soongsc said:
And I think that you must have missed the point too - its all meaningless, what's the point of measuring and publishing meaningless data? Because thats what "we always do"?
I publish that data that means something, and I publish more meaningful data than almost any company that I know of.
Has this thread been so misunderstood that we are even having this discussion? I started this post to get people to think beyond "what we always do" and to use new data that has been obtained to better enlighten our designs. If others want to continue to use obsolete approachs to loudspeaker design thats fine, but for me, I prefer to move on with a more enlighten approach.
gedlee said:
Please read all posts, otherwise things get more than a little bit confusing..
You asked a question on my response to following DOGMATIC STATEMENT;
More clear now?
Obviously what you wrote to me was a question.. goes without saying when a sentence is ended with '?'.
And to be clear.. your question was not was I meant was a dogmatic statment.
/Peter
Undefinition said:
Jerkanese.. I suppose that would mean the language of jerks?
See it was easy enough for you (and I would guess anyone reading the thread) to grasp so what's your problem? If you let me express me I let you express you.
No. Cleanest and most resolving is basically something objective. Digital, low level electronics and power amps can be checked for this doing bypass tests. The equipment that manage to pass these tests with as little coloration as possible is what I usually prefer... because they receive a signal and pass it on with as little as possible added or subtracted. That is "Cleanest" and "Most resolving"... how could it be otherwise? These gear always has low HD and IMD. HD about 0.5% is easily heard and I see no rational reason to believe that HD and IM from speakers would be more masked than in electronics. Please be aware that I'm talking about low order non linearities and no crossover distortion.
Now the tricky part is of course speakers which can not be tested this way easily (allthough to some degree it is actually possible.. I haven't done it but a manufacturer of low distortion speakers I know of has) so of course you are free to believe that the low distortion speakers I have enjoyed actually is colored and that I have a preference for distortion of some sort.
/Peter
gedlee said:
You named this thread "Distortion perception".
And you question the meaning of people asking for the distortion performance of your speaker as you touting being so outstanding?
They don't sell well and you get listening fatigue?
You state that distortion measurements are meaningless.. why don't you let others decide for themself what is meaningful for them?
/Peter
gedlee said:
Your data and facts told you that a dome tweeter couldn't handle what your compression driver could. That was a false conclusion.
I have (as I allready told you) measured dome tweeters that match and possibly beat your compression tweeter regarding thermal compression... and you still haven't told me what dome tweeter you showed graphs on for some reason..
Also you had it completely wrong regarding what a high quality 6.5" midwoofer could and could not do.
Now, since you have had it wrong earlier I can't take your word for it now.
You claim to be a scientist and a pro.. you should understand my position without taking it personal IMO.
/Peter
So it sounds like there is going to be actual data to compare?Pan said:
Pan said:
I guess not.
It seems like another spit-fight thread without data comparison. Since gedlee has started to present his experience, I think it very impolite to say he is wrong unless there is at least one set of comparison.
I am quite interested in finding out how one can look at distortion data and tell what kind of listeing impression one might experience from a speaker. Hopefully someone that really knows can tell.
I personally look at CSD plots a lot, and whenever I see a frequency range that has extends longer than other ranges, we can expect to hear a stronger impression of that range.
So to elaborate on my question a bit more, how can one look at distortion data and tell how the speaker sound will be colored? Can we sort of predict what frequency range will have a stronger impression of colored sound?
I personally look at CSD plots a lot, and whenever I see a frequency range that has extends longer than other ranges, we can expect to hear a stronger impression of that range.
So to elaborate on my question a bit more, how can one look at distortion data and tell how the speaker sound will be colored? Can we sort of predict what frequency range will have a stronger impression of colored sound?
soongsc said:
Page 9-10 in this thread;
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=120101&perpage=25&highlight=&pagenumber=1
And before anyone get on my back I posted my results before gedlee and have to beg him several times. For some reason he bakced off first but then the results came.
As for the last part in your post.. when it comes to physics and facts there's no room for subjective opinions. Either it's tru or not and this time gedlees was wrong..
/Peter
soongsc said:
Coloration is not only about tonality but about resolution. High distortion often leads to a grainy sound.. maybe a feeling of blanket in front of the speakers. Sameness is common.... reduce distortion and the set up will differentiate between the program material to a higher degree.
Low distortion means higher resolution of weak details... ambience and reverbtails.
Of course you can't look at a distortion graph and know what this or that record will sound like. Colorations (tonal or distortion) give different results with different material. Frequency curves can give pretty good clues though but that goes without saying.
/Peter
Jay_WJ said:
Is it just me, or did this guy completely miss the point of this thread? If you go to Zaph's site, it's clear that he puts a huge emphasis on the quality of a driver based on its THD.
And if I'm understanding this study correctly, Gedlee is saying that THD is a bad metric to judge speakers because--even though a microphone and software can easily detect it--our ears cannot. Judging a driver (or a system) based on non-linear distortion is a very common practice, but that doesn't make it meaningful. Dr. Geddes, please pitch in if I've read your papers correctly. (If I AM reading you wrong, I'll just catch the next train out of here, because I don't want to impose)
And if you have additional reading material on psychoacoustics, I'm VERY interested in finding out more. This study has really opened my mind as to how to design a loudspeaker system, and treating audio in general.
This is the same kind of thing that I hear if there are some resonances shown in CSD graphs. However, in CSD graphs we can specifically relate to where the problem is. Normall if there is some stronger resonance at a certain frequency musical instruments lose focus when a specific note is played.Pan said:
This is the same thing I hear when the CSD decays fast.
Frequency response does give a very good clue of tone balance. However, when viewed closly with CSD graphs, one can still see how the tone balance can be shifted.
But this distortion issue is interesting, because gedlee had mentioned a few times that his Summa speaker was commented by others for being somewhat "lifeless". From what you have described and from my experience, if the comments are true, then we should see high distortion figures and sustained energy (especially within the 0.3ms range) Whether this is the case remains a mystery until someone gets a pair and measures them.
I do think we should also give any designer some room to learn and improve rither than giving them the "knock out". Especially those whom have dedicated very important parts of their lives in research in this area.
Earl;
Can you elaborate any further on your distortion algorithm?
If I understand your remarks, both the order and phase of the harmonic play into your heuristic.
The obvious question to me is: What characteristic of the phase makes it more or less audible?
I also have a suggestion.
Why don't you licence your SQ algorithm to Soundeasy and LPDCad (?) for a relatively nominal fee to get the Idea planted in the market? They are two major CAD speaker design and test suits for hobbyists. It could be a win - win scenario.
It would put it in position to influence thinking at least in the DIY community.
Thanks in advance.
Doug
Can you elaborate any further on your distortion algorithm?
If I understand your remarks, both the order and phase of the harmonic play into your heuristic.
The obvious question to me is: What characteristic of the phase makes it more or less audible?
I also have a suggestion.
Why don't you licence your SQ algorithm to Soundeasy and LPDCad (?) for a relatively nominal fee to get the Idea planted in the market? They are two major CAD speaker design and test suits for hobbyists. It could be a win - win scenario.
It would put it in position to influence thinking at least in the DIY community.
Thanks in advance.
Doug