"Studio made sound" is still made of "sounds that are modulating in the air" so I don't understand your comment.
Not always. Electric and electronic instruments don't modulate the air but are recorded directly and electronically.
se
I played on stage and in studios, and i can tell you
that it s not the same sound.
Live sound is much richer in its simple harmonics and intermodulations
contents..
A Greater part of the sounds is "mixed" in the air before being recorded.
In a studio sound, most of the sounds are mixed electronicaly,and
the speakers can t render this.
No wonder that people prefer tubes amps, as they slightly recreate
this enhancig effect thanks to a high distorsion level and intermodulation
levels , at the expense of fidelity.
That makes wahab's not more understandable to me. Do you know what he's talking about? That there's a difference in recording techniques? Of course. That's something nobody would ever deny.
I don't think high distortion levels have much to do with why some prefer tubes over solid state - most of the tube lovers that I hang out with prefer tubes because they more accurately reproduce the timbres of vocals and instruments, they lack the raspiness and hashiness of solid state, and they trounce SS at throwing 3-D images. How those types of attributes would contribute to a lack of fidelity is beyond me.
Perhaps what he means is real unamplified instruments recorded using just microphones
This is a classical example how preferences differ depend on whaqt people are used to listening to. I once modified an interconnect that created additonal harmonics. It's still laying around somewhere in the dust.
That's because stereo is not about realism. Its an entity of its own. Adding distortion of tubes to recordings is easy and practiced every day. Look at all the effects available. Arbitrarily adding distortion at any stage in the reproduction process leads to unpredictable results. http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/10/audios-circle-of-confusion.html
If you want realistic sound reproduction then look at binaural recordings or wave field synthesis. Even multichannel can deliver a more realistic sound stage.
I´d asked again why the audio business should be an exception compared to nearly all other fields?
If using double blind test results were a great marketing strategy we were flooded with it in every part of the consumer market; but apparently it doesn´t happen.
Of course the manufacturers are happy with the current situation (despite the fact that it is of course a tough competition), but if another marketing strategy would work better, they imho would be happy to use that.
Take for example gedlee´s loudspeakers; he had presented a solid theoretical analysis that predicts a certain effect that should better be avoided and he had developed and patented a waveguide with foam insert as a countermeasure and that delivers a controlled directivity.
And he had a range of loudspeaker models with this technology. Obviously he does not argue with double blind test results and i´d assume that´s because he does not believe that it would really help in marketing.
Wishes
While there are many design tradeoffs in amost every aspect of audio design, there is not clear conclusion which set if the best. While there are many reports on what can or cannot be ignored, I have always found that there is some critical conditions and that are not identified in each such reports.
Last edited:
Science and marketing seldom mix because the truth is boring and will never generate the demand that subjectivity creates. You are wrong to believe "nearly all fields" Actually few fields adhere to science or "absolute best design" (Think Audio, Fitness products, Diet pills, Herbal medicines...the list is a long one for science not being involved, think Microsoft for less then perfect design). Its one reason Science type people are not the best business men out there and marketing gurus are! EDIT: If you have both skills then congrats
The only time science really matters is when some gets hurt and safety becomes the biggest concern.
Why have the truth when you can sell brass weights for $100 (4 pack) to keep your amp from vibrating....the amp is 50 pound itself but the brass weight helps
Last edited:
I would like to point out that "blind" tests were used very early on in the development of the technology (we could not do DBT). But I agree that from a marketing standpoint they don't help because people don't understand the need. If they did, then they would require them. At any rate I believe in strong and meaningful objective data not subjective data - even if it is DBT. Enough DBT tests have been done to quantify what is required objectively for good sound quality. Very few speakers meet these requirments, and until they do subjective tests aren't all that necessary.
Maybe not in your mind. In my mind there is and for most professionals in this field there is.
Sad but true and even very intelligent people fall for marketing blah. This thread is an impressive demonstration of that.
Im a fan of subjectivity in Golf
I buy the latest greatest products all the time its really okay to spend money on things we want. Not everything has to be science based. Of course I would never post in a golf forum arguing that the golf ball I use is better
We were mocking my good friend on friday because he was wearing a titanium braclet....it didnt improve his game but he felt great
EDIT: what does this mean? I honestly do not care what anyone spend their money on. Spending money is simply a great thing for the economy so spend more!!!
Last edited:
Based on the definition of "professional" in the Merrian-Webster dictionary, I doubt it.
Based on the definition of "professional" in the Merrian-Webster dictionary, I doubt it.
Perhaps "expert" would have been a better word. Among those who have spent their professional lifes study audio and perception there is very little disagreement.
Your comment would lead one to believe that there is very little consensus and that is simply not true. The lack of concensus is among marketing and amatuers - but one should expect that.
I've decided to use that term VERY conservatively after legal proffessionals asked me how I won some cases.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.