The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
lcamtuf.substack.com
The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
1–10 of 511 posts
Re: The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
#2Great post, the fusion of scale with unit is a mess.
When using it as a factor, for example when describing attenuation or amplification it is fine and can be used similar to percent. Though the author is right - it would be even more elegant to use scientific notation like 1e-4 in this case.
For using it as a unit it would really help to have a common notation for the reference quantity (e.g. 1mW).
But I guess there is no way to change it now that they are established since decades in the way the author describes.
Re: The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
#3While the author is technically right, I must argue that in the area of sound work, decibels make sense. Zero is base level, -3db is half loudness, +3dB is double. There may be a better way to describe loudness, but decibel is good enough.
Re: The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
#4While the author is technically right, I must argue that in the area of sound work, decibels make sense. Zero is base level, -3db is half loudness, +3dB is double. There may be a better way to describe loudness, but decibel is good enough.
So on my amplifier, 0db is the loudest and -50db, where I usually listen is what?
-47db is definitely not twice as loud as -50db, of course.
Re: The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
#5The nice thing about dBs is that they are logarithms: successive applications of gain/attenuation are easily computed by just adding up the dBs. (but yes, I agree that there should be more consistency in their definition)
Re: The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
#6While the author is technically right, I must argue that in the area of sound work, decibels make sense. Zero is base level, -3db is half loudness, +3dB is double. There may be a better way to describe loudness, but decibel is good enough.
So on my amplifier, 0db is the loudest and -50db, where I usually listen is what? -47db is definitely not twice as loud as -50db, of course.
I'm not confident in what I'm saying here, so please correct me if I'm wrong as I'd like to learn:
Human hearing isn't linear in terms of loudness. So a 3db increase in loudness sounds like "an increase", but the pressure is actually double. Hence, it makes sense to use db to describe loudness even in the context of perceived loudness to human-hearing.
This is similar to brightness. In photography, "stops" are used to measure brightness. One stop brighter is technically twice the light, but to the human eye, it just looks "somewhat brighter", as human brightness appreciation is logarithmic, just like "stops" and "db".
Re: The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
#7While the author is technically right, I must argue that in the area of sound work, decibels make sense. Zero is base level, -3db is half loudness, +3dB is double. There may be a better way to describe loudness, but decibel is good enough.
So on my amplifier, 0db is the loudest and -50db, where I usually listen is what? -47db is definitely not twice as loud as -50db, of course.
I mean, it should be, unless your amplifier is taking its own liberties with the definition of dB.
Re: The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
#8Weird that the author makes no mention of Sones: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sone
Re: The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
#9A pet peeve I share! An expanded version of this article should become the article on decibels on Wikipedia.
I've read that article many times over my life and for the first couple times came back thinking I was too dim to understand.
Transparently leading it with "Here's something ridiculously overcomplicated that makes no sense whatsoever..." wouldn't fit Wikipedia's serious voice but actually be pedagogically very helpful.
Re: The scientific “unit” we call the decibel
#10Weird that the author makes no mention of Sones: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sone
Nor phons!
“The phon is a logarithmic unit of loudness level for tones and complex sounds.”