Reddit mentions: The best acoustics & sound books

I'm always so late to the game.

TL;DR: Seventh Grade science project with basic relativity, caused some fiasco

Around seventh grade I got a hold of Issac Asimov's Understanding Physics. I got really into it especially in relativity. I was a few years ahead in math but nowhere near understanding any calculus or even trigonometry, but I owned algebra and geometry and understood basic physics equations. I started reading Six Easy Pieces, A Brief History of Time, all the books I can find on the topic at the local library. No I wasn't a genius, I was (and still is) just a curious cat. I enjoyed them, though I only understood as much as someone with high school algebra/geometry could. Anywhoo, fast forward to science project -

I decided to do my science project on space-time dilation. It was a subject very few peers knew about at my age but I myself was fascinated by it, so why not!? I mostly covered black holes, light cone, and Lorentz transformation, mostly conceptual discussions. Only the latter two topics contained any math, and that was just the very simple algebraic expressions and some simple geometry. Lacking calculus and a deep understanding, I had very little "Why", and instead had mostly "this is what happens when you do this and here's a drawing and there's an equation". Everything I could understand about relativity without knowing calculus was on that poster.

We got graded before the science fair, and I got a nice fat . I was really surprised and talked to the teacher. She said something along the lines of "This isn't science, you made it up." Apparently she hadn't heard of that stuff. I was surprised and I talked to her and the vice principle about it. He suggested I participate in the fair while they look for someone knowledgeable about this area of science, and my science teacher still didn't believe it had any merit.

A week or so later, the VP got some other teacher's professor friend from the local McMaster University to grade it, and I got called to the VP's office. I got an A! My 12-year-old ego exploded.

EDIT: Come to think of it, that VP really liked me or something. Once a bully was shoving me around and I punched him in the chin and left a nice bruise. I didn't get in any trouble, not even a stern talking-to. We were both brought into his office and the whole time he yelled at the other kid, Trevor. A month or so later we got into another scuffle and Trevor got suspended and again I didn't even get a stern talking-to.

>but as a photon travels through a substance, it is absorbed and re-emitted by the atoms of that substance

no! no! no! a thousand times no! This is a common misconception and shame on you for propagating it!

The index of refraction of a material is not due to simple atomic absorption and re-emission. Absorption features are typically very spectrally narrow. The index of refraction is very broad and nearly constant over long regions of the spectrum. The index of refraction does not depend only on the type of material but its bulk properties. Take the case of carbon: Diamond (n=2.4) and soot (n=1.1) are both made of carbon, but have very different indices of refraction. Index of refraction depends heavily on the organization (crystal or noncrystal) of the material and other bulk material properties.

If you do insist on using the photon model, this is the best explanation I have found - its a bit of a mess:

>A solid has a network of ions and electrons fixed in a "lattice". Think of this as a network of balls connected to each other by springs. Because of this, they have what is known as "collective vibrational modes", often called phonons. These are quanta of lattice vibrations, similar to photons being the quanta of EM radiation. It is these vibrational modes that can absorb a photon. So when a photon encounters a solid, and it can interact with an available phonon mode (i.e. something similar to a resonance condition), this photon can be absorbed by the solid and then converted to heat (it is the energy of these vibrations or phonons that we commonly refer to as heat). The solid is then opaque to this particular photon (i.e. at that frequency). Now, unlike the atomic orbitals, the phonon spectrum can be broad and continuous over a large frequency range. That is why all materials have a "bandwidth" of transmission or absorption. The width here depends on how wide the phonon spectrum is. Fowels

A more brief explanation comes from wikipedia

>The slowing can instead be described as a blending of the photon with quantum excitations of the matter (quasi-particles such as phonons and excitons) to form a polariton; this polariton has a nonzero effective mass, which means that it cannot travel at c.

To use the wave model:

To use the wave model, let's go back to the derivation of the wave equation from Maxwell's equations. When you derive the most general form of the speed of an EM wave, the speed is v=1/sqrt(mu epsilon). In the special case where the light travels in vacuum the permittivity and permeability take on their vacuum values (mu0 and epsilon0) and the speed of the wave is c. In materials with the permittivity and permeability not equal to the vacuum values, the wave travels slower. Most often we use the relative permittivity (muR, close to 1 in optical frequencies) and relative permeability (epsilon_R) so we can write the speed of the wave as c/n, where n=1/sqrt(epsilonR muR).

> There are about 3 things i'd love to do related to science, but everyone requires you to have a PhD or AP classes in all 3 sciences.

Autodidactism. All that is really needed to learn is paper, pencil, and a library membership. If you're really interested in science, head to your local library and study individually.

After a few months of doing that, and learning/studying not for grades or due to pressures of parents/teachers you'll really begin to enjoy it. When you do keep it up, and after that if you enjoy it continue to do so. Eventually when you do sign up for classes you'll breeze through them.

Asimov puts it rather nicely best 4:17

> if books weren't so expensive here, or i found good books on them

Bullshit. All you have to do is look. Libraries give away books all the time; even a short search "used books in Canada," provides a lot of results. You could even buy a kindle $75 and pirate books.

Especially when it comes to philosophy and science books. Many of them are dirt cheap for the valuable information they contain. New books and textbooks are expensive, crappy, and very rarely rival the classics, especially those written by masters of the field.

Seriously, fucking look at this

I got an almost new book that covers physics wonderfully for $1.60

awaiting more excuses...

First off, Here's a Nice Paper for you which is simply one of many in this vain. I did study basic physics of acoustics under Thomas Rossing, Who wrote this book at NIU when I was getting my degree in experimental composition. Also, Here's a great write up by Luthier Terry McInturff on the Gibson truss rods And certainly, anyone with an ear will notice the difference in attack vs sustain with even a heavy bodied telecaster vs a light bodied telecaster. And it's a reciprocal relationship.

Do these things make an inkling of difference in a more complex electrical chain? No, but certainly to say there isn't a difference between the density of a maple vs. spruce top is ignoring the basic physics.

Now, the point is that there are some Gibson guitars which are absolute classics and are built a certain way, to certain specifications and at all time of their productions there had been cheaper guitars available. This especially applies to their hollow and semi-hollow models. Regardless of how one feels about the role of the pickup, to attain the similar resonance peaks, fit, finish, and response of a certain guitar would one NOT want to build it the same way?

So, I'm just pointing out the noticeable differences in construction. So, take a simple Fender Tweed, plug in an Epiphone Casino then plug in an ES330 custom shop, or don't plug them in at all. If you don't think there's a very noticeable difference, more power to you, and I don't think it's just an electronics swap, I've done that too many times with grandiose hopes.

My favorite introduction to physics is Asimov's Understanding Physics. It does get somewhat advanced, but Asimov is such a great writer (IMHO) and it will give you a survey of the field like none other that I think you'll enjoy it.

What I would suggest:

Introduction to Modern Optics by Fowles. It's short and to the point.

The Oxford Solid State Basics by Simon. The author also has lectures posted on his website that are fantastic. Additionally, Roald Hoffmann has a series of papers that introduce solid state concepts that are useful for chemists. They're very worthwhile reads. Here, here, and here.

Computational Physics by Newman. I find this really easy to read and understand. A lot of people around here recommend it.

You can't come up with radical ideas extrapolated from current science if you don't have an understanding of current science.

Start with research. I think the first thing you need to do is to bone up on physics. Asimov's series is a great popular science examination of physics.

Then read some of the more outre modern popular science books. Hyperspace by Michio Kaku would be an excellent choice.

It's no good trying to write about future physics if you don't have a familiarity with at least high school series physics. A large percentage of SF fans is scientifically literate. If you try handwaving, you'll come off as technically naive. Better to write about elves & vampires, where you can make shit up as you go along.

I don't want to be rude but before diving into special or general relativity and astronomy you should probably start from very beginning. I suggest you to get more familiar with the definition of mass, force, motion and energy, Newton's laws and laws of conservation. Don't just try to memorize formulas, try to understand meaning behind them.

This is one of the best books to start in my oppinion https://www.amazon.com/dp/0880292512/

Well, I am not Dr. Kaku but I know a really good book called Understanding Physics by the late Isaac Asimov. If you like Asimov's non-fiction writing style (which I like a lot) then it may be for you.

Special relativity, yes. You can get the basics of the Lorentz transformation with some effort. Isaac Asimov's Understanding Physics even contains a good derivation.

General relativity...on the other hand. That's considerably more difficult. Einstein extended Maxwell's field theories--theories which Maxwell himself didn't fully understand and Maxwell was one of the most impressive physicists who ever lived. So it's a rough trip.

First of all, I'm delighted that you used to find science boring, and now you enjoy it. I also agree that Feynman lectures will cover almost everything you list. Since I'm an optical engineer, let me steer you to the Field Guide series for handy books on optics. If you just want one book in optics, I like Introduction to Modern Optics by Grant Fowles.
https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Modern-Optics-Dover-Physics/dp/0486659577/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

What's your previous science background? Most of this stuff is built upon layers of knowledge like knowing calculus requires an understanding of algebra which requires an understanding of multiplication which requires an understanding of addition.


For example Hubble's observation of a red shift everywhere in the universe is based on an understanding of the doppler effect which requires an understanding of light as a wave. You don't need to know anything about light or doppler to understand what his observation means, it's the first major clue we had about the big bang theory. However without this knowledge it can seem to someone unfamiliar that it's all "based on faith" when in fact it is based on evidence.


>Does one need to know physics to understand astrophysics or cosmology? Or would one be better served learning astronomy? Or Both?

In a very broad sense astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology are all the same thing. Unfortunately astrology became associated with predicting the future based on your birth date when it's literal translation should mean science of the stars like geology means science of the earth and biology means science of life. So scientists had to look for another name so as not to be associated with the psuedo-science that is astrology today.

Are you familiar with the crash course series on youtube? They have series on both physics and astronomy I would recommend.

Astronomy episode 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rHUDWjR5gg&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtPAJr1ysd5yGIyiSFuh0mIL

If you are really new to science I'd recommend the newer cosmos series with Neil Degrasse Tyson as a good starting point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmos:_A_Spacetime_Odyssey

edit if you want a substantial read

https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Physics-Magnetism-Electricity-Electron/dp/0880292512

I read this a while ago it's very good but not an "easy" read.

Need this book: (UPDATE: BOOK FOUND, THANK YOU)

Measured Tones: The Interplay of Physics and Music, Third Edition

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B005H6YS8M/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_c_api_i_u.DyCbEQ21ET6

$5 PayPal ready please help a college student get his HW done

If you want to start to learn how to actually do physics and not just novelty facts, [This may be the best introduction on physics you will find.] (http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Physics-Volumes-One-Electricity/dp/0880292512/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1348642325&sr=1-1&keywords=understanding+physics)
It covers all the basic topics from gravitation, optics, relativity, electromagnetism to particle physics. What they are and how they work and how they came to be known. It goes real light on the math and is very easy to grasp. You can buy a used copy dirt cheap on Amazon. I highly recommend it.

Understanding Physics by Asimov.

It's 256 pages, and it's the best qualitative description of physics I've come across. I'd recommend it for anyone who's about to start their first year of college-level physics.

Asimov said it himself that his biggest goal in writing was to write clearly, and no subject is better served by that attitude than physics. Moreover, the order in which he introduces new concepts simply makes sense; everything builds seamlessly from what's already been explained. Plus, this is all classical physics, so while it's outdated, it's still the same outdated stuff they teach to freshmen nowadays.

I recommend neurosciences. A good book will do the trick. this book seems like a swell choice. https://www.amazon.com/Optics-Science-Vision-Vasco-Ronchi/dp/0486668460/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1522255720&sr=1-5&keywords=dover+neuroscience&dpID=41BP29CAP2L&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

also here
https://www.amazon.com/New-Ambidextrous-Universe-Reflections-Superstrings/dp/0486442446/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1522255720&sr=1-3&keywords=dover+neuroscience&dpID=5160gAyCoYL&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

For starters you can read Asimovs Understanding Physics. It's a concept-describing TEXT book. There's almost no pictures, no math and no pop-culture-references. It's the opposite of Serways classic physics book which I used back in the day. Asimov is a good writer and tells about physics in an understandable way. I bought the book used for one dollar :) Best quality/price book I own.

Understanding physics, and how sound behaves in physical mediums. We are air manipulators. Once I realized that, my approach to using plugins changed. Frequency in the time domain is crucial to proper gain staging, EQing, compression, delay, and phase correlation. And, how it all relates in the real world when the sound might be played on someones iPhone or in a club with multiple subs. this blueberry done me up good


edit: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0805385657

If you're looking for a very simple intro, try Isaac Asimov's Understanding Physics.

If you want something more in-depth and you're comfortable learning some math as well, try Richard Feynman's Lectures on Physics.

Yes, I understand that it's a broad question. I suppose I'm looking for an all-around books, but my areas of interest would be noise, vibration (obviously), intake & exhaust flow and pressure.

A broader survey would be useful. I guess I was asking if there were a few core books that any automotive engineer would be familiar with. After those, they would branch into their areas of speciality.

edit: An example, from my own field. It doens't matter if you're working in automotive, industrial, HVAC, etc., if you're doing anything related to acoustics you probably own Acoustics by Leo Beranek, as well as his other books. They aren't as laser-specific as some books, but they're the building blocks that acousticians/NVH guys start with.

Introduction to Modern Optics by Fowler

Frankly it's like to be too focused on the physics of optics. You'll have much different knowledge requirements packaging laser diodes than you will building telecom transceivers or camera lenses. Not that there aren't people who have worked in all those fields.

Asimov's Understanding Physics is great for a guided tour.

It is a little known fact that Isaac Asimov wrote more science books than novels. I have read one or two of them and can tell you that the writing is clear and straightforward. He is credited with authoring around 500 books.

Here are a few examples:

Understanding Physics

Asimov's Chronoloy of the World

Atom: Journey Across the Sub-Atomic Cosmos(I Read this in the 90's and due to the speed of advances in this field it's a bit dated but it gave me a solid foundation and taught me the difference between a letpon and a baryon)

Here are several textbooks on the subject which I used back in the day and still have a proud spot on my bookshelf:

Acoustics by Beranek (classic acoustical engineering theory from an MIT professor)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/088318494X

The Art of Electronics by Horowitz and Hill (for low level lessons on circuit components like DACs and op amps)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521809266/

Introduction To Electroacoustics and Audio Amplifier Design by Leach (more theory by a professor) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0757572863/

JBL Audio Engineering for Sound Reinforcement (practical applications) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GQZQ8UE/

I really enjoy Understanding Physics by Isaac Asimov.

A good classic is The Science Of Sound by Rossing, Moore & Wheeler.

I used Modern Optics by Grant Fowels. It's decent.

> Sorry to interrupt your internet fight

lol

> did Asimov actually do science educational books along with science fiction?

yep. understanding physics by isaac asimov. it's the only one i have and have read and is excellent, but he also has a new guide to science. then, take a look at the nonfiction section on his wikipedia page. the man was insanely prolific.

Hecht is the landmark. If you want a bargain Grant Fowles modern optics is hard to beat.

You should check out The Sound Book, it's all about these types of locations. The author, Trevor Cox, goes and visits a bunch of places with weird echos or really long reverb times and has a bunch of cool analysis and discussion of them.

Asimov points out in Understanding Physics that the Greeks valued reason over experimentation.

For example, reason led them to affirm that equal masses must fall at equal rates. But a simple experiment could show that two equally massive pieces of paper fall at different rates if one is crumpled into a ball and the other is not. Such a simple experiment would have led them to the discovery of air resistance, etc. Unfortunately, their scientific framework didn't move them to test their conclusions.

It's The science Of Sound by Rossing. It contains theory of everything you need to know, from the workings of digital sampling to acoustics and construction of instruments.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Science-Sound-3rd-Edition/dp/0805385657

Physics of Waves: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00A73FMQW/

Understanding Physics.

"LET THERE BE LIGHT"
Made me realise i need to read everything by Isaac Asimov
Just found out he wrote a physics text book , now added to the list.

I took an acoustics course aimed at non physics students that used this book http://www.amazon.com/The-Science-Sound-3rd-Edition/dp/0805385657

It does require that you know some math but I don't think you need to know any calculus to really understand it.

General Acoustics: Start with Fundamentals of Acoustics by Kinsler and Frey, then move on to Blackstock and Pierce.

Underwater Acoustics: For underwater, pick up a copy of Principles of Underwater Sound by Urick and Sounds in the Sea by Medwin.

Try this. https://www.amazon.com/Measured-Tones-Interplay-Physics-Music/dp/1420093479/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=physics+of+music&qid=1550187717&s=gateway&sr=8-3

​

http://www.amazon.com/Measured-Tones-Interplay-Physics-Edition/dp/1420093479

Art above is from Mike Franchina.

​

Palla Grande commences. A bogatyr in a torn pink bathrobe many sizes too small hefts a folio of living flesh through an assembled mass of celebrants, largely unnoticed admidst the dark kaleidoscope of costumes and revelry. The bogatyr kneels before a cluster of debating Tzimisce awaiting the blood bath ritae, imparting the script to a horned, skull-faced zhupan in a long robe. The puzzled zhupan accepts the gift, leafing through the volume while muttering incredulously at the amazing passages of brilliance, and then gracefully excuses itself to adjourn to the rooftop. The volume is cast into a mote of flame, placed before the crescent moon vozhd playing the role of the “large ball” itself. The fire leaps and twists, but the practiced zhupan fights the urge to frenzy with the memories of fire dances felt through the centuries past. The screaming, charred flesh of the folio burns and the vozhd inhales the rising ash. The eyes blink out the scores:

​

Actually following the rules of the contest (all entries should be submitted on the JustTzimisce subreddit):

MrWideside (breathes and wheezes loudly): 10

Indridkuld (pipe organ and Mongolian throat singing): 10

BloodOfVoids (clicks and grinding and flesh noises): 10

D20Lo (flrrrrrrpblt): 10

Superbestnotfine (as cited previously in the “Tzimisce Turbo” thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPnOrwE5jBs&feature=youtu.be&t=26m03s): 10

Asuritos (Never any sound): 10

Xedefer (Wheezing, clattering, sloshing of flesh): 10

TheTitanofApathy (Cracking bones and joints, grinding teeth, soft sobbing): 10

LaRoienJaune (wide variety of old-timey Barbershop Quartet songs): 10

Yuraiya (Mr. Sandman in three part harmony): 0

Darklordofbunnies (Meat dubstep): 0

Heliand (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl5sUEqzcp8): 0

Sallajin ("Are you my mummy?"): 0

TempestStrike (Irritated gurgling sounds): 0

m30wm30wm30w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RL3ArJVFSw): 0

Nick__Frost: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZTFdO4a_ew): 0

​

The skill and complexity of the fleshcraft required to make the vozhd consistently produce the sound:

MrWideside (breathes and wheezes loudly): 2

Indridkuld (pipe organ and Mongolian throat singing): 7

BloodOfVoids (clicks and grinding and flesh noises): 3

D20Lo (flrrrrrrpblt): 4

Superbestnotfine (as cited previously in the “Tzimisce Turbo” thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPnOrwE5jBs&feature=youtu.be&t=26m03s): 3

Asuritos (Never any sound): 8

Xedefer (Wheezing, clattering, sloshing of flesh): 2

TheTitanofApathy (Cracking bones and joints, grinding teeth, soft sobbing): 4

LaRoienJaune (wide variety of old-timey Barbershop Quartet songs): 7

Yuraiya (Mr. Sandman in three part harmony): 8

Darklordofbunnies (Meat dubstep): 7

Heliand (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl5sUEqzcp8): 6

Sallajin ("Are you my mummy?"): 7

TempestStrike (Irritated gurgling sounds): 2

m30wm30wm30w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RL3ArJVFSw): 7

Nick__Frost: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZTFdO4a_ew): 5

​

Thematic relevance to the occasion of All Hallows Eve (disturbing or disquieting or inferentially sadistic, like pug inbreeding):

MrWideside (breathes and wheezes loudly): 6

Indridkuld (pipe organ and Mongolian throat singing): 4

BloodOfVoids (clicks and grinding and flesh noises): 6

D20Lo (flrrrrrrpblt): 2

Superbestnotfine (as cited previously in the “Tzimisce Turbo” thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPnOrwE5jBs&feature=youtu.be&t=26m03s): 5

Asuritos (Never any sound): 5

Xedefer (Wheezing, clattering, sloshing of flesh): 6

TheTitanofApathy (Cracking bones and joints, grinding teeth, soft sobbing): 6

LaRoienJaune (wide variety of old-timey Barbershop Quartet songs): 2

Yuraiya (Mr. Sandman in three part harmony): 2

Darklordofbunnies (Meat dubstep): 3

Heliand (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl5sUEqzcp8): 7

Sallajin ("Are you my mummy?"): 8

TempestStrike (Irritated gurgling sounds): 6

m30wm30wm30w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RL3ArJVFSw): 3

Nick__Frost: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZTFdO4a_ew): 2

​

Bonus style points for scientific detail, lore, humor, timelessness through future centuries, or onomatopoeia:

MrWideside (breathes and wheezes loudly): 5

Indridkuld (pipe organ and Mongolian throat singing): 6

BloodOfVoids (clicks and grinding and flesh noises): 5

D20Lo (flrrrrrrpblt): 8

Superbestnotfine (as cited previously in the “Tzimisce Turbo” thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPnOrwE5jBs&feature=youtu.be&t=26m03s): 5

Asuritos (Never any sound): 4

Xedefer (Wheezing, clattering, sloshing of flesh): 5

TheTitanofApathy (Cracking bones and joints, grinding teeth, soft sobbing): 5

LaRoienJaune (wide variety of old-timey Barbershop Quartet songs): 8

Yuraiya (Mr. Sandman in three part harmony): 8

Darklordofbunnies (Meat dubstep): 6

Heliand (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl5sUEqzcp8): 4

Sallajin ("Are you my mummy?"): 4

TempestStrike (Irritated gurgling sounds): 6

m30wm30wm30w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RL3ArJVFSw): 6

Nick__Frost: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZTFdO4a_ew): 6

oltre ai link sotto che sono istituzionali dell'INFN
direi tutte le cose di quark (soprattutto ci sono dei vecchi cartoni di bruno bozzetto sulla fisica magnifici, chissa' se stanno su youtube)

questo di Asimov non e' male come libro

in italiano qui

e in generale tutto quello scritto da lui. e' un po' datato ma ancora valido

anche i primi tre minuti di weinberg e' molto bello