Re: OT-fundamentals in sound (was singing bowls)

[rich <rich@nuvision.com>]

Hey, if the contestants want to bow out, no problems here.  But i 
think the audience is enjoying the contest...whether anybody's 
getting thrashed or not.

Seriously, i have been enjoying this thread.  I was afraid it was 
going to degenerate into "oh, there's more stuff we're supposed to 
buy", but having it mutate into theories of psychoacoustics has been 
informative and refreshing...

thanks for your input.  now would somebody pull out their "Repeater" 
stick and beat this list back into purchasing mode?  Damon?


rich

ps.  anybody know if Larry Tremblay wandered off list?  must say i 
miss being beaten with Larry's 'historical accuracy' stick now and 
then...



>I'm not claiming to be an acoustic engineer.  So, I will already admit
>defeat if that's what's due me.  However, I think there is a fallacy
>between drawing a similarity between the way a resonating cone or
>half-sphere (like a bowl) produces sound and that produced by the two-way
>excursion of a rigid cone (a speaker).  The surface area argument just
>doesn't feel right to me when we're not talking about excursion, but 
>rather
>a three-dimensional resonance.  And for right now, "feel" is all I've got.
>I'm still looking, though.
>
>Will someone with a real working knowledge of this take the baton?  I'm
>foundlessly proselytizing and Bret threatens to beat me with a bigger 
>stick
>than I'd care to take.