=3BAll th=3D<br>&gt=3B e best=3D0A&gt= =3B=3D0A&gt=3BDavid=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A-- =3D0Ahttp://pablozivic.com.ar/ <br>&gt= =3B ---1690458260-1672112700-1370411753=3D:90110<br>&gt=3B Content-Type: te= xt/html=3B charset=3Diso-8859-1<br>&gt=3B Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted= -printable<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B &lt=3Bhtml&gt=3B&lt=3Bbody&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv s= tyle=3D3D"color:#000=3B background-color:#fff=3B font-family:Co=3D<br>&gt= =3B urier New=2C courier=2C monaco=2C monospace=2C sans-serif=3Bfont-size:1= 2pt"&gt=3B&lt=3Bfont siz=3D<br>&gt=3B e=3D3D"2"&gt=3BSorry to interrupt aga= in. Would you see any difference in the evolu=3D<br>&gt=3B tion of western = musical style between 1960s and 1980s? or 1900s and 1920s? =3D<br>&gt=3B FM= &lt=3Bbr&gt=3B&lt=3B/font&gt=3B&lt=3Bfont face=3D3D"Arial" size=3D3D"2"&gt= =3B&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B&lt=3B/font&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv&gt=3B&lt=3Bspan&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr&g= t=3B&lt=3B/sp=3D<br>&gt=3B an&gt=3B&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr&= gt=3B&lt=3B/div&gt=3B &lt=3Bdiv style=3D3D"font-family: Courier New=2C cou= rier=2C =3D<br>&gt=3B monaco=2C monospace=2C sans-serif=3B font-size: 12pt= =3B"&gt=3B &lt=3Bdiv style=3D3D"font-family=3D<br>&gt=3B : times new roman= =2C new york=2C times=2C serif=3B font-size: 12pt=3B"&gt=3B &lt=3Bdiv dir= =3D3D"l=3D<br>&gt=3B tr"&gt=3B &lt=3Bhr size=3D3D"1"&gt=3B &lt=3Bfont face= =3D3D"Arial" size=3D3D"2"&gt=3B &lt=3Bb&gt=3B&lt=3Bspan style=3D3D"fo=3D<br= >&gt=3B nt-weight:bold=3B"&gt=3BDe&amp=3Bnbsp=3B:&lt=3B/span&gt=3B&lt=3B/b&= gt=3B Pablo Hern=3DE1n Rodriguez Zivic &amp=3Blt=3Bel=3D<br>&gt=3B sonidoq@xxxxxxxx= GMAIL.COM&amp=3Bgt=3B&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B &lt=3Bb&gt=3B&lt=3Bspan style=3D3D"font= -weight: bold=3B"&gt=3B=3DC0&amp=3Bnbsp=3B:&lt=3B=3D<br>&gt=3B /span&gt=3B&= lt=3B/b&gt=3B AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx &lt=3Bbr&gt=3B &lt=3Bb&gt=3B&lt=3Bsp= an style=3D3D"font-weight: bol=3D<br>&gt=3B d=3B"&gt=3BEnvoy=3DE9 le :&lt= =3B/span&gt=3B&lt=3B/b&gt=3B Mardi 4 juin 2013 14h33&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B &lt=3Bb&= gt=3B&lt=3Bspan style=3D3D"=3D<br>&gt=3B font-weight:<br>&gt=3B bold=3B"&g= t=3BObjet&amp=3Bnbsp=3B:&lt=3B/span&gt=3B&lt=3B/b&gt=3B Re: SV: RE: Percept= ual basis of evolving we=3D<br>&gt=3B stern musical styles&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B &l= t=3B/font&gt=3B &lt=3B/div&gt=3B &lt=3Bdiv class=3D3D"y_msg_container"&gt= =3B&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B=3D<br>&gt=3B &lt=3Bdiv id=3D3D"yiv3572727833"&gt=3B&lt=3B= div dir=3D3D"ltr"&gt=3BHi David=2C&lt=3Bdiv&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B&lt=3B/div&g= t=3B&lt=3Bdiv sty=3D<br>&gt=3B le=3D3D""&gt=3BThank you!&amp=3Bnbsp=3B&lt= =3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv style=3D3D""&gt=3BI'm glad that both=2C Eric has =3D= <br>&gt=3B a concern about my analysis=2C and you don't. Otherwise=2C there= would be no di=3D<br>&gt=3B scussion :).&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv style=3D= 3D""&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B=3D0A=3D0A&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv style=3D3D""&gt= =3BWith resp=3D<br>&gt=3B ect to the selection bias of the corpus=2C it may= be. However=2C if you look in=3D<br>&gt=3B the Supporting Information=2C = we did a control by projecting another corpus =3D<br>&gt=3B (the Alicante's= 9GDB) into the factors=2C and we found very similar results. =3D<br>&gt=3B= However=2C I don't exactly recall how the projection values where for the = 9GD=3D<br>&gt=3B B corpus with respect to the IR principles.&amp=3Bnbsp=3B&= lt=3B/div&gt=3B=3D0A=3D0A&lt=3Bdiv style=3D3D"=3D<br>&gt=3B "&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr= &gt=3B&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv style=3D3D""&gt=3BYou are right with respec= t to the Baroque overs=3D<br>&gt=3B hoot. Yet=2C the end of the Baroque is = a very arbitrary date as well=2C since i=3D<br>&gt=3B t's the year of Bach'= s death. So=2C it could be the case that for 20 years af=3D<br>&gt=3B ter B= ach died=2C similar music was still been written (maybe someone who know=3D= <br>&gt=3B s more about music history can tell me if this make sense).&lt= =3B/div&gt=3B=3D0A=3D0A&lt=3Bdiv=3D<br>&gt=3B style=3D3D""&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr&g= t=3B&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv style=3D3D""&gt=3BAnyway=2C thanks for your c= omments!!&lt=3B/d=3D<br>&gt=3B iv&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv style=3D3D""&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr= &gt=3B&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv style=3D3D""&gt=3BPablo&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt= =3Bdiv style=3D3D""&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr=3D<br>&gt=3B &gt=3B&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3B= /div&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv class=3D3D"yiv3572727833gmail_extra"&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr&gt= =3B&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv class=3D3D"=3D<br>&gt=3B yiv3572727833gmail_quot= e"&gt=3BOn Mon=2C Jun 3=2C 2013 at 7:50 AM=2C David Morris &lt=3Bspa=3D<br>= &gt=3B n dir=3D3D"ltr"&gt=3B&amp=3Blt=3B&lt=3Ba rel=3D3D"nofollow" ymailto= =3D3D"mailto:dmorris@xxxxxxxx" =3D<br>&gt=3B target=3D3D"_blank" href=3D3D= "mailto:dmorris@xxxxxxxx"&gt=3Bdmorris@xxxxxxxx&lt=3B/a&gt=3B&amp=3Bg=3D<= br>&gt=3B t=3B&lt=3B/span&gt=3B wrote:&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B=3D0A=3D0A&lt=3Bblockqu= ote class=3D3D"yiv3572727833gmail_quote" st=3D<br>&gt=3B yle=3D3D"margin:0 = 0 0 .8ex=3Bborder-left:1px #ccc solid=3Bpadding-left:1ex=3B"&gt=3BHi P=3D<b= r>&gt=3B ablo=2C&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B=3D0A&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B=3D0AI don't share Eric's = concern about a drawback and found =3D<br>&gt=3B this article definitely wo= rthy of your shameless self-promotion. &amp=3Bnbsp=3BCong=3D<br>&gt=3B ratu= lations. &amp=3Bnbsp=3BIt's perplexing that the closure projection results = for =3D<br>&gt=3B the Classical period are so low. &amp=3Bnbsp=3BI would ha= ve ex=3DE5ected them to be a=3D<br>&gt=3B mongst the highest. &amp=3Bnbsp= =3BCould this relate to selection bias in the corpus=3D<br>&gt=3B =2C or do= es it have to do with the definition (as per the Carol and Krumhansl=3D<br>= &gt=3B reference which I should probably try and wrap my feeble mind aroun= d). &amp=3Bnb=3D<br>&gt=3B sp=3BAlso=2C on account of the two deaths that o= ccured=2C I think that the second=3D<br>&gt=3B year overshoots the end of = the Baroque by 20 years=2C but that doesn't effec=3D<br>&gt=3B t your analy= sis.&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B=3D0AAll the best&lt=3Bbr&gt= =3B=3D0A&lt=3Bspan class=3D3D"yiv35=3D<br>&gt=3B 72727833HOEnZb"&gt=3B&lt= =3Bfont color=3D3D"#888888"&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B=3D0ADavid&lt=3B/font&gt=3B&= lt=3B/span&gt=3B&lt=3B/blockqu=3D<br>&gt=3B ote&gt=3B&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3B= br&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr clear=3D3D"all"&gt=3B&lt=3Bdiv&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B&lt=3B/d= iv&gt=3B-- &lt=3Bbr&gt=3B&lt=3Ba rel=3D3D"nofollow" t=3D<br>&gt=3B arget=3D= 3D"_blank" href=3D3D"http://pablozivic.com.ar/"&gt=3Bhttp://pablozivic.com.= a=3D<br>&gt=3B r/&lt=3B/a&gt=3B=3D0A&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3Bb= r&gt=3B&lt=3Bbr&gt=3B&lt=3B/div&gt=3B &lt=3B/div&gt=3B &lt=3B/div&gt=3B &l= t=3B/div&gt=3B&lt=3B/body&gt=3B&lt=3B/html&gt=3B<br>&gt=3B ---1690458260-16= 72112700-1370411753=3D:90110--<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B -----------------------= -------<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B Date: Thu=2C 6 Jun 2013 09:50:19 +0000<br>&= gt=3B From: "Faulkner=2C Andrew" &lt=3Ba.faulkner@xxxxxxxx&gt=3B<br>&gt= =3B Subject: Re: Sound proof booth and EEG recording<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B D= ear Massimo<br>&gt=3B We had IAC UK install an adapted double wall booth fo= r EEG a few years back=3D<br>&gt=3B . They added some additional screening = through having no window in the door=3D<br>&gt=3B and by electrically bond= ing all the parts with braiding.=3D20<br>&gt=3B We also had DC lighting ins= talled and the facility to kill the ac power in =3D<br>&gt=3B the room.<br>= &gt=3B <br>&gt=3B For getting EEG/ABR data out of the room had a tube insta= lled through the w=3D<br>&gt=3B alls to an adjacent booth to take multicore= cables. My understanding is tha=3D<br>&gt=3B t thus tube acts as a wavegui= de and minimizes interference.<br>&gt=3B In practice we don't actually use = this. Instead we have a Biosemi setup wit=3D<br>&gt=3B h the amplifier/conv= erter located inside the room. This is battery powered =3D<br>&gt=3B and co= nnected through the wall by USB cabling to the PC outside. This kit =3D<br= >&gt=3B is working really well for us=2C for ABR as well as cortical respon= ses.<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B I am happy to get you more details if you are int= erested<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B Dr Andrew Faulkner<br>&gt=3B Head of Research = Department of Speech Hearing and Phonetic Sciences<br>&gt=3B UCL (Universit= y College London)<br>&gt=3B Rm 314=2C Chandler House=2C 2 Wakefield St<br>&= gt=3B London WC1N 1PF<br>&gt=3B tel 44 (0)20 7679 4075 (direct)<br>&gt=3B = Internal tel 24075<br>&gt=3B Fax: +44 (0)20 7679 4238=3D20<br>&gt=3B mailto= :a.faulkner@xxxxxxxx<br>&gt=3B http://www.ucl.ac.uk/psychlangsci/staff/shp= s-staff/a_faulkner<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B -----Original Message-----<br>&gt= =3B From: AUDITORY - Research in Auditory Perception [mailto:AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx= .MCG=3D<br>&gt=3B ILL.CA] On Behalf Of Massimo Grassi<br>&gt=3B Sent: 05 Ju= ne 2013 11:13<br>&gt=3B To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx<br>&gt=3B Subject: [AU= DITORY] Sound proof booth and EEG recording<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B Dear list = members=2C<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B we are about to buy a IAC soundproof booth = and=2C because here many people do=3D<br>&gt=3B EEG recordings=2C we were = thinking to have the booth electrically shielded. =3D<br>&gt=3B The booth w= ill be used to run psychoacoustics=2C cognitive science and neuros=3D<br>&g= t=3B cience experiments.<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B Here comes the problem. What = is the best way to carry the EEG-signal from t=3D<br>&gt=3B he inside of th= e booth to the outside of the booth?<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B So far we thought= two possible solutions.<br>&gt=3B 1. Place a panel on the booth's wall tha= t has (inside and outside) the spec=3D<br>&gt=3B ific plug of the signal ca= ble that comes out of EEG amplifier. In practice=2C=3D<br>&gt=3B we interr= upt the signal cable at the booth's wall.<br>&gt=3B 2. Make a hole on the b= ooth's wall. The hole starts high in the inside of t=3D<br>&gt=3B he booth= =2C runs downward inside the booth's wall and arrives low at the outs=3D<br= >&gt=3B ide of the booth. I this way the booth is acoustically safe because= the hol=3D<br>&gt=3B e is not direct and the EEG-signal cable is not inter= rupted=2C but it needs t=3D<br>&gt=3B o be very long (wild guess about 6/8 = meters).<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B Some of my EEG colleagues are unhappy with bo= th solutions because:<br>&gt=3B 1. You interrupt the signal cable and this = interruption could introduce art=3D<br>&gt=3B efacts in the EEG-signal.<br>= &gt=3B 2. The cable is too long and this could introduce artefacts in the E= EG-sign=3D<br>&gt=3B al.<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B Is there anybody out there th= at had this same problem and that can suggest =3D<br>&gt=3B me which is the= best way to solve it?<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B All the best=2C<br>&gt=3B m<br>= &gt=3B --<br>&gt=3B http://www.psy.unipd.it/~grassi/<br>&gt=3B http://www.s= pringer.com/978-1-4614-2196-2<br>&gt=3B http://www.finveneto.it/nuoto_sched= aatleta.php?id_atleta=3D3D73076<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B ----------------------= --------<br>&gt=3B <br>&gt=3B End of AUDITORY Digest - 5 Jun 2013 to 6 Jun = 2013 (#2013-132)<br>&gt=3B ************************************************= *************<br><BR> </div></body> </html>= --_f6b8a358-056d-4ce8-86d5-16c33d9170de_--


This message came from the mail archive
/var/www/postings/2013/
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <dpwe@ee.columbia.edu>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University