ACOUSTIC QUERY Is it true that the common sound a duck makes - usually sounded among humans as "quack!"-is a sound which does not echo?
I have come across an assertion twice recently which insisted the sound in question doesn't produce and echo. I have been concerned because my favorite television critter - the AFLAC duck may have missed an opportunity to produce yet another prize-winning commercial. Picture that redoubted duck quacking up and down the length of the Grand Canyon or some other such side-walled structure - natural or NASA-made. The normal sound, according to the the theory in question,does not produce an echo, but the commercial term AFLAC which is that duck's trademark, reverberates full and strong - which calls for a series of selling words of explanation by announcers standing by waiting for just such a moment.
Could it possibly be that the texture of the ducks "quack!"is of an inferior tonal quality which sets it apart among unusual sounds. It might be, I theorized, that the "quack!" sound is formed by aspiration rather than inspiration of air into the duck lung passing over vocal chords in a reversed manner to produce a different sound headed in the wrong direction. I even gave some thinking time when someone else pointed out to me - that, since the word "quack!" is almost always spelled with a "!" included, perhaps that ! got in the way if the echo-genesis process in some silly way.
Realizing that the entire subject can get silly, I, immediately, Google-ized the question and promptly found out why this non-echo duck lore has been a news item recently. During the early days of this month of February 2005 "the British Association Festival of Science at the University of Salford." discussed the subject in detail. Their summations were based on studies recently completed at the university in Greater Manchester, north-west England. They tested a duck named "Daisy" in a reverberations chamber, and in simulations such as having some quackery done in Royal Albert Hall,in London.
They marked the entire idea of non-echoing quacks as "myth".
However, they have rather impishly left several loopholes for those who wish to continue believing otherwise. One: "Tests revealed definite echos...but perhaps not as noticeably." Two: "duck's quack is rather quiet...sounds coming back a such a low level (they) might not be heard". And, a third such loophole:"a quack is a fading sound...It has gradual decay...It is hard to tell the difference between the actual quack and the echo. That's especially true if you have not previously heard what it should sound like with no reflections."
Ducks quack but do their quacks echo? Listen carefully and build your own theory.
A.L.M. February 28, 2005 [c468wds]
