There are objective realities in these sorts of things, at least two of them: what the actual object that is being represented is; and the physical characteristics of its (be it a picture or a sound clip) representation. What we are hearing/looking at is not the object but its representation. “This is not a pipe.”
We can measure the wavelengths of the stripes in the picture of the dress and the sound spectra of the word clip, but the subjective experience, the experienced reality by the viewer/listener, happens internally as the result of processing and classification in a top-down/bottom-up dance. These are unintentional ambiguous figure-ground illusions in which some only see one as figure, some only the other, and some can flip.
The question is what level this occurs at. How much is who has lost some high pitched hearing, how much is how trained one is at filtering out noise from signal, how much is top-down mechanisms and from what level. Do musicians hear this clip differently than those with little musical training for example? Do people raised in say Japan, or some other very different language cultures, hear this on average differently?
I hear Laurel on the original, and all three files on the SPIN column - even the one they say is Yanny.
On the NYTimes page, the slider works for me, but it goes rather far to the right before it changes.
As it approaches the right, I first start to hear “Gary” before it settles to “Yammy”. I don’t hear an n, I distinctly hear m’s.
Sliding back the other direction, it will stay “Yammy” closer to the middle than when I start in the middle, showing how the brain filters based on expectations.
Yes, the original voice said Laurel, and the sound file is intended to say Laurel and laurel is a word. That doesn’t change what some people hear, which is the result of the brain processing files that have been distorted through some string of electronic audio devices and ears.
Clear “yammy” (not yanny) for me, I have no idea how anyone gets Laurel out of it. I have to move to the third notch from the left on the NYT page to hear Laurel. Between the 3rd and 4th notch it’s sort of a hybrid yammy/Laurel.
It’s a scientific thing but I most deff. hear Yanny. I think it has something to do with the pitch and speed of the voice. My friend was telling me that he heard a male voice saying laurel and I literally, over the phone, heard what he described. Except on my phone, I heard a female voice saying “Yanny”.
Wow, so I just came in from outside, all hot and sweaty. Now when I go to the NYT page I clearly hear Laurel. I think they’re messing with us. :dubious:
The quality in the New York Times clip is so bad that I only hear laurel because that’s what I heard before. On neutral, it should sound like the original, but it doesn’t. It’s very distorted and choppy sounding. I’m not sure I hear Laurel because that’s what it sounds like, or because that’s what I expect. I definitely do not hear the “y” I would hear when starting the audio on the real thing.
That said, I was able to use it to hear Yanny. I had to slide it nearly all the way to the right, where the Yanny becomes the same pitch as Laurel was. But that sounds like Ya__y. maybe Yally. As I slide it back to the left, I can get it to sound more like Yanny if I keep listening for it.
But, the thing is, the “voice” starts to sound like a chipmunk, and not like a real person. And when I get within one and a half stops of neutral, I hear Laurel in a normal (but bassy) speaking pitch range, and then that removes my ability to hear Yanny anymore.
After that, the changeover point moves to two spots from the end, which is where I clicked to mark it, since I can’t hear it the way I originally did anymore. Still, the Yanny sounds like a slightly chipmunk real voice. While, even all the way to the left, Laurel still sounds mostly like a real person, with the real normal harmonics–or, at least, as close as they can with it being so choppy.
FWIW I listened and while the effect was more muted in concert it did crop up - most notably, when he sang a long “oo” vowel (“Jesu!”) you could clearly hear in the upper overtones an “ee” vowel. There’s probably a scientific explanation for this but I can’t be bothered to look it up.
This comes across as some kind of indignant logical response, when this is all about differences in auditory processing. People are hearing what they hear.
Trust me, when the “yanny” stuff clicks in, it sounds exactly like “yanny” to me. It’s a weird effect, and I’ve only got it to work on me once (well, one specific period of time, but over about a dozen samples), but it’s really uncanny. It sounds like a voice saying “yanny.” It doesn’t sound like “just a sound.” It literally sounds like a voice saying “yanny.”
One of the guys in my office - a real know it all type- heard “laurel”. As the rest of us were talking and having fun with it, all he wanted to do was “explain” it to us (you know, by reading out loud the same articles we had all seen). When the origins of it were revealed and the fact that the word being said is laurel, he almost broke his own arm patting himself on the back. I could not make him understand the spirit of the issue. He just lives to be “right”.
It’s like an “optical” illusion with your ears. It’s like an auditory version of an image where your brain can switch between seeing two different things, like this one of a old/young woman.
I hear Laurel. I have to move the slider to the rightmost segment before I hear Yanny. But once I hear Yanny, I have to move the slider left 2-3 segments before I year Laurel again. But then to get back to Yanny, I have to slide it all the way to the right to year Yanny again. So it seems like once my brain has decided on the sound, I need to modify the sound a lot to get it to hear the other.