Neither is SY I guess
This is what this film is all about (what makes us human and losing control like humans we are)
I am bloody thirsty and wipe off the blood marks from your right shoe
George
Recently I have been helping design a project. We used all sorts of tools to help. The more technically perfect the project became the worse it sounded and the cost was going seriously skywards. I was called back in to help. I went through the data and found one very interesting example.
We started from that point and switched off the measuring devices. Everything from then was by listening tests. I drove everyone mad as I insisted that it was bunny hops. It took weeks. The bigger surprise is things that seemed related to one area had a big reaction in supposedly unrelated areas.
The final results stunned me. Everything I thought impossible now works. I have no idea how it measures now and even less interest. It will be OK as the starting point was and we only moved a little away from the point. The quality found is it now has coherence.
One test I did was Jimmy Robertson blues singer. Boss man. Jimmy has sung this for me face to face. This new device comes mighty close to him being in front of me. The bigger quality is no pinch in the sound. The 180g LP disappointing me as it was not like him. Well I was wrong.
I said to one of the guys. " You hit No 1 on the dartboard 3 mm away from the Bulls-eye".
The rub is I was praised and 3 mm man was less than praised. I would have none of that as 80% of the work was his. What he lacked was the courage to say it was the right starting point.
I have been told that this engineering approach is the fastest and exists in all things. Set up might be 20 % the final result. It is 100 % the success of the idea to make a profit. I have proved this many times by taking OK things and doing that 20 %.
Only one thing wrong with the design. It makes LP show how good it is. I can not change that.
We started from that point and switched off the measuring devices. Everything from then was by listening tests. I drove everyone mad as I insisted that it was bunny hops. It took weeks. The bigger surprise is things that seemed related to one area had a big reaction in supposedly unrelated areas.
The final results stunned me. Everything I thought impossible now works. I have no idea how it measures now and even less interest. It will be OK as the starting point was and we only moved a little away from the point. The quality found is it now has coherence.
One test I did was Jimmy Robertson blues singer. Boss man. Jimmy has sung this for me face to face. This new device comes mighty close to him being in front of me. The bigger quality is no pinch in the sound. The 180g LP disappointing me as it was not like him. Well I was wrong.
I said to one of the guys. " You hit No 1 on the dartboard 3 mm away from the Bulls-eye".
The rub is I was praised and 3 mm man was less than praised. I would have none of that as 80% of the work was his. What he lacked was the courage to say it was the right starting point.
I have been told that this engineering approach is the fastest and exists in all things. Set up might be 20 % the final result. It is 100 % the success of the idea to make a profit. I have proved this many times by taking OK things and doing that 20 %.
Only one thing wrong with the design. It makes LP show how good it is. I can not change that.
Last edited:
"Technically perfect" by what measure? If the correlation between what measurements show, and what the ears hear is poor, then the wrong things are being measured - as has been said here many times! So, what is it going to take to get some movement forward ... ?
I loved the movies he made when he was still funny. With some artists, a point comes where they take themselves seriously and that's death to creativity.
Measuring the device could show you how to design equipment that you like.
If you find that a device you like the sound of distorts quite a lot, so what. Measuring it will tell you what you like.
OT
A point in time came when the others took the funny W.A. seriously.
This kind of success I think scared him. None of his ‘symbols’ were ‘funny’ and ‘entertaining’ characters.
IMO, it is when he started to make movies that were not ‘funny’ anymore, that he seriously started his public self exposure (self sarcasm) on important issues (inner feelings), a different kind of creativity.
George
The boring kind.
I'll take "Sleeper" or "Take the Money and Run" over anything he's done in the past 35 years, put together, and multiplied by 10.Designing by ears is good. Designing by tools is good. Thinking that "technically perfect" design can sound bad is NOT GOOD.
Relying by ears alone can be dangerous. Because there are too many variables affecting the sound. When we hear a good sound, it is only a small possible combination of variables. One variable changes (such as room or distance between speakers, or even the music) the sound may turnout to be disaster.
There are many variables to measure and they have different weight. Most common speaker measurement technique is measuring FR on-axis. Using ears, if it doesn't sound good off-axis, then it is not good. Seems like ears and technique contradict each other but it does not.
Tattoo made a simple and correct technical statement. Can you explain how either of these fits?
Of course, this assumption means that you know everything relevant to measure, and control all the significant variables. Good luck with that.
What stuff did you smoke?
I did not post any criticisms at all or to anyone in this post your referring to. If someone likes something, that's fine by me.
My criticism in this thread is against sighted listening tests.
Measures "bad" on variable that is not important, but measures "well" on variable that is more important (but often not common or even unknown).
Or you can even know a lot of "secrets" of what makes a good sound.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.