TRC #278: This Will Make You Smarter + Predictions + Female Falsetto

2013-failed-psychic-predictionsThe gang (minus Elan) rings in the new year with episode 278 of The Reality Check. Darren starts things off by reviewing the book “This Will Make You Smarter”. This is followed by an analysis of the predictions the guys made last year as well as a new round of predictions for 2014. Pat closes things out with a look into whether females can sing falsetto. Happy new year!

 

Download direct: mp3 file

If you like the show, please leave us a review on itunes.

SHOW NOTES

Female Falsetto

Slate:  Can A Woman Sing Falsetto?

Wikipedia: Falsetto

Wikipedia: Whistle Register

Other

Effective Altruism Meetup

 

Facebook Twitter Reddit Email
This entry was posted in The Reality Check Episodes and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to TRC #278: This Will Make You Smarter + Predictions + Female Falsetto

  1. Pierre says:

    Hi guys, this is a comment regarding the “Can a woman sing falsetto?” segment. I’ve always thought so, mainly because of a famous Canadian singer: Sarah McLachlan. On “Fear” from her album “Fumbling towards ecstasy” I think the sound of her voice has that “falsetto” quality. I wonder what Pat would make of that? Can super sleuth Pat manage to interview Sarah and confirm that she is using this technique on that song?

    • Pat says:

      Hi Pierre.

      I certainly hear what you are hearing in this song. I think Sarah is well known for her ability to switch between “head voice” and “chest voice.” I think this is largely what you hear with a female yodeller.

      All these terms are debated (throw in “middle voice” and it starts to get complicated) but I think most would say there is a difference between head voice and falsetto.

      Cheers!

  2. Ian says:

    Many interesting things in the book this time, but I cannot NOT react snarkily to one of these concepts. Here goes.

    My, my… so the guys whose job is (and presumably has been for a while) to do things in the short term are good at thinking of how to do things in short term, the guys whose job is doing things in the mid term are good at thinking of how to do things in the mid term, and the guys whose job is doing things in the long term are better at doing things in the long term? Clearly the only explaination is that the guys with a natural affinity towards that timeframe drift to those positions as opposed to them using that particular time horizon through doing a job which requires it of them (well duh), that is the only possible explaination. I cannot see why such a claim would be controversial at all!

    I’m glad you said you don’t trust it, let’s just say, heh.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>