What can measurements show/not show? - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > General Interest > Everything Else

Everything Else Anything related to audio / video / electronics etc) BUT remember- we have many new forums where your thread may now fit! .... Parts, Equipment & Tools, Construction Tips, Software Tools......

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 7th August 2010, 08:55 PM   #1
jkeny is offline jkeny  Ireland
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dublin
Default What can measurements show/not show?

I really don't know the correct place for this thread?

Just when a thread was getting interesting & about to have a breakthrough it was closed down Modifying USB cable to supply 5v

Sy, I believe, was going to post plots of analogue outs clearly showing jitter, sound stage, instrument timbre, sonic tails & all the things we audio freaks crave.

He claims that anything that can be heard is measurable so I'm presuming he either has these measurements & can produce them or he has never heard the effects of which I speak.

Maybe he can produce them here & others can give their measured opinion as to heard Vs measurements?

Last edited by jkeny; 7th August 2010 at 08:58 PM.
 
Old 7th August 2010, 10:49 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Canandaigua, NY USA
IMO, any signal defect that can be heard is measurable. IOW, if by signal you mean the time vs voltage characteristics measured on a wire, say between the input and output of an amplifier, there's no mystery there. More sensitive or more accurate instruments aren't going to reveal anything we don't already know.

Now, once you get into transducers and enter the 3-dimensional airspace, the ear and the brain, things get way complicated. We still have pretty good measurement capability, and more is known about perception than is sometimes acknowledged, but the number of variables seems huge and I don't think predicting how the brain will interpret them is very far along.

So, the electrical journey is well understood, but don't make the mistake of thinking that "best" sound is necessarily perfect reproduction, where noise and distortions have been reduced to zero. The acoustic journey is way complicated, transducers are far from perfect and even though we can measure the defects, you and I might prefer entirely different designs. Thus, the audio hobby will happily continue.
__________________
I may be barking up the wrong tree, but at least I'm barking!
 
Old 7th August 2010, 10:56 PM   #3
jkeny is offline jkeny  Ireland
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dublin
Thanks Conrad, for your considered reply - I pretty much agree with what you say & don't believe for a moment that low distortion = best sound! it's well known that the ears introduce 2nd order distortion & who knows how the ear/brain interface behaves?

I was specifically asking about audible characteristics in the sound like sound stage, timbre, instrument tails & decay, etc.

Some people (SY & others) claim that anything that can be heard is measurable - what do you think?

I'm waiting for SY to produce the analogue plots that show this & I've been asking for a while now but so far no show!
 
Old 7th August 2010, 10:57 PM   #4
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkeny View Post
...
...Sy, I believe, was going to post plots of analogue outs clearly showing jitter, sound stage, instrument timbre, sonic tails & all the things we audio freaks crave.

He claims that anything that can be heard is measurable so I'm presuming he either has these measurements & can produce them or he has never heard the effects of which I speak.

Maybe he can produce them here & others can give their measured opinion as to heard Vs measurements?
actually you have the presumption backwards - we can measure many types of signal distortion, frequency response, phase, and jitter effects on the analog signal - the issue is getting any reliable evidence of audibility thresholds in controlled perceptual testing

grab a handful of audiophile subjectivist speculations with "night and day differences" which seem to largely disappear under controlled testing with blinding protocols and then claim "you can't measure it" – seems to be begging the big question

as long as the "Golden Eared" refuse to use even basic controls that the rest of the world uses when turning human perceptual responses into reproducible data that can validate theoretical models and give quantifiable predictions there won’t be advances in measurement correlation with audibility

it is not that the problem of perceptual testing is too hard – the development of losey perceptual encoders that can “throw out” >75% of the Shannon-Hartley “channel information capacity” with vanishingly few able to detect the difference for the majority of music shows audio perceptual testing can give significant results
 
Old 7th August 2010, 11:06 PM   #5
jkeny is offline jkeny  Ireland
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dublin
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post
actually you have the presumption backwards - we can measure many types of signal distortion, frequency response, phase, and jitter effects on the analog signal - the issue is getting any reliable evidence of audibility thresholds in controlled perceptual testing

grab a handful of audiophile subjectivist speculations with "night and day differences" which seem to largely disappear under controlled testing with blinding protocols and then claim "you can't measure it" – seems to be begging the big question

as long as the "Golden Eared" refuse to use even basic controls that the rest of the world uses when turning human perceptual responses into reproducible data that can validate theoretical models and give quantifiable predictions there won’t be advances in measurement correlation with audibility

it is not that the problem of perceptual testing is too hard – the development of losey perceptual encoders that can “throw out” >75% of the Shannon-Hartley “channel information capacity” with vanishingly few able to detect the difference for the majority of music shows audio perceptual testing can give significant results
It's not my presumption, JCX, it's SY's - he claims that anything audible is measurable! I sense you disagree with this?

So can I ask you if you have ever heard an increase in sound stage? a more realistic instrument timbre? etc. If you have, have you ever measured the difference in analogue output before the increase & after? Can you show them please? Everything we hear is measurable, right? So these are measurable, correct? Show me please! Otherwise, I presume these are not yet measurable phenomena?

Now if you are going to reply that these are very subjective terms then I take it that you have never experienced such an improvement in your audio set-up?

Last edited by jkeny; 7th August 2010 at 11:19 PM.
 
Old 7th August 2010, 11:09 PM   #6
jkeny is offline jkeny  Ireland
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dublin
Still no plots from SY - I PMed him to let him know about this thread!

I was hoping that all this speculation could be avoided with his plots as he has stated that anything audible is measurable!

Last edited by jkeny; 7th August 2010 at 11:16 PM.
 
Old 7th August 2010, 11:55 PM   #7
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
I had a thoughtful reply prepared but seeing your continued hectoring I'm not interested in feeding a Troll...
 
Old 8th August 2010, 12:02 AM   #8
jkeny is offline jkeny  Ireland
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dublin
Any thoughtful reply would be appreciated but I'm also interested in hearing from Sy & seeing his plots. I'm presuming you don't have these plots of analogue out showing sound stage, etc? Or I guess you would have posted them!

Can all that we hear be shown on an analogue out plot or not?

I'm going to take it from the silence & the lack of evidence to the contrary that this is proven to be a falsehood & anybody stating this in the future is also just promulgating a falsehood!

I have an open mind on this but need evidence to show that these sonic characteristics that we hear are actually evident on a plot of analogue out! If this is not the case then please stop pushing this line of needless argument & wasting everybody's time, energy & internet bandwidth!

Last edited by jkeny; 8th August 2010 at 12:18 AM.
 
Old 8th August 2010, 12:27 AM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 109
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkeny View Post
Sy, I believe, was going to post plots of analogue outs clearly showing jitter, sound stage, instrument timbre, sonic tails & all the things we audio freaks crave.
I didn't get the impression that that was going to happen any time soon. You and he were talking past each other rather a lot

Quote:
He claims that anything that can be heard is measurable so I'm presuming he either has these measurements & can produce them or he has never heard the effects of which I speak.
I think as far as SY's claim goes, its a theoretical stance. In theory I also agree with him But practically speaking he's a long way from proposing the kind of measurements which correlate with what we hear. His lexis is distortion, crosstalk, sidebands and yours is soundstage, timbre, reverberation. A bridge between the two ain't going to come from either of you methinks.

For just one example, he has claimed that the differences could be seen in the output spectrum. I picked up on his claim, asking for more details, he provided the proposed acquisition length of 8192 samples. I've not received a reply to my latest question on that and I'm not holding my breath

Quote:
Maybe he can produce them here & others can give their measured opinion as to heard Vs measurements?
A forlorn hope IMO.
__________________
There is surely nothing quite so useless as doing with great efficiency what should not be done at all - Peter Drucker
 
Old 8th August 2010, 12:35 AM   #10
jkeny is offline jkeny  Ireland
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dublin
Well, abraxalito, I believe his statement was that anything that can be heard, can be measured. I take it that he can hear differences in sound stage & timbre between different devices - if not we have a completely different frame of reference & no more discussion is needed.

I put it to him to show these differences in analogue output plots before he demands of others to show these differences. He says it's so simple! If he can't do this then his whole argument is a fabrication!
 

Closed Thread


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Show me the way MCMXC A.D. Multi-Way 2 9th May 2009 11:05 PM
the show electro samurai Analogue Source 2 15th March 2004 01:53 PM
show off your sub! paulspencer Subwoofers 0 30th September 2003 10:24 AM
No Lima show Positron Tubes / Valves 8 22nd September 2003 05:57 PM
Show of hands for the Montreal Sound and Image Show (Le Festival Son & Image) alvaius Everything Else 2 28th January 2003 06:48 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:56 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2