It’s All a Preference

[NorthStar]

---John, you can call me Bob (that's my real name). :b

Music is unamplified and also amplified.
And I took the electric guitar as an example to continue Tim's line of thought.
But I could have easily took my unamplified Alto flute as another example.

Anyway, the point is to have a good discussion and from all the angles we can find.
That's what Audio is about.

And methinks that you and Tim should be able to discuss anytime you wish for,
and without any restriction whatsoever.
{That Ignore stuff is total bull to me!}

* By the way, did you know that the "f...bomb" is now in the dictionary?

 

[Gregadd]

I continue to see no evidence of how the "listeners" in the test were chosen.

I was under the impression that all the listeners listened to all the speakers and ranked them according to thier preference.

Please enlighten me AMIR. Thanking you in advance for your help. Oh and thanks for your the help you already provided.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

So there is probably merit to both points of view. We are remarkably good at judging good sound without a reference. While having our hands tied behind our backs not knowing "what was there."

We are good at judging sound, perhaps. but I think you're talking about pretty broad strokes Amir. Are we good at judging fidelity, using real instruments as the reference? That's the question. Can we tell if a system is capable of resolving the subtlties in the sound of a violin, without the memory of that particular violin, without knowing that violin like our mother's voice? That is the standard that people are implying when they say real instruments are their reference. Can they tell when their system makes a violin sound like a violin? Of course. But that's a very weak reference. Even my modest system is capable of resolving much finer detail than "a violin." It is capable of resolving the character of a particular violin. And that real instrument reference is not something audiophiles have. That's why I have trouble finding the merit in that point of view.

Tim

 

[amirm]

I continue to see no evidence of how the "listeners" in the test were chosen.

I was under the impression that all the listeners listened to all the speakers and ranked them according to thier preference.

Please enlighten me AMIR. Thanking you in advance for your help. Oh and thanks for your the help you already provided.

There were two type of tests. One large scale that included many people. And then lots of tests that used expert listeners. The AES report I provided is based on composite research of the individual studies, some of which are documented in Sean's blogs. It certainly is not practical to have 230 people listen to 70 different speakers. Any more than it is possible to sample half the US population to know if they like chocolate or not .

The way to look at such research in my opinion is that it gives us good directional data versus without which is total chaos.

 

[jkeny]

---John, you can call me Bob (that's my real name). :b

Music is unamplified and also amplified.
And I took the electric guitar as an example to continue Tim's line of thought.
But I could have easily took my unamplified Alto flute as another example.

So tell me how you would have translated what you said if using the Alto flute as the example? "I play guitars, including electric ones, and I use several pedals (effects). And I tell you; you can truly go where no one has ever gone before!
...And if you can tell the strings I'm using, the pick, and the guitar's brand, even the amp, BRAVO!"
The point in picking on the electric guitar is that it's often played with distortion & therefore probably is not a good reference point. I don't play so I overlooked this! So please move on & deal with the main point of the posts that people are quite capable of using references to evaluate the accuracy of their playback system.

 

[Gregadd]

There were two type of tests. One large scale that included many people. And then lots of tests that used expert listeners. The AES report I provided is based on composite research of the individual studies, some of which are documented in Sean's blogs. It certainly is not practical to have 230 people listen to 70 different speakers. Any more than it is possible to sample half the US population to know if they like chocolate or not .

The way to look at such research in my opinion is that it gives us good directional data versus without which is total chaos.

I agree to a certain extent. But that means the results are not applicable to the general public. That's where I came in.

BTW AMIR Do you think I want measurements to be a predictor of how for instance, a speaker sounds? That was my goal when I entered audio. But as in my own profession, the law and measurements have let me down.

 

[NorthStar]

So tell me how you would have translated what you said if using the Alto flute as the example? "I play guitars, including electric ones, and I use several pedals (effects). And I tell you; you can truly go where no one has ever gone before!
...And if you can tell the strings I'm using, the pick, and the guitar's brand, even the amp, BRAVO!"

-----Good question; I'm not 100% sure but I believe that each pair of loudspeakers would translate the sound of my Alto flute with some slight different sound variables (tweeter's construction, crossover, wiring, box volume, electrostats, etc., etc., etc.).
But you will know for sure that it is a steel Alto flute; but without knowing exactly if the holes are covered or not, and without knowing exactly the make (brand name).

And I bet that Tim wouldn't be able to tell either. ...That would be only a guess at best.

The point in picking on the electric guitar is that it's often played with distortion & therefore probably is not a good reference point. I don't play so I overlooked this! So please move on & deal with the main point of the posts that people are quite capable of using references to evaluate the accuracy of their playback system.

Yes, but pedals too have their own distinctive sound signature. I used various "Flanger" pedals before and they all sound different somehow. ...Same for "Digital Delay" pedals, "Distortion" pedals, "Sustain" pedals, "Chorus" pedals, "Wa-Wa" pedals, etc.
[And I use my pedals with electric & acoustic guitars.]

But John, tell me, what is your true reference in music to evaluate your own degree of accuracy?
First, is it analog or digital?
Two, what exact measurements?
Three, the room, is she acoustically treated?
....

Is there only some type of specific and particular music that we should listen to to evaluate?

 

[jkeny]

-----Good question; I'm not 100% sure but I believe that each pair of loudspeakers would translate the sound of my Alto flute with some slight different sound variables (tweeter's construction, crossover, wiring, box volume, electrostats, etc., etc., etc.).

Right so no pre-distortion of the instrument which will mask the identification of the guitar model! That was the point in Tims's response to me - picking on the electric guitar ( a pre-distorted instrument) exclusively & thereby suggesting that my identification of a reference was wrong!

But you will know for sure that it is a steel Alto flute; but without knowing exactly if the holes are covered or not, and without knowing exactly the make (brand name).

And I bet that Tim wouldn't be able to tell either. ...That would be only a guess at best.

Would you be able to tell these characteristic listening to a live playing of the instrument if it was not visible?


-snip-

But John, tell me, what is your true reference in music to evaluate your own degree of accuracy?
First, is it analog or digital?
Two, what exact measurements?
Three, the room, is she acoustically treated?
....

Digital primarily but a number of analogue TTs at friends houses.
What measurements are you talking about?
Room treatments - that's for wimps !

-snip-[/QUOTE]

 

[Raffles]

I think that our brains are good at compensating for 'natural' 'distortions' such as listening to a recording in a non-anechoic room. The brain is not so happy with a fixed non-flat 'formant' over a moving audio spectrum. A guitar or violin or human voice, however, is often modelled as an excitation waveform filtered by a fixed formant, so perhaps judging frequency response accuracy is not easy on a recording of a single instrument compared to, say, an orchestra where the combination of multiple instruments is constantly changing.

I am told that we are remarkably tolerant towards 'harmonic' distortion, but an amplifier with harmonic distortion generates inharmonic intermodulation distortion when fed with multiple input waveforms. Again, another reason why perhaps a complex signal e.g. a choir rather than a solo voice is a better test of an audio system..?

 

[jkeny]

Ah good points and it brings us into psychoacoustics which I know Amir is actively pursuing some research in & maybe it deserves a thread on it's own rather than getting lost in a long tired thread. Here's a good starter - a 2011 presentation summary of the mechanics of the ear & psychoacoustics form JJ Johnston http://www.aes.org/sections/pnw/ppt/jj/hearingtutorialv1.ppt

I think that our brains are good at compensating for 'natural' 'distortions' such as listening to a recording in a non-anechoic room. The brain is not so happy with a fixed non-flat 'formant' over a moving audio spectrum. A guitar or violin or human voice, however, is often modelled as an excitation waveform filtered by a fixed formant, so perhaps judging frequency response accuracy is not easy on a recording of a single instrument compared to, say, an orchestra where the combination of multiple instruments is constantly changing.

I am told that we are remarkably tolerant towards 'harmonic' distortion, but an amplifier with harmonic distortion generates inharmonic intermodulation distortion when fed with multiple input waveforms. Again, another reason why perhaps a complex signal e.g. a choir rather than a solo voice is a better test of an audio system..?

 

[NorthStar]

Would you be able to tell these characteristic listening to a live playing of the instrument if it was not visible?

-----Probably not, or unless I was a super expert on that specific instrument...

Digital primarily but a number of analogue TTs at friends houses.
What measurements are you talking about?
Room treatments - that's for wimps !

-snip-

-----Speaker's measurements like Frequency Response, Delay of the drivers, Waveform from Waterplot Falls, Crossover interactions, Sensitivity, Impedance, Phase angles, etc.

And then all types of other measurements (THD, S/N Ratio, Crosstalk, Damping Factor, Slew Factor Ratio, Frequency Response, Intermodulation, Distortion, Bias adjust, Jitter, etc.) from the preamp, amp, and source.

And then Resistance, Impedance, Inductance, Capacitance, Current, ...from the speaker wires and interconnects.

__________________

I don't think so! :b

__________________

* What does 'snip' stand for?

 

[MylesBAstor]

I am told that we are remarkably tolerant towards 'harmonic' distortion, but an amplifier with harmonic distortion generates inharmonic intermodulation distortion when fed with multiple input waveforms. Again, another reason why perhaps a complex signal e.g. a choir rather than a solo voice is a better test of an audio system..?

I think that it's a little apples and oranges. I like to start with solo voice, small scale music. If a component can't get the timbre, micro or macro dynamics, etc right, then it won't do anything more complex. Now as far as "complex" music goes, I find that it depends in some part on the power supply design of the component eg. that's where lesser priced gear tends to cut costs, and will evnetually hear it in some sort of dynamic compression, soundstage collapse, or loss of pristiness (?distortions?).

 

[jkeny]

-----Probably not, or unless I was a super expert on that specific instrument...

Duh??? Well then how would you expect to be able to tell these characteristics on a playback system if you can't tell them live/blind????
You really are incredibly confusing or confused????

!!-----Speaker's measurements like Frequency Response, Delay of the drivers, Waveform from Waterplot Falls, Crossover interactions, Sensitivity, Impedance, Phase angles, etc.

And then all types of other measurements (THD, S/N Ratio, Crosstalk, Damping Factor, Slew Factor Ratio, Frequency Response, Intermodulation, Distortion, Bias adjust, Jitter, etc.) from the preamp, amp, and source.

And then Resistance, Impedance, Inductance, Capacitance, Current, ...from the speaker wires and interconnects.

Oh I see you want to characterise my system with a set of characteristic measurements. I would have to call in one of you sharp objectivist to do all these measurements as you talk like you are experts in the field. Me, I'm just a poor subjectivist who doesn't know anything but how to listen - I'm not bothered with these measurements as it adds not one jot to my enjoyment of the music that emanates from my system.

 

[NorthStar]

---I have few guitar amps when I play my guitars, and that I also use with various pick-ups and mics when playing flutes and harmonicas and acoustic guitars.

Other times I go directly into my main sound system! ...Though the mic inputs of a Tape Deck.
And in the past though the ones from an R2R Tape Deck.

And that is quite revelatory and educative. ...Regarding the reproducers (loudspeakers used),
and also the preamplification and amplification of my music sound system (more refined sound).

One thing is fo sur at the end; the music is beeing amplified.
And the mics, the pick-ups, the low level signals, the amplification, the volume level control; they all play an important role in the final sound reproduction from the real instruments that I am playing in my living room.

And there is no substitute for quality speakers and electronic gear.
The better the equipment, the better the reproduction!
...Get your Visa or Master card ready! :b

* I also made quite a few recordings of my own, and with track's dubbing and all that Jazz.
...And from various methods (direct, mics, and different machines).
It is with experimentation that one truly learns.

P.S. Any typtos?

 

[NorthStar]

Duh??? Well then how would you expect to be able to tell these characteristics on a playback system if you can't tell them live/blind????
You really are incredibly confusing or confused????

-----You asked me some'; I gave you an honest answer.
If there is confusion it's only in your own interpretation (from another dimension in another context). :b

Oh I see you want to characterise my system with a set of characteristic measurements. I would have to call in one of you sharp objectivist to do all these measurements as you talk like you are experts in the field. Me, I'm just a poor subjectivist who doesn't know anything but how to listen - I'm not bothered with these measurements as it adds not one jot to my enjoyment of the music that emanates from my system.

-----Hey John, you are 100% FREE to choose your own destiny.
That's what's so great with all the people from this planet! :b

P.S. Any typos?

 

[Gregadd]

Here are two:

One thing is fo sur at the end

Can we let this go now?

 

[NorthStar]

Here are two:

One thing is fo sur at the end

Can we let this go now?

-----"C'mon Down in my Kitchen"; you know that song? :b

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

-----"C'mon Down in my Kitchen"; you know that song? :b

Woman I love

Stole her from a friend

That man got lucky

Stole her back again

You better come

into my kitchen

Because it's gon' to be rainin' outdoors

 

[NorthStar]

---...And who's the songwriter/singer? :b

 

[Gregadd]

I guess not.
Post 168 I tthink.http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...nd-is-Rubbish/page19&highlight=stereo+rubbish