So manufacturer's claims based on the designer's and those with a vested interest "own experience/listening" is "verified" regardless of how they are achieved.
Not sure what the point is....guessing at riddles is redundant.
Like I tell my wife, I’m not a mind reader 😀
Measurement for sure this can not, because impression "how something will sound" is created by many higly subjective factors , in sighted test sound is only one from many factors. And the same sound stimulus is often perceived very different by various listeners, often also by the same person in various time... Believing in own impresions as measure of objective quality is...mistaken.🙂
So you are essentially saying there are no listening tests (sighted or blind) that can be extrapolated to an entire population, therefore all tests need to be individual.
How convenient. I'm sure Fletcher–Munson and your favorite statistician would disagree
. Sometimes I have to pinch myself to make sure you are for real
.
No. We have a problem in that we want to be able to measure performance of equipment designed for human perceptual use, but we don't have a sufficient understanding of human perception. What we have been doing for a long time is measuring what our technology makes it practical to measure, and telling ourselves it effectively works perfectly for its intended end use by all humans in existence.
The fact is, we don't know enough about human perception to make broad claims about all humans in existence.
We have heard from Earl Geddes in casual conversation that hearing research to date is applicable to roughly 95% of the population. If he is correct then we clearly don't know about all humans in existence.
When PMA states that an professional symphonic musician can hear things that PMA cannot hear, we accept that without debate.
When people claim they can hear distortion in an amp that has been measured at -120dB HD @1kHz, we somehow assume the person is claiming to hear HD at -120dB @1kHz, and we think that can't possibly be true. Actually, it is quite possible the person making the claim doesn't mean they hear what we tend to assume they mean. What they may be hearing is something we didn't measure for.
Below are a couple of FFTs of a dac output. Both were digitized at 24/192, the test tone was actually driven at -10dBFS, but the display readout is relative to 0dBFS of the A/D. The only difference between the two is that the the test sine wave frequency was changed by 3Hz, from 997Hz to 1KHz. When a spectrum changes that much with only a 3Hz change in test tone frequency, no wonder if it were to attract the attention of a listener. People tend to notice non-stationary effects more than stationary. Also, no wonder if some distortion effects in some devices might get missed depending on the test regimen used and nature of distortion production in the device. This dac may have also be subject to the ESS HD 'hump' that not everyone tests for.
Attachments
Thanks for the kind words and compliments, but new gear is not my direction at this time.
It turns out mass prod mid-fi and hi-fi and av amplifiers meet accepted performance figures like 100W 0.05% 20-20k etc, work as advertised and are pretty much good enough so there is no need for me to reinvent the wheel at this time.
One day maybe I will pool all my knowledge into a statement amp why not, in the meantime guitar cables, bass cables and drum accessories seems as good a place as any to start spreading the good word and the truth.
Out into the real world and playing real music typical home systems sound clean enough but they don't sound right and the same applies for plenty of hi-end, musician and pro gear too.
I suggest that all non noiseless audio system stages each impart a unique and identifying voice or signature into the throughput signal.
I find that this system stages signatures collection of can be easily overridden and the system set to a new and subjectively perfectly neutral/transparent/natural behaviour easily and repeatably by correct application of proprietary 'goop' mixture to the system.
My custom goop loopback cable and the recordings using this cable are demonstration examples of how existing systems can be 'unvoiced' by application of goop in correct internal locations in units, and/or in custom cables or existing cables.
My recordings are demonstration also that once a system is unvoiced the sound signatures of individual materials or compounds or mixtures can be deliberately 'imparted' into the system 'audio stream' and that this can be done or undone 'on the fly' without signal switching or rerouting and in real time !.
Ferrite clamp-on filters for example usefully reduce RF ingress, but also 'revoice' systems by introducing overriding and harsh new signature, unacceptable long term.
The concept that some 'passive' materials can and do influence system behaviours is a step too far for some it seems, in my investigations I find this is normal and is to be expected, relativities and entanglements controlling system noise behaviours are involved it seems.
Dan.
No, I'm not saying that - read what I posted with more care
When you build a strawman like in your first incorrect statement of what I said, you should pinch yourself to emerge out from your delusionHow convenient. I'm sure Fletcher–Munson and your favorite statistician would disagree
Sometimes I have to pinch myself to make sure you are for real
Working on speakers for sound quality improvement? OK. Don't forget the room acoustics.
Mirage OMD 28 you showed are floor standers rated for 25 Hz - 20 kHz (+/- 3dB) which conflicts with what you stated earlier as quoted below.
So you are no longer confused on the term speaker transient response?
Still won't answer where and when you observed those people?
You mean you think he was correct. Unless you consider yourself as the final arbiter of matters regarding tests.
A speaker with cheap drivers made by expert is better than a speaker with the best drivers made by amateurs. Many things can go wrong with speaker, yet, it can sound subjectively normal for some people. I have always used a 'reference' speaker during speaker design and amplifier design.
BTW, I used to use reference amplifier too. But all the amplifiers that are considered the best amp by others, sounded so inferior when compared to my amps so I couldn't stand to not modify them. The only amp here that I haven't modified (but I have a serious plan to) is the MyRef LM3886.
He is for his audio business.Sometimes I have to pinch myself to make sure you are for real
There's a huge ( infinite) difference from playing test tones on headphones to listening to some reproduced music by the stereoSo you are essentially saying there are no listening tests (sighted or blind) that can be extrapolated to an entire population, therefore all tests need to be individual.
How convenient. I'm sure Fletcher–Munson and your favorite statistician would disagree
Sometimes I have to pinch myself to make sure you are for real
- Status
- Not open for further replies.