Originally posted by NyxieI can lick my elbow and I'm not a woman. 🙂
oi oi oi, I give up. it's just useless trivia. I guess then he might be looking down? I shan't defend anymore I was just posting it out of boredom.
They say Leonardi DaVinci invented scissors, but the egyptians actually did.
They say it's impossible to lick your elbow, but some women can.
Nyxie
~ Cheshire Cat 😀
It is not possible for a sound source to have anti-resonance. Anti-resonance is a property of sound spaces, ie: a recording booth in a studio will be designed to exhibit anti-resonance to allow the microphone to pick up as clean a sound as possible by reducing reflection from the various wall surfaces within it. A duck's quack, just like any other sound, will echo if introduced into a reflective environment. An echo is just an audible reflection of a sound wave back to the original point of origin so as to be heard and ALL sound reflects in this way.
1 edit
It is not possible for a sound source to have anti-resonance.As regards the duck: http://www.acoustics.salford.ac.uk/acoustics_world/duck/duck.htm
If you invert an acoustic signal it can be made to cancel the original, however this relies on fast response times and can presently only be achieved where the signal is quasi-stationary (ie not transient like speech) and in enclosed spaces where little spatial variation occurs, viz aircraft cockpits, air ducts etc
Edit: Though, as you say, it's not anti-resonance
Originally posted by Marcusrwhen do you guys have the time to look up all these sites?
As regards the duck: http://www.acoustics.salford.ac.uk/acoustics_world/duck/duck.htm
If you invert an acoustic signal it can be made to cancel the original, however this relies on fast response times and can presently only be achieved where the signal is quasi-stationary (ie not transient like speech) and in enclosed spaces where little spatial variation ...[text shortened]... urs, viz aircraft cockpits, air ducts etc
Edit: Though, as you say, it's not anti-resonance