I don't think it makes sense to talk about all listening tests ever conducted when the topic is your specific listening test. If you want to test for absolute polarity (I think this is what you were trying to do in your test although you didn't use the word "absolute" in post #1703) then the test has to be conducted differently. You have to minimize errors. Sighted tests introduce huge errors that render results meaningless. This has been shown many times. I can't make you accept this fact, sometimes people act irrational..
Do these listening tests show what the room and system decay caracteristics are as part of the know conditions? If they do, then I am interested.
Last edited:
markus,
My intention was just to provide an example of audibility of reveresed polarity, not to argue about whether it's right or wrong because there is simply no listening test I've seen ever conducted right. If you have information about what is conducted right, I will review it as I said I would. So let's not let this thread go too much off track. If you are interested in the subject of conducting proper listening tests, please feel free to open a thread on the subject. I will provide my inputs there.
My intention was just to provide an example of audibility of reveresed polarity, not to argue about whether it's right or wrong because there is simply no listening test I've seen ever conducted right. If you have information about what is conducted right, I will review it as I said I would. So let's not let this thread go too much off track. If you are interested in the subject of conducting proper listening tests, please feel free to open a thread on the subject. I will provide my inputs there.
They were done with headphones as virtually all modern psychoacoustoic studies are these days. It avoids having to deal with room issues.
Do they specify type of of headphone (sealed, opened, or the model), and the CSD performance as measured using a dummy head? If they do, then I am interested.
About a month ago I took may father for a hearing test, it was very interesting.
About a month ago I took may father for a hearing test, it was very interesting.
The standard for this kind of test are the Etymotic ER-4a, the same ones that we used. They are insert earphones that are free field equalized to be flat - unlike most headphones. If you have not heard these then nyou should because they are quite good - albeit VERY expensive.
I have found a place around here that carries the ER-4P, so I will drop in for a listening test. It'll probably be next week till stores open around here. But I can't find information on ER-4a.
Last edited:
George - what you personally think of them is not the point. The point is that they are the most accurate way to present signals to the ear in psychoacoustic hearing tests. If they sound terible to you that is completely beside the point.
Earl, I just came back from listening to them, and I also looked at the data on their web site. To avoid any arguement, if I do not see their CSD data unsmoothed up to 20KHz, the data is just not enough to make an adequate judgement. I could explain what I see from the existing data, but you would just say I am wrong just to defend the validity of all research done using this earphone.
While I was listening, I though I heard some people moving in the background on my right side behind me, and I thought "gosh, this is amazing" then I looked behind me, and there was really someone moving around about 2 feet away from me.
When I get go to Taipei, I will take some time to audit the ER-4s which is the more accurate one. Nobody knows of the ER-4a version. Is that a typo? Or is that version only available at special locations?
While I was listening, I though I heard some people moving in the background on my right side behind me, and I thought "gosh, this is amazing" then I looked behind me, and there was really someone moving around about 2 feet away from me.
When I get go to Taipei, I will take some time to audit the ER-4s which is the more accurate one. Nobody knows of the ER-4a version. Is that a typo? Or is that version only available at special locations?
Last edited:
They appear to call them ER4 B now, an upgrade I suppose Etymotic Research, Inc. - ER-4 - Which ER?4 is Right for You
It's possible. But here is something I can't understand.
"As compared to the ER•4S, the ER•4P has 10 dB greater output at high frequencies and 13 dB greater output at low frequencies. "
Yet, the graph from their site shows more dip in the high frequencies instead of 10db gain.
"As compared to the ER•4S, the ER•4P has 10 dB greater output at high frequencies and 13 dB greater output at low frequencies. "
Yet, the graph from their site shows more dip in the high frequencies instead of 10db gain.
Attachments
Read the site, its all explained there.
The P is for lower output portable units like the Ipod. The A/B is intended to be used where the amp has lots of output, like a lab.
A little off topic maybe, but I'm just curious, Earl... what do think about SL's equalization approach? Reference earphones
I realize that for research purposes it is important to adhere to standards, but is it true that equalization to compensate for the tuning of the ear canal produces more accurate sound?
- Doug
I realize that for research purposes it is important to adhere to standards, but is it true that equalization to compensate for the tuning of the ear canal produces more accurate sound?
- Doug
All Insert earphones do this. Read about it at Etymotic.com. Its essential and not something that SL came up with.
That is why I'd like to look at the CSD as measured from the dummy head. SL compensation will improve the situation, but will effect transient response because resonance of the higher frequency notch commences after first reflection.
The problem is those data seem to be secrets well kept.🙄This is the reason why I take those listening studies as news. Bits of information are usefull. Real understanding comes from integration and studying research many sources.
Last edited:
One of the first things that you have said that I can agree with. Now, you just need to start studying whats out there, as I have, and we will be all set.
I think you underestimate what I have read and how far back in time I search. Probably 80% out there that I have read regarding listening tests really are far from adequate as a whole to provide conclusive results, but contain some usefull information and points of view. When we do research, we just look for the pieces that are usefull. Not all people have an open mind to pick out the diamonds from what they despise.
I certainly did not expect a simple sharing of a demonstration experience could excite such a long discussion.
I certainly did not expect a simple sharing of a demonstration experience could excite such a long discussion.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.