Kareface, would you like to tell us the results of the measurements of your loudspeaker cabinets? How about a 'waterfall test'? I only want measurements, not your subjective appraisal of your loudspeakers. After all, isn't that what you are saying makes the difference?
Precisely. Go to any recital (piano or chamber music), orchestral performance, or opera and you will find that the sound is "warm". Unfortunately, a lot of people base their reference of "live performance" on music that is piped through a (lousy) P.A. system. An accurate reproduction of a voice performance probably will sound "warm" when compared to the output of a Peavey amp and speaker. Eight times out of ten, when I hear a live show with sound reinforcement the whole experience is an assault on the ears. A lot of movie theaters are just as bad and some worse.
John
Last edited:
Accuracy is simply about reproducing the recording (not the actual event) as accurate as possible. If the recording sucks then adjustments are needed if you want to listen to the crap recording. You are altering the original recording and its not accurate.
Dont confuse accuracy with being right or wrong. How anyone listens is 100% their choice.
You can define "Warm" to whatever suits your needs in an debate 😉
But generally "Warm" is a term describing the coloration of a speaker. "Bright" is another term describing the coloration of a speaker.
Why do the measurements of his first DIY speakers matter?
You have yet to produce one measurement that actually is on topic of this thread but you ask for totally pointless measurements of someone's project?
Are you saying that moving an inch or does not matter when listening and that you will hear the same thing?
Stereo speakers have a specific sweet spot and if you move off that spot you will most definitely have combing. Try some measurements of two speakers and move just a couple of inches left or right.
I will let your collection of posts answer the moron part but maybe you do not actually have good hearing. Speakers have a combing filter, read about it 😉
Last edited:
Nothing is pointless, if it might interfere with ones perception of quality sound. You are correct I do not publish ANYTHING but words on this website, but I have plenty of measurements on file, including a loudspeaker that I once designed, with almost perfect frequency response, including plus/minus 45 degrees dispersion, and time aligned output of the drivers too, and custom made crossovers to get the best transient response that I could get. Price was no object, and we used a composite cabinet design with dissimilar materials to reduce the Q of the cabinet resonance to a minimum.
I used a B&K instrumentation mike to measure the response, and my first reflection was France, more than 20 miles away within the 90 degree spread vertical or horizontal.
YET, my design sounded rather lousy. What MEASUREMENT did I miss?
I used a B&K instrumentation mike to measure the response, and my first reflection was France, more than 20 miles away within the 90 degree spread vertical or horizontal.
YET, my design sounded rather lousy. What MEASUREMENT did I miss?
Um....You missed my actually point yet again.. I was asking for measurements on audible cable differences. Lets try to talk about the actually thread topic instead of some redirection you guys are famous for. You will ignore that request again because you have zero data, its the same way you have ignored my question about what sound can not be measured even though you have posted "not everything can be measured".
hmmmm...🙄
As for your post who knows. Its a complete topic on its own. Maybe you like a specific inaccurate sound (ala B&W designs or similar). What was your goal? To build accuracy speakers or to build speakers you like to hear?
Have you even trained yourself on listening and accuracy? I would recommend going to harman and learning a bit Audio Musings by Sean Olive: Harman's "How to Listen" - A New Computer-based Listener Training Program
That is sad. It shows confusion about how the ear/brain system works. The answer to the question is obviously 'no'. Your auditory system interprets, and immediately adjust to, a positional change as exactly that, a positional change. You don't hear the changes in comb filtering and reflection delays as changes in comb filtering and reflection delays. The character of the sound source doesn't change. Your ear is not a microphone.
Then again, I can believe we have to debate this. I once had to defend the notion on this forum that we have the innate ability localize sound sources overhead.
Oh, I have plenty of them, but SY and SE don't like them, so I don't put them up, anymore. Why not look at Ed Simon's wire measurements? They are pretty interesting.
Yes it is, albeit a crude, low performance one. It's the brain where the magic happens. But I've said that a few hundred times with no apparent effect.
Your opinion is short sighted once again, so this is bogus stuff?
Why We Believe
You want to show me some proof behind your spin? I have yet to see any data from you to support any of your opinions.
Ed measured your speakers?
C'mon John, time to stop running away. Put up or shut up.
Where are Ed Simon's measurements?
Im enjoying your dog and pony show, I say you have zero measurements and you are just lying about it all. A guy like you has nothing on an used car salesman 😀
I don't know about this one, but Dave Moulton's "Golden Ear" training material was quite an interesting experience. But I doubt I'd want to do that kind of training for the reast of my life like dog training.
ahhh, the frankenthread LIVES!!
again..will it ever die?
sheesh, at least get it right.
that is the source of a liquid midrange.
It's mostly the same old ones all the time, with a new one every now and then replacing the ones that get lost or drift away.
Oh, sorry, you said electrons. Thought you was talkin bout people who post in cable threads.
Ahh, but is not listening an actual measurement?? (I heard when the speaker was turned on, and heard when it was turned off).
Guess it comes down to seperating the noise in the measurements to get the true measurements (whatever they are) way down the bottom. That is where our friends usually come up short. (I do love the ones that do there own DBTs -unsupervised- and come up trumps when all the rest of us-when supervised-completely fail.)
not really sure what diffractor is..but if you are into building your own room treatment devices here is something that might help you
QRDude: Quadratic Residue Diffuser calculator
Not in the slightest..who 'generations' ago (how many generations are we talking here btw??) even considered the room in their stereo??
who generations ago had access to computer modeling to help design their speakers (again, how many generations are you talking?? Edison??)
you don't reckon material science has anything to do with our progress? If you admit it may have, was that due to new and unknown scientific measurements being discovered, or simply application of existing knowledge and measurements?
Of course, I am open enough to admit that the reason my system sounds better than edisons is because I have better cables than he did (and all this time we thought going away from mechanical horns was the true source of audio improvements when really the true source of those improvements was that it allowed us into the magical world of cables!!)
TBH I think he was talking about measuring your box itself and it's mechanical construction, resonances of the cabinet itself etc etc, not the driver output nor crossover results.
That surprises you in a twelve thousand post thread???
Thank god for the OT nature of the thread, would be damned boring without it!!
I don't know about this one, but Dave Moulton's "Golden Ear" training material was quite an interesting experience. But I doubt I'd want to do that kind of training for the reast of my life like dog training.
Soong, I have often wondered about courses like these, but then think 'why would you WANT to be cursed with picking and hearing flaws (and thence never happy) in every system you will ever hear?'.
No, I will sit back and love what I have thanks very much.😀
again..will it ever die?
sheesh, at least get it right.
that is the source of a liquid midrange.
It's mostly the same old ones all the time, with a new one every now and then replacing the ones that get lost or drift away.
Oh, sorry, you said electrons. Thought you was talkin bout people who post in cable threads.
Ahh, but is not listening an actual measurement?? (I heard when the speaker was turned on, and heard when it was turned off).
Guess it comes down to seperating the noise in the measurements to get the true measurements (whatever they are) way down the bottom. That is where our friends usually come up short. (I do love the ones that do there own DBTs -unsupervised- and come up trumps when all the rest of us-when supervised-completely fail.)
not really sure what diffractor is..but if you are into building your own room treatment devices here is something that might help you
QRDude: Quadratic Residue Diffuser calculator
Not in the slightest..who 'generations' ago (how many generations are we talking here btw??) even considered the room in their stereo??
who generations ago had access to computer modeling to help design their speakers (again, how many generations are you talking?? Edison??)
you don't reckon material science has anything to do with our progress? If you admit it may have, was that due to new and unknown scientific measurements being discovered, or simply application of existing knowledge and measurements?
Of course, I am open enough to admit that the reason my system sounds better than edisons is because I have better cables than he did (and all this time we thought going away from mechanical horns was the true source of audio improvements when really the true source of those improvements was that it allowed us into the magical world of cables!!)
TBH I think he was talking about measuring your box itself and it's mechanical construction, resonances of the cabinet itself etc etc, not the driver output nor crossover results.
That surprises you in a twelve thousand post thread???
Thank god for the OT nature of the thread, would be damned boring without it!!
I don't know about this one, but Dave Moulton's "Golden Ear" training material was quite an interesting experience. But I doubt I'd want to do that kind of training for the reast of my life like dog training.
Soong, I have often wondered about courses like these, but then think 'why would you WANT to be cursed with picking and hearing flaws (and thence never happy) in every system you will ever hear?'.
No, I will sit back and love what I have thanks very much.😀
- Status
- Not open for further replies.