this post was submitted on 28 May 2025
45 points (95.9% liked)

No Stupid Questions

40913 readers
973 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The prequel to the 'A Quiet Place' saga got me thinking.

spoiler alert!

There is a scene in which many humans march towards a safety point. Each individual human would have been relatively quiet, but because there are a lot of them (potentially hundreds), they end up being, as a whole, loud enough to alert the monsters so they get all killed.

This would suggest that many sources of noise which are near to each other and generate more or less the same amount of noise end up adding up so that the end result in dB is more or less the sum of the individual dB levels.

But then again, it's fiction.

Back to reality, I work in a room full of different servers which have also very different levels of noise. I have noticed that from my standpoint, the noise of the quietest server seems to disappear whenever the loudest is running, so it kind of does blow my mind how our perception of noise works...

top 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 4 points 22 hours ago

Each individual human would have been relatively quiet, but because there are a lot of them (potentially hundreds), they end up being, as a whole, loud enough

This might happen because of "resonance" - but I don't know your specific scene.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_resonance

the noise of the quietest server seems to disappear whenever the loudest is running, so it kind of does blow my mind how our perception of noise works...

The effect with the servers is called "sound masking" (and some other commenters have written about it), and how our peception works here is called "auditory masking" (nobody has mentioned this one so far).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_masking

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auditory_masking

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Sound is complicated. Its both physics and perception.

The decibel scale is logarithmic. If you double the energy you increase the dB level by 3. Two people will be about 3 dB higher, four people would be 6, eight people would increase the level by 9 dB, sixteen would be 12 dB higher and so on.

Some people in this thread are talking about destructive interference. That really only happens in noise canceling headphones, or situations designed to cause it. In open air, its not really an issue that comes up. I've never become quieter by playing an instrument with someone else. It just doesn't work like that.

What lets the monster hear you is the peak volume, not the minimum or average, so it will be close to the 3 dB doubling rule.

There's also perception. Your brain does a ton of filtering of sound information. Your brain is constantly trying to pick out the important sounds and ignore the rest. That's why the quieter severs seem quieter when something louder happens. Also that's why some people use white noise machines to sleep.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

This is partially wrong as well. Non-coherent energy does not add like this, and is a perfectly natural phenomenon, not something which only happens in headphones. If you play two synchronized sinusoids some meters apart, you will get perfect energy doubling only along a single line in the far field which is equidistant to both sources. Any angular divergence from this line will reduce the coherence energy relative to the phase angle. Audible sound has a wavelength of about 15m to a few cm so any real channel with any real sound will experience significant total coherence attenuation as a function of the angular offset of each pairwise emitter.

You are correct that a yelling crowd will never be quieter than a single person, but there is a massive natural diminishing effect which prevents a pure log-rule volume increase.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I was discussing real world sounds in open air. Yes, destructive interference is something you have to account for when dealing with sound systems. A speaker playing the same sound in the inverse phase will cause issues, but a group of people, as was the topic, will never be anywhere close that precise.

If the concern is safety, as it is in this example, the concern is the worst case. And the worse possible case is when all the sounds interfere constructively.

It's not really a counterargument when I specifically said my logic of ignoring destructive interference doesn't apply in "situations designed to cause it" like two synchronized sinusoids. Most people are not synchronized sinusoids.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Right, the fact that people are not synchronized sinusoids is why coherence energy is the way I describe it. If you randomly place emitters and receivers in real space, playing real signals with real bandwidth, the distribution of coherence factors between pairwise emitters is generally positive, but is also not 1.0. This is not destructive interference, it's just just wave mechanics.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is a very good, comprehensive and comprehensible answer. Thank you!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

Two people will be about 3 dB higher, four people would be 6, eight people would increase the level by 9 dB, sixteen would be 12 dB higher and so on.

This is only the case if they're making identical sounds in phase with each other. The real life scenario of people walking would not scale in this way as there are too many variables. No two footsteps are the same no matter how hard you try.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Others have commented on the physical process of interference, waves add up but also cancel out. But the server sound 'disapeaearing' is not caused by interference, in fact it doesn't disappear at all. It's a phenomenon called 'masking' caused by your auditory perception. Louder or lower sounds mask quieter or higher pitched sounds.

Edit: and to add a bit to the answers, natural sound sources add up more than they cancel out on average, so it will get louder the more sources you add. But sound pressure level is also inversely proportional to the squared distance, so there's a limit to the max db you can get just adding more similar sources, with a higher limit with higher source density, ie the closer to each other you put them. I leave the formula for this as an exercise for the reader.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wouldn't a louder room raise the noise floor, too, so that any quieter signal couldn't be extracted from the noisy background?

If we were to put a microphone and recording device in that room, could any amount of audio processing be able to extract the sound of the small server out from the background noise of all the bigger servers? Because if not, then that's not just a auditory processing problem, but a genuine example of destruction of information.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

That's an excellent question, and like most excellent questions I think the answer is 'it depends' but I would bet for 'yes'.

First, 'noise' is a part of the signal we don't want or we don't care about. In op's example they talk about 'two servers' one quieter and another louder. The sounds of these sources is the part of the signal we care about so the sound of the louder server isn't noise in any case. As long as the sound of the quieter server rises above the noise floor and the recording device have the dynamic range to record the sum of the sounds you should be able to 'measure' it (as in pointing to differences in the readings when you turn it on and off) and maybe cancel the other server to some extent by processing it.

Now to this point is a yes but 'it depends' because while the sound of the louder server isn't noise it can rise the noise floor depending on the acoustics of the server room. Some server rooms have lots of reverb and echo, specially when they're not very full, but in my experience most don't, many put these plastic curtains to contain the AC and they dampen sound reflections pretty effectively. But with bad enough acoustics, a very loud 'loud server', and a quite quiet 'quiet' one the sound floor could rise over the quieter server sound.

Disclaimer: this is from the top of my head, I'm tired and not a hundred percent sure this is correct. Don't take any important decisions based in my autistic rambling.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Why is the title phrased like you're asking chatgpt? It feels strangely cold and disrespectful.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Can you demonstrate how you would have composed the question?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Not the one you asked but - I thought it read more like an exam question than a crapgpt question.

It is this part that rubbed me the wrong way: "Please provide formulas and an example."

That's like the part where the examiner is giving a hints about how the marks will be awarded.

Either way here's my equation: P(Answer | Question and constraint on answer ) < P(Answer | Question)

I assume that's the OOPs intention though; to block out some of the noise from the responses. I only see one formula so far (excluding my stupid one) so I'm not sure if it worked strictly, but I'd be surprised it it hasn't filtered out some answers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago

You've said it better than I

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Amusing.

a) I don't use shitGPT and never will, so I wouldn't know how to phrase questions for it;

b) You are aware that this is 'no stupid questions', right ? People here expect to be asked stuff - or to learn from others' answers for that matter, which I'm pretty sure is the case here;

c) Cold? Maybe that's because this is a science question? I'm not asking a lady out;

d) Disrespectful? It takes a particular brand of pessimism to be offended in the least by a question that's not even directed at you...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago

Who said I'm offended? Not everyone who critiques something or someone is "offended" you know.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's a lot of things going with sound, but in general sound1 + sound2 is louder. You may not always perceive that, and if one of them is significantly louder, it's not a significant difference. Active noise cancelling uses sound to make other sounds disappear, but this is just a trick, the pressure is still there (it's why prolonged use of active noise cancelling can be bad for you).

When it comes to decibels, dB, it's a logarithmic unit so adding them isn't straightforward. You need to do logarithmic addition, so 5dB + 5dB = 8dB, and 90dB + 90dB = 93dB, but 70dB + 90dB = 90dB.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Curious about info on the effects of long term ANC exposure. I'm guessing what's happening is fairly consistent pressure, right? Hence the "underwater effect" on some devices. Is it any different than being in a higher pressure environment? Or does it work like noise does?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

The post above yours in my feed provides a partial answer

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Idk about the additive effects, but:

Fan noise especially is very "white" in the sense that it contains a lot of frequencies from low to high. That makes it ideal for overpowering (and subjectively swallowing) other noises (like other fans, speech, etc).

Fan noise

Speech for comparison happens in a frequency band where fans are very strong

Running water is similar. When you try to listen to a conversation or a video with speech while washing your hands, you will have a hard time understanding anything. With other noises that are in different frequency bands or only use very small range of frequencies it wont have that effect even if the noise is much louder than the running water was.

Noise cancelling in the sense that one noise actually makes another noise disappear, doesnt really happen under non lab conditions. Its more of a drowning out effect where your ear/brain cant differentiate the two noises anymore.

Selective hearing can do a lot of work by processing the signals from your ear in your brain, but that isnt all powerful.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sorry for the very tangent.

That speech frequency graph is a good visual of why for trans voice training, resonance is more important than pitch. The pitch is nearly the same, the difference is in which overtones are projected.

Where did you find it? I would like to read more about the methodology.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I just looked for "human speech frequency spectrum" images so i had to tineye it to find it again but this seems to be the source
https://erikbern.com/2017/02/01/language-pitch.html

I cant vouch for its quality, but it seems pretty in depth from a quick scroll.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 day ago (3 children)

So lets talk about constructive versus destructive interference.

First off, waves are waves. When you have something like a fan, its generating a series of waves. These waves are typically coming at a constant frequency. The frequency here matters.

Sound travels in waves. These waves are pressure waves in a fluid. Those waves don't just get absorbed by hard surfaces; they reflect or refract. But those waves are both moving through the space, and themselves have a frequency.

This is important because of this you get patterns of constructive and destructive interference in space.

In some areas of a space there will be amplification, because the frequencies are lining up. In some spaces, the waves will cancel out. Those areas will be quieter.

This phenomena is true for all waves.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Very nice, though one thing to note for readers is the pictures are of transverse waves like you’d see in a vibrating string. Sound waves are longitudinal pressure waves which propagate outward in expanding spheres from the source of the noise. The loudness of a sound you hear corresponds to the pressure and frequency it imparts on your eardrum at the point of intersection between that expanding sphere and your ear.

This pressure is directly proportional to the surface area of your eardrum on the surface of that sphere. As you may or may not recall from high school geometry, the surface area of a sphere is 4pi*r^2. If you consider the pressure of a sound wave as being evenly spread out over the surface of that expanding sphere (assuming an ideal gas), then doubling the distance from the sound source will quadruple the surface area of the sphere, thus decreasing the pressure your eardrum experiences by a factor of four! Sounds from very far away rapidly lose pressure (so are quieter) without the aid of constructive interference to boost them.

If you’ve ever heard an echo, you know that sounds can bounce off solid surfaces. Combined with the phenomenon of constructive interference, sound reflections can achieve a great deal of amplification (and attenuation with destructive interference). This is the principle upon which architectural acoustics is based.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

This is nice!

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago

OP: Destructive interference as illustrated here is the basis of active noise cancellation (ANC) in headphones.

In theory it is a microphone on the outside of the headphones that has the outside sound inverted and mixed into whatever is playing from the speakers inside the headphones. The undesired outside noise reaches inside the headphones at the same time as the inverted signal is played so that they cancel each other out.

In reality there is some more complexity, as always, but it's the core principle.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

To the best of my memory. It has to do with sound actually traveling in waves. Depending on when the waves hit each other they can cancel out (to some extent) or add to each other.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_interference

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Depends on the frequency and displacement of the wave. Interference can be both constructive or destructive

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You can cancel out one sound wave an equal and opposite one.

Doing so outside of a controlled laboratory setting would be effectively impossible for real world noises.

But if you got two speakers in a completely soundproof room playing equal but perfectly opposite oscillating and repeating sound waves....

Sure, it's possible.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Doing so outside of a controlled laboratory setting would be effectively impossible for real world noises.

Actually it happens all the time, because of reflection/ refraction from a single source. Say you've got a table saw running in a shop. The sound coming from the saw is a (fairly) constant oscillator.

A shop has hard surfaces and that sound will bounce all over the shop the saw is in. Because it still takes time for the sound to travel and bounce all over, there will be places where standing waves of constructive or destructive interference form. Now there is also a shit ton of other sound bouncing all over the place, so it might not be as noticeable, but standing waves/ regions of constructive/ destructive interference don't require a lab setting.

Modern phased array antenna are effectively taking advantage of this phenomena.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (4 children)

So if I understand you correctly, in the real world, they do add up?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

This answer makes no sense. Sound comes in waves with crests and throughs. In a controlled setting you can harmonize which effectively matches crests to crests and throughs to throughs. This happens in music with choirs, orchestra etc. In that case indeed sounds adds up.

However, with many random sources at many random frequencies you just get chaotic patterns where sound sometimes cancels out and sometimes adds up. No way that the overall result of this is that it adds up in dB. My first approximation would be that if one source emits 1dB and another also emits 1dB, these roughly add up to 1dB.

A very easy test of this is whether you now hear a very loud buzzing in your ear because at this very moment many people talk at the same time. I guess you know the answer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yes, sounds are waves that go thru a medium, usually air.

Think of it like one person speaking in a gym compared to 1,000

The different sounds add up, that's easy everyone just has to talk. But you don't get silence, you get a cacophony.

To produce opposite sounds to cancel each other out though, that would be impossible, and becomes even more impossible as you scale up.

It helps if you can see it to visualize what I mean by alternating waves:

https://www.askamathematician.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Noise-Cancellation.gif

I didn't think of it till I looked for a diagram, but yeah, it's exactly how active noise cancellation works.

Quick edit:

But headphones are the easiest way to do it because it just controls for sound right outside each ear.

To do that "out in the open" to trick the monsters you'd need something mounted right on what's making the noise. Like crazy noise cancelling shoes which would still have a slight delay before and after the noise. And ones good enough to work out in nature on u predictable terrain?

Like, cool thought experiment, but no practical way to implement

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

Yes, normally noise is cumulative

It's pretty easy to think about this in the context of a stadium of people. One person cherring, 10 people cheering, 1000 people cheering. They produce a louder result.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

They add up (in the sense of getting louder) if they're harmonized or party harmonized. They cancel out if they're opposing or partly opposing. They become more continuous but not louder if they're out-of-synch.