Talk:Echo

Physics: Acoustics Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Acoustics Taskforce.

Page title

Shouldn't this either be the main page for Echo (with an Echo (disambiguation) page) or the tag changed to Echo (acoustic), as phenomenon is rather undescriptive? ~ trialsanderrors 08:01, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also what's up with having the sound sample in ogg format? isn't that a little obscure?

I believe ogg is used because it is open source (public domain) and does not require a licensing fee. It is used in other places on Wikipedia.Dmine45 18:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

House of Leaves

Did whoever wrote this article get most of the main text out of the novel House of Leaves? The bit about "having 'seen' a space" comes straight out of the book.

Duck quack

The article states:

The actual reason for the myth is that the wave of a duck's quack is almost identical to an echo. It echoes, but it is not very obvious.

This makes no sense. An echo "wave" is almost identical to the sound that is being echoed (which is why it's called an "echo"). So any sound will be practically identical to its echo sound. | Loadmaster (talk) 17:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it makes no sense. AFAIK, a duck's quack can most certainly echo if there's a surface for the sound to bounce off of--the probable reason for the myth is that there often was no such surface. Binksternet (talk) 02:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]