Okay, now I get it. You are playing with the semantics regarding the terms "barely", "clearly" and "readily" that have no definitive reference and are open to interpretation. That was not clear from your earlier post where you stated that the book was incorrect on the
subject rather than indicating that your issue was actually the specific terminology used. What is really the important point is simply that it is a noticeable or perceptible difference to most people, adding other adjectives may just be confusing the point.
| Quote: |
Think about it - if 3db is barely noticeable how would 10db sound twice as loud? Got a mixer? Move the fader 3db & listen to the difference.
|
3dB on a fader is not 3dBSPL and relating those as seemed to be done is wrong. There are many factors that could make even any indirect relationship nonlinear. The fact is that "3dB" and "10dB" are actually completely meaningless terms by themselves and using dB without noting the application and reference, much less mixing different dB references such as dBSPL and dBV/dBu, is very poor practice and leads to many misunderstandings. If we are going to worry about the nuances of the language used, then we probably should to show the same concern when referencing dB and levels.
If I remember correctly, 1 sone = 40 phons = the loudness of a 1kHz pure tone at 40dBSPL re: 20 micropascals. A 10dBSPL increase in the level of the 1kHz tone doubles the sone level, thus the general concept that a difference of 10dBSPL is perceived as a doubling of loudness. Of course all of this is based on research into the perception of sound by individuals, so the general results really only apply to some mythical generic person and will vary from person to person.
Author
Topic: Is +3db twice as loud? (Read 57884 times)