Keeping this on topic about speaker isolation, you have failed to explain why standard REW measurements won't show a difference that can be heard. I proved that your example that AM/FM sound different but measure the same, yet you never acknowledged that. You never acknowledged any of my other points that relate to hearing speaker isolation. You called me wrong a bunch of times, and said my tests are not valid, but you never once explained why they're not valid. At least not in a way that makes sense. If you truly believe you can hear artifacts and differences 90 dB below the music, that tells me for certain that you have no idea what you're talking about. Here's proof of that for you to ponder:
http://ethanwiner.com/audibility.html
http://ethanwiner.com/audibility.html
True. Nor does whether or not I can pass your (possibly non-scientific) listening tests. Yet you attempt to goad me into playing your game. Why do I say that? I know quite well it is possible to do things like make hi-res sound exactly like CD. Its also possible to make hi-res sound better than CD. Probably it could be made to sound worse too. So, I return to the message in #227: there are thousands of ways to design testing the wrong way, and only a few ways to do it right. Based on everything I know about you so far, I am not convinced you are the equivalent of a competent research scientist. You may intend to be perfectly honest with your listening tests, but as a statistical likelihood you may have discovered some of the thousands of ways of designing bad experiments. So, is it on topic for me to visit your website and then for us to talk about that or not?
^^^ Utterly bizarre. You proved nothing about AM/FM; you missed the point completely about placing too much faith in spectral analysis, and you didn't figure out a way to make a proper FFT that showed the individual frequencies. You also still don't seem to understand a word about what REW is good for and what it isn't so good for. And I know at least some people understood it:
I have some idea of who @mark100 might be referring to with respect to fixation on frequency domain response. You keep going back to REW without ever acknowledging you understand what REW doesn't show about information contained in spectral line skirts. You still seem to have insufficient understanding of human perception of phase and the lack of information about in FR spectral measurements.
Moreover, its seems like you already forgot about ITD and the fact that you can't measure stereo effects of isolators with only one speaker and one mic.
Sorry if that stuff wasn't plain enough or if it didn't stick with you. All I can say is I am willing to try to explain again if you really want to know how much you are missing.
Last edited:
OMG, you are so full of it. You have no interest in learning, you just want to pretend you already know everything. So forget the HD versus CD test and just try the other two. But you won't because deep down you know that you won't pass, and you'll be embarrassed when I tell you how well you did. So I really am done with you. Let me know when the AES invites you to present two workshops, and when you write an 800+ page book about audio that's used as the main course text at major universities like Notre Dame and Tufts. Sorry if I wasted your time. 😒
https://ethanwiner.com/book.htm
Ethan, first of all I don't know it all. Nobody does so far as I can tell. Audio is a huge field, much like electronics itself. Regarding your book, do you really want to open that off-topic can of worms? I have seen the book. A lot of it is good and correct. Kudos for that. That's the good news. There will have to be some bad news too if you really want to litigate it here.
Regarding learning, you don't seem to have learned anything in this thread, not from gedlee nor from anyone else. OTOH, I do pay attention. Gedlee said that imaging and localization are treated separately in the literature. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...eaker-cabinets-decoupling.428300/post-8037712 So, I will keep that in mind from now on. You OTOH, don't seem to have learned anything. But if I am wrong and you learned something technical that you will now keep in mind forever, what was it?
Last edited:
Gedlee,
I would like to investigate this.
Just my opinions before further research.
Hard Rubber? Transmits Vibrations. Yes?
Soft Rubber? Transmits less Vibrations. But wears out, gets punctured by the metal post.
Sorbethane? Transmits less Vibrations. Might have to be replied after every song.
I would like to investigate this.
Just my opinions before further research.
Hard Rubber? Transmits Vibrations. Yes?
Soft Rubber? Transmits less Vibrations. But wears out, gets punctured by the metal post.
Sorbethane? Transmits less Vibrations. Might have to be replied after every song.
Also potentially allows more of the energy to act on the box alone.
The main difference between rubber and sorbothane would have to be their damping qualities.
Hello, this is "i have a problem i solve it" man.
Why would you choose any material when you don't know how, where and why ?
A technical solution is like an answer to a question and if there is no question, there is no answer, so what is the problem?
Why would you choose any material when you don't know how, where and why ?
A technical solution is like an answer to a question and if there is no question, there is no answer, so what is the problem?
We encourage frank discussions about technical issues but if you feel the urge to get personal, here's an effective method to refrain from it.
Move your head slowly 45 degrees to the left, then 45 degrees to the right.
Repeat five or more times until the urge disappears.
We do have an ignore button in case the above doesn't help.
Remember, when the mod team needs to step in, we've got a whole arsenal of unpleasant tools if self-help fails.
An unpersonal and technical disucssion about what ?
Human technology is human as well, they can't be separated unless you are dead and don't need technology anymore.
I got no problem with those who try to solve a problem they don't have with people they don't know but a practical problem is the only thing that interest people in order to start learning something, whatever it is.
Human technology is human as well, they can't be separated unless you are dead and don't need technology anymore.
I got no problem with those who try to solve a problem they don't have with people they don't know but a practical problem is the only thing that interest people in order to start learning something, whatever it is.
Other than that, all the system needs to be evaluated with the ears.
A competent ( no other adjective comes to mind) source, a competent ER...piece of music - what about 'inaging ' an orchestra? Too 'hot' for
Your system? My problem too, but go ahead..
So a competent volume
A competent amplifier....
A competent ( no other adjective comes to mind) source, a competent ER...piece of music - what about 'inaging ' an orchestra? Too 'hot' for
Your system? My problem too, but go ahead..
So a competent volume
A competent amplifier....