Interesting, but as I learn they didn't test dipoles. Damn. Research must go on.
Hi, I didnt try Scilab. In theory both Octave and Scilab are Matlab compatible so I think there should be no big problems as I used only basic functions and nothing Octave specific comes to my mind.
If you are using Scilab, yes please, share with us how it goes if you run the script.
Everybody has his own perception.
To me this thread sounds like "MANY find dipoles sound most natural. Let us find the science /metric to support this". Many theories in science started with an astute subjective observation made just by the sensory organs of humans...that was later supported by the physics and math. Newton "saw" an apple falling. We "hear" a dipole as the better sounding.
I would be very interested in the dipole vs cardioid comparison using Elias's methods by JohnK.
Last edited:
Agreed, as long as the researcher leaves open the possibility that his initial assumption/hypothesis is incorrect - i.e. maybe dipoles are not the best sounding LF source. I, for one, do not believe that they are. I don't believe that anything else is any better either. I believe that it all depends on how the room and subs are setup and that the source type is a distant second in importance.
The source type is just a tool to reach a certain goal. Unfortunately in consumer audio land the tool somehow became the goal.
Yes, that's true. Things become problematic when the tool characteristics become the basis for supposedly generic metrics used to evaluate performance. The performance metrics have to come from subjective studies, like the one that you asked about - a very good start.
It's very hard sometimes.
If the bottom line is "What sounds good to me.", then what is this thread all about?
But I want every pie to taste like apple pie because apple pie is my favorite. I also don't need no recipe for making apple pie. I just add ingredients until it "tastes good to me". And if there's just pizza for dinner I simply add some apples on top of it
Well, if you believe the room is the most likely culprit, we need to take it out of the picture or at least reduce the room contributions. Although I don't have have Elias's measuring tools, I have used my ears to compare dipoles vs sealed woofers, in big rooms with huge windows and many doors to approximate wide open listing environments and still favor dipoles. It would be great to know if somebody ever did scientific measurements comparing sealed vs dipole/cardioid in simulated anechoic conditions.
Except that is the point, we cannot do that, it is dominate and makes all the other discussion moot.
And I could just as easily say the opposite. Where does that get us?
Here's the FFT frequency responses of the same impulse responses as before.
In this metrics they both are bad, and they just suck in a slighty different way.
Compare these FFT curves with the pics from post #212.
Dipole:
Monopole:
Clearly, comparing only FFT responses to find the better performing solution is a dead end.
- Elias
In this metrics they both are bad, and they just suck in a slighty different way.
Compare these FFT curves with the pics from post #212.
Dipole:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Monopole:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Clearly, comparing only FFT responses to find the better performing solution is a dead end.
- Elias
As a wise man recently said:
"Don't bite, don't bite, don't bite..."
Yes, but ... In the long run if we just avoid this issue then it's not even worth coming to DIY (or any other site). It's just the "same old, same old". You either fight the laudable fight or go away.
Yes, they are both bad, and it is often hard to tell the difference in impression between two very bad results (I have statistical data to show this. As two sounds become "very bad" perceptions will have a greater deviation across subjects than "better" ones. "How bad is bad?" is always an issue.) But I do not see how you can draw the conclusion that you are drawing.
Further - that data is obviously bogus since they both have the same level of LF excitation and that is impossible.
Last edited:
You propably mean echoic ?
I do have 3D room impulse response simulator which can generate impulse responses from monopole, dipole and cardiode in an arbitrary room. I made it with Octave, how else
It is easy to simulate any source location and orientation. It has been a long time dream to do exhaustive simulations on these source types in a small room, but unfortunately time has allways found better use. One day, I hope and belive !
- Elias
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.