In Reply to: RE: Better duck under that desk; posted by Ryelands on August 4, 2009 at 02:55:41:
" BTW, I don't get Tony's argument that the tests should have used a frequency more in line with RBCD parameters. As I see it, Kunchur was researching human hearing, not RBCD technology, and presumably (and certainly should have) chose his tones accordingly."
I made my comment in response to an AA poster, not as a criticism of Kunchur's work. As you correctly stated, Kunchur designed his experiments and reported his results to a scientific community interested in human hearing. Had he been an engineer rather than a scientist or had he been publishing in JAES then perhaps he would have designed the tests differently.
Kunchur's choice of a 7000 kHz square wave was no error. But he did make an error by jumping into a snake pit on the two forums. I doubt that he will repeat that mistake! There is little point in debating with a bunch of characters who criticize statements taken out of context and then go on to admit they haven't even read the scientific papers that were the substance of the work. Some of the people on those forums have the smarts and knowledge to appreciate Kunchur's work, but unfortunately they appear to be suffering from overpowering egos that prevent proper use of their mental faculties.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Tony Lauck 08/5/0917:29:58 08/5/09 (0)