# HEARING SPACE Refereeing  ## Metadata - Author: [[read]] - Full Title: HEARING SPACE Refereeing - Category: #books - Summary: insert summary - My notes: - Document Tags: [[refereeing]] - Summary: Auditory experience includes awareness of space, not just sound qualities like pitch and loudness. Timbre helps us perceive where sounds come from and the nature of sound sources. Our perception of auditory space is direct and changes with experience, showing it is part of how we hear. ## LLM Chats ## NotebookLM ## LLM Audio ## Highlights > According to the a-spatial view defended by Peter Strawson (1959), the relevant object of auditory perceptual experience is sound ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1fsqfjwm92pxxhpr8xs4rq3)) - Note: is that a good description? > In response to Strawson, some have argued for the spatiality of auditory experience in a way that is disconnected from timbre, pitch, and loudness. Casey O’Callaghan (2007; 2011) and Elvira Di Bona (2019) hold such a view. We hear sounds “coming from” a certain direction and at a “certain distance” from ourselves and from other sound-sources not because of these three properties, but because the auditory system contains mechanisms that are responsible for the processing of these spatial relations. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1fswy8s6c8p1bv93cxz1vhd)) > ]he dimensions on which pitch, timbre, and loudness vary are not ones to which changes in location correspond” ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1fym4q7gbx4pvg83h5p8s48)) > I argue that auditory phenomenology is spatial because space is perceptually experienced, in part through timbre. I ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1ft0wj4mm0qwjxf84pn0s9s)) > Part of this content is determined by timbre, which allows us to perceive certain spatial aspects of sounding bodies, such as the nature of the sounding body (its material composition, size, weight, shape), what is happening to the sounding body (how it was set into motion), and where the sounding body is relative to ourselves and to other sounding bodies (Van den Doel and Pai 1998, 386). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1ft1kkcmftdqn7w8yd58h9r)) > Similar to loudness ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1ft2d89jkn9xk17x42asjmc)) - Note: ??? > Timbre has been positively described as the ‘sound quality’ or ‘tone color’ of a sound. But out of the three canonical qualities, timbre is the most poorly understood because it has been identified negatively in relation to pitch and loudness, as: That attribute of auditory sensation which enables a listener to judge that two nonidentical sounds, similarly presented and having the same loudness and pitch, are dissimilar (American National Standards Institute 1994, 35). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1ft3ek36x4rsrjg47pc99rq)) - Note: clumsy way of putting things > Strawson asks his audience to consider a presentation of color in a visual scene and a presentation of sound in an auditory scene, arguing that in the former case there are spatial relations between the three dimensions of color that do not hold in the latter case (1959, 79). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1ft6b4bhhqtsc4bdsevxwww)) > Strawson’s argument asks the readers to consider a “snapshot” of a visual scene and compare it to a “snapshot” of an auditory scene.4 He concludes that the former exhibits spatial relations to one another in a way that the latter does not: “the momentary states of the sound-patches of the auditory scene do not audibly exhibit the auditory analogue of spatial relations to each other at a moment” (Strawson 1959, 80). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1fx9g59ezyws2detwxbnekg)) > First, the method assumes that good theorizing can occur when auditory experience is given a “snapshot” treatment, where a moment of time is frozen, singled out, and analyzed. Such a snapshot treatment dismisses the robust temporal nature of audition. To dismiss the temporal dimension of audition is to dismiss many of its interesting and illuminating attributes. Why should we think that auditory spatial relations can be captured in a momentary time-slice? ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1fxb8szgn7pk6dxs7g4zcfk)) - Note: Because there is no reason to think that have spatial relations anything with tempo to do with temporal relations. I’m not saying that they can’t be connected, but I need an argument > Second, the comparative method assumes that for auditory perceptual experience to contain spatial content, the structure of the auditory spatial field must have the same structure as the visual spatial field. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1fxfj5hex9fd5f3mb4rrcf8)) > space is perceptually experienced ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1ftae7bdyy032aadsvggm9k)) - Note: not the way it was phrased before > The inferential interpretation concedes that our awareness of timbre is constitutive of auditory phenomenology, but argues that our awareness of timbre does not entail that our awareness of space is also constitutive of auditory phenomenology. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1ftc3pk0nz1ct7v6yhf0v29)) > Our perception of space could be a perceptual belief that is formed on the basis of our auditory awareness of e.g. timbre. If you see something that is apple shaped, it does not entail that you are seeing an apple on its basis. The same could be said about timbre. Just because you hear a sound as having a particular timbre, does not entail that you hear that that auditory object as coming from a certain direction, or as located at a certain place in auditory space. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1ftcspt7z7pj6wpw2s8eyqg)) - Note: Whuh? > If our awareness of auditory space is perceptual and is not inferred on the basis of auditory phenomenology, auditory space would be capable of adaptation, rivalry (percepts are all-or-none), pop-out (a target can be easily perceived among distractors), or the processing responsible for it would be involuntary, fast, or unconscious (Fodor 1983; Block 2024, 61; Drozdzowicz 2023, 197). I focus on adaptation as a perceptual marker for auditory space perception. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1ftdf7m54n2s7ybkzhnx438)) > Studies dating back to the 1950’s support the claim that humans adapt to auditory space (Held 1955; Florentine 1976; Musicant and Butler 1980; King et al. 2000; Dahmen et al. 2010; Mendonça 2014; Lingner et al. 2018). In order to induce changes in auditory space, experimenters have used ear blocks (plug one ear with a sound attenuating ear plug), ear molds (fitted to the external ear of each individual), hearing devices (e.g. hearing aids), or altered head-related transfer functions (which synthesizes localizations cues to a new location). Each of these methods allows the sound of interest to be manipulated to correspond to an altered sound-source position (Hofman et al. 1998; Shinn-Cunningham 1998; van Wanrooij van Opstal 2005; Zahorik et al. 2006; Mendonça et al. 2012; Parseihian and Katz 2012; Carlile et al. 2013; Mendonça 2014). While participants are wearing e.g. ear blocks or ear molds, they are exposed to sounds with altered auditory localization cues. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1fxq12hsjtp5vgn2xbfn9gs)) - Note: Not very clear the first sentence > In most cases, participants heard the sound as being located away from adapting stimulus (Mendonça 2014, 5). That is, the canonical repulsive effect of adaptation was demonstrated. For instance, Carlile et al. (2001) exposed participants to a broadband sound for a number of minutes which resulted in a shift of the perceived location of subsequent sound sources away from the location of the adapting stimuli (2001, 422). Such repulsive adaptation effects are echoed in other studies such as Lingner et al. (2018) and Dahmen et al.’s (2010) experiments, where they found a shift in perceived location away from the adapting stimulus (2018, 7; 2010, 944). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1fxvb36bv42e6km8x054b9y)) > A crucial part of timbre awareness is awareness of the size of the object that was set into vibration, its geometry (shape and dimensionality), its material composition, the way it was impacted (struck), the location of the impact (where the object was struck), the force of the impact, as well as the location on the body that was responsible for its vibration, (e.g. where on the drum a stick was struck and where that drum is relative to you) (Miller and Carterette 1975; Samson et al. 1997; Van den Doel and Pai 1998, 385; Caclin et al 2005; McAdams 2019, 24). Thus, timbre awareness allows us to perceive the nature of the sounding body, what is happening to it, and where it is relative to ourselves and to other sounding bodies (Van den Doel and Pai 1998, 386). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k1fxy107pz6y21sqnxw2mpxq)) - Note: Not very clear. Specially with Awareness vs perceptual