Science desk
< May 30	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	June 1 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 31[edit]

Laurel-Yanni, again[edit]

What is the scientific explanation why some people hear "Laurel" and others "Yanni"? 2601:646:8A00:A0B3:4CBD:5562:350E:838B (talk) 08:28, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Check the section called "Laurel-Yanny followup". The answer, according to the guy who started it, is that it depends on the frequency range of whatever listening device you happen to have. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:14, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yanny or Laurel explains and demonstrates with audio clips. DroneB (talk) 11:56, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes our article provides a decent explanation. I'm not sure why BB keeps mentioning the opinion of the person who spoke the clip as of it's the end all. He's an opera singer and there's no real evidence he has significant experience or knowledge psycholinguistics or anything of that sort. The opinion of those who do have knowledge appears to be that it's likely a mix of different factors. I highly doubt he intended it to be some sort of overreaching explanation, he just answered a question posed by an interviewer the best he could and I suspect assumed most people would understand his expertise in the area was limited. Nil Einne (talk) 13:45, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article gives the same information (and names the same guy) as the link I posted. So we're in agreement. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:11, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Um, are you reading some other article? I'm referring to our article this one Yanny or Laurel which would have looked something like [1] when you replied. It doesn't mention the listening device frequency claim of the person who spoke it anywhere. It only mentions him in relation to how it was recorded etc which is relevant and a completely different point to what you were saying. No one disputes that Laurel was spoken, this was known long before your followup. The info on the recording equipment has minor relevance although not that much and is not something you've ever mentioned anyway. (I don't think many people really thought the recording equipment was poor quality. More that the post processing and particularly compression may have created issues.) So no, no agreement. Our article does however provide useful info from experts, who again, I strongly suspect the opera singer would much rather you rely on than him, on reasons the phenomena arise which relate to frequencies (although equipment/listening devices aren't really mention). Nil Einne (talk) 15:45, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The best toy to play around with is [2] (which is cited in the article and previous discussion). Wnt (talk) 14:48, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it depends on the quality of the sound. When I first played it back, it unquestionably sounded like "laurel" - no doubt about it. But then I saw the video made at the White House, and someone was playing it back on their phone, and then I heard "yanni", or something close to it. I think that the sound degradation hearing it in that poor quality sound is an important factor. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 04:38, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]