Course talk:PHYS341/Archive/2016wTerm2/MusicWithHugeReverbTimes

Excellent article! I didn't know anything about reverberation, so this was really interesting to read, and I learned a lot. The topic itself is interesting, as well as the things you chose to highlight, particularly the parts about how computers try and mimic natural reverberation, and how the environment affects reverberation times.

Just a few small, mostly structural, things:

The natural psychoacoustic phenomenon are synthetically transformed into a highly malleable set of parameters.

- this sentence is scientifically sound, but for a layperson (such as myself, who didn't know anything on the topic), may be too complex - maybe find a simpler way to say this?

until drops 60 db - check the grammar on this one

The work itself was missing the figures, unless I couldn't find them, so don't forget to include the figures in an easily readable way for your final version. (If this was a technical difficulty/accident, disregard that comment)

In this situation usually results in the perception of a kind of sonic mush - I couldn't really understand this sentence - check grammar - I didn't understand what sonic mush meant either - maybe explain that further or use different words to explain what you have to say

The article itself is pretty well sub-divided, in the sense that you've very nicely sorted everything into proper categories! Just a thought - the percussive and sustained sounds with long reverb times (2 separate headings) could potentially be combined into 1 - for example, "different sounds with long reverb times", or something along those lines. It might help organize your article even further. - additionally, those two headings explained the difference between the reverb of percussive/sustained sounds, but I feel like you could go even further into detail about how the environment around these sounds affects the reverb times, or makes them larger or "huger". Your last paragraph did that, but I feel like it's something you could expand upon.

Most of my critique is grammar/structural comments, as the content/message of your article was clear and easy to understand!