h a l f b a k e r yFaster than a stationary bullet.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Frequent exposure of children to music at an early age has been popularly linked with benefits to their mental development, capacity for intelligence and planning, and educational aptitude; many mothers-to-be will bathe themselves in classical music of all types in attempts to stimulate the mental development
of their unborn children. No doubt, however, that what the fetus hears is a rather muffled and liquid-distorted semi-musical sound, with at least a tempo.
Although I'm uncertain that the 'peekier' intonations are reproducable, I propose a modification or addition to the software or hardware of any musical playback device, CD, MP3, digital tape, whatever, that would essentially pre-distort the selection in a matter that would negate the distortions experienced in liquids with sound properties near to water. The mother would hear something more resembling a noise with a tempo, but the fetus would hear Beethoven as he was meant to be heard.
Of course, this would give way to the new style of "underwater bands" which would make their mark producing music best heard underwater; compilation CD's, and attempts at live concerts in swimming pools.
Underwater Speakers
http://www.recreoni...rwater_speakers.htm
Includes frequency-corrector circuits for distortion-free sound. A bit big to mount 'in utero', though. [Cedar Park, Oct 05 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]
BéBéSounds
http://www.asseenon...m/delgifsetlis.html
Here's a device for playing music for a fetus, but it doesn't mention anything about distortion. [krelnik, Oct 05 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]
Underwater concerts
Underwater_20Orchestra
Similar [csea, Nov 25 2009]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
A (real-life) HB story: When my kids were in uteri, I spoke to them because I was told that it would familiarize them with their Dad. Being the experimental type, I of course talked to them through a paper towel tube that I observed causing a greater reaction than speaking directly at an abdomen. |
|
| |
<flash forward - years later> I come up with a similar HB idea for sound that works well traversing multiple mediums. I run the idea by the kids (for the same reason - stimulating creativity). They say “Dad, that’s baked”. So I never posted the idea, but I also never found a baked device that could do it. |
|
| |
Do they remember that I did that? Why do they say it’s baked when it’s not? |
|
| |
Hm. I'm interested in the notion of negative distortion. I'm not sure that could be done. It would need to be subtractive, and I can't quite work that out in my head as being possible. |
|
| |
I've been scuba diving in a tank which had piped sound. It was pretty clear actually. Only problem was that I couldn't sing along. |
|
| |
As long as you had some sort of before and after waveform, I don't think it would be difficult to use some sort of equation mapping each particular frequency to its underwater response. Correct for each frequency ratio as input, and there you have it. Ie, you play A: you get B underwater. Use A:B as a response mapping. Now, multiply A by B/A to get C in input as a first attempt. Iterate as necessary to achieve a clear response. |
|
| |
Wasn't thinking about 'in utero' mounting, though that could be fun. |
|
| |
Ah, yes, well Spock figured this about 45 minutes into Star Trek <whaterver - the one with the whales>. |
|
| |
Bottom line, as long as the recipient is receiving some sort of sound and there is a 1:1 mapping between frequencies and a signal response with no dropouts, it should be possible, if subject to degrees of variation. Granted, the input signal may sound nothing like Beethoven, and the output quality might sound like a slow tape recorder. |
|
| |
I could have sworn we did this idea already, but darned if I can find it. |
|
| |
The idea of predistortion could be used in air as well. Over long distances, sound gets distorted because different frequencies travel at different velocities and have different attenuations. So, for a given distance, you could delay some frequencies and amply others, making your meaning perfectly clear. |
|
| |
[pluter]: The frequency of the sound does not change its speed. Only the temperature and pressure (elevation) have effect on the speed. |
|
| |
// as long as ... there is a 1:1 mapping between frequencies and a signal response with no dropouts // |
|
| |
I'm not sure that's applicable in this case. It might not be 1:1 (for all measureable intent, anyway), and so might not be reversible. I don't know though, I'm just bringing this up. |
|
| |
[Det], So if I play certain frequency, I'm liable to get no significant response? Or if I play another, I might get two? |
|
| |
I keep rethinking this and I keep coming back to the same conclusion. Sound doesn't work this way, Ray. |
|
| |
For example, say you have a particularly bass-heavy passage in a piece. A lot of that bass is going to get eaten up as the sound passes through the liquid, resulting in a muffled effect. Now how do you go about producing a version of that bass that will translate unmuffled? You can't. It's gonna be muffled no matter how you produce it. You can alter the original signal such that the low-end is rolled way back to decrease the muffly-ness, and that will work, but the end result having passed through the liquid will not sound like the original. |
|
| |
I don't see how it can be done. |
|
| |
This CD would be a loud, irritating high-pitched noise -- maybe like fingers on a chalkboard. Never mind the baby, Mom won’t tolerate it. You know, this form of “music” will return when the child reaches adolescence. |
|
| |
If a company sold “Baby Distortion Mozart”, with a slight phasing sound, people would buy it. You just need the right sales pitch. |
|
| |
I'm with [waugs], I don't see how to do it. [talking out my
ass here, way over my head], the water/flesh will filter
certain frequencies. You'll need to amplify those
frequencies to get them through, which might work for
some, but there just might not be any sources for certain
frequencies to get into the womb. |
|
| |
Additionally, are you going to try to adjust for the under-
developed ear and brain of the fetus? |
|
| |
What do fetuses dream about when they sleep in the
womb? |
|
| |
[o], exactly. Let's say the low-end muffling is a problem per waug's example. Would it not be possible to exaggerate the accentuation to accomodate? Make the low notes more staccato, modify the woofer's output signal to a peekier response. |
|
| |
[oxen], I would market the product for later-term, after the ear had been developed, and limit the volume to a safe level. Perhaps only to be used by perscription, as well, in order to not interfere with the baby's sleep cycle. |
|
| |
I suspect that the distortion in water is the result of resonance, reverberation and refraction as well as attenuation, so there would probably need to be some active feedback rather than a simple frequency-based filter. |
|
| |
Right. Might be variable according to the person's size, as well. |
|
| |
// what do fetuses dream about // |
|
| |
The embarrasment of going to school with their umbilical still attached. |
|
| |
from krelnik's link: "hear hiccups"
Fetuses can hiccup? |
|
| |
The more solid an object is, the better it conducts sound. What you want is not a "pre-distorter" but a method for creating the soundwaves directly into your liquid medium, it should be percussive. |
|
| |
// Of course, this would give way to the new style of "underwater bands" which would make their mark producing music best heard underwater // |
|
| |
I'm pretty sure that there are several bands playing music like this already, we just haven't realised it and keep putting them on Top of The Pops without submerging them first. |
|
| |
There are plenty of bands on Top of the Pops that I'd like to see submerged, perhaps with some sort of weighty footwear involved. |
|
| |
There is link between early exposure to music and intelligence. How would listening to classical differ from listening to anything else. |
|
| |
Oh man. I thought this was going to be a live symphony version of MTV's liquid television. From my days of not doing drugs I can already tell you that Bevis and Butthead episodes sync up pretty well to Chopin. |
|
| |
[drow], I think it has to do with melodic harmonies or some such... Anyways, adults study better to classical than anything else for these reasons, pretty sure. |
|
| |
//Bevis and Butthead episodes sync up pretty well to Chopin//
maybe not the top of the list of things I didn't need to know but pretty close. |
|
| |
They simulated this in one of the Harry Potter movies (after Rowling wrote the simulation in the book), where an egg when opened created an ear-splitting squeal no one could stand, but when opened under water, it was the song of a mermaid. |
|
| |
Still, sounds like a research project for a grad student in acoustic science, what ever that is (a branch of physics?). |
|
| |
The device could be a filter/amplifier with a stereo
input jack and a couple of speakers attached to an
elastic waistband. |
|
| |
//When my kids were in uteri ... I of course talked to them through a paper towel tube //
Must... flush... mental... image... |
|
| |