Rmaf 2008

[gedlee]

Originally posted by jerome69

Yes ! It 'a a critical point. I can remove your doubts
A tall story I heard, a blind test was done with a critic to find a record cello and an unamplified play. The result, he preferred the record one...

I think that this discussion is OT, but I'd like to add some experineces.

Once in a well published test on the perception of distortion we wanted to test the differences in perception between the general public and a group of "trained listeners". The trained listeners took, on the average twice as long to do the test. The test was designed to test the subjects ability to repeatably judge the same trials over and over. The "trained" group was far LESS stable in their judgments than the general public, but both groups agreed "on average". It appears that the trained subjects keep trying to "second guess" the distortions - knowing that there always were some - and didn't do a very good job.

In a very elaborate test at a major car company the "expert listening panel" of 12 subjects were tested for they "guage capability" - how well they could repeatedly rate the same sound system over and over. Of the twelve only two were found to be "capable". The other ten could not be relied upon to give the same rating to the same system over and over. These were all trained audiophiles.

[cdwitmer]

Originally posted by gedlee

The other ten could not be relied upon to give the same rating to the same system over and over. These were all trained audiophiles.

Yeah, well you can definitely rely on me -- to be unreliable. I bet if they were audiophiles who were also highly trained musicians -- especially players of instruments in the violin family, whose players probably develop the best ears for pitch -- they could do a much better job on average, and most especially if they knew the music being played well enough to be able to play it themselves. I'm guessing that if you could get the listeners to that level, then they could really zero in on a lot of different things. My kids are not all that interested in audio but they are trained musicians and I'm always amazed by all the things they pick up on that tends to go right by me on a single listening.

It also occurs to me that perhaps part of the "problem" is that our brains keep repairing or deleting the "broken" parts so that we don't readily notice them as defective. Perhaps one might only notice it gradually, as fatigue or the inability to listen to something for a long time, and then we have to go back and start analyzing why the system leaves us feeling that way.

-- Chris

[gedlee]

The thing that I would caution about is that music appreciation and sound reproduction appreciation are not the same things. One can be very good at one and poor at the other and visa-versa. I have, in general, not seen a strong correlation between the two, although there might be a tendancy for a weak positive correlation. However, I would never bet on a good musician being a good listener. I've seen far too many counter examples.

[cdwitmer]

Originally posted by gedlee
I would never bet on a good musician being a good listener. I've seen far too many counter examples.

Absolutely -- the musicians are often so much into the music that they could almost care less about the audio fidelity. That's why I fudged my answer by specifying that participants should be selected from that rare group who are both musicians and audiophiles . . .

Of course, one of the main reasons why there are few audiophiles among classical musicians is that usually the classical musicians would rather put what little money they have toward their next instrument purchase . . . it seems like most of them have four or five instruments that range from "expensive" to "Oh my God that's expensive" . . .

-- Chris

[gedlee]

"Avoiding deportation from Japan for over a quarter century!"

That's more than Bobby Fisher was able to do.

[cdwitmer]

Originally posted by gedlee
"Avoiding deportation from Japan for over a quarter century!"

That's more than Bobby Fisher was able to do.

Since I'm just a lowly pawn, I have been more successful than Bobby Fischer in keeping one step ahead of the international Jewish conspiracy . . .

-- Chris

[Pano]

Originally posted by cdwitmer
-- but with standard close miking techniques you end up with FAR MORE instrumental detail in the recording than you would ever get from listening to the live performance normally.

Yes indeedy! And why is it done this way? Not for you, or me, or the other guys here - for Joe Q. Public.
For the vast majority of sound systems, car stereos, radios, etc. that the music is played on. If you start out with all that detail, you might just end up somewhere near reality in the end. And that's what's going to sound "good" to most of the buying public. I'll include myself in there, if using a less than great system.

Funny thing: When I first got into high end Hi-Fi back in my school days, I never liked those far miked, lot's of concert hall sound recordings. I thought they were rubbish and didn't understand why the engineer did that. "Doesn't sound real. - Too muffled, too far away" I liked much closer miked stuff, whatever the genre. Until it dawned on me - duh - that in those days I was sitting in the orchesta! High school band, youth orchestras, etc. Put a stereo pair in the woodwind section and you'd get an idea of what was "right" to me.

It all goes back to what Lynn said in an earlier post in this thread. Most systems just can't get the feel of a real, live event. It's not easy to do...

[Pano]

On the other hand:

There was a gentleman who stupped by our room at RMAF last year. "Log Cabin Recordings." He asked to play a few of his CD and they were wonderfull.

Just the right mix of direct and ambient sound. The piano was missing none of its detail, but you could here the room very well too.

I asked how it was done and he said "one stereo microphone."

Obviously, he knew right were to place that mic!

[Don Naples]

Originally posted by wchick
I stayed in Orion room most of the day; I think I saw Lynn too. I can confirm that SL has used all 12 channel of the ATI amp, he bridged 2 channel to feed the woofers.

Jeffbook and Eric Weitzman are correct in their posts about how the Orion speakers are wired to the AT-6012 amplifier. I made the speakers and also connected the amplifier at the show. Only 8 channels are used with the Orion+.

I did appreciate those who brought music to the show as it is easier to get a sense of comparisons when you listen to the same piece of music and something you know. We did have some samples requested that did not sound very live as some studio recordings seemed very compressed.

What was not obvious at the show I suspect most members of this forum know. The Orion is not only a DIY project, it is also available as a kit or as a custom turn key system in the woods of your choice. If you are planning the DIY version, please study the pictures to see some differences in the DIY version and the completed version. There are some subtle changes that one might want to consider.

[tktran303]

Hi Don,

They look very similar to me. Is the one manufactured by your company the one with the grill?