A Subjective Blind Comparison of 3in to 5in drivers - Round 2

Which file do you think sounds best.

  • A-Clip

    Votes: 10 20.0%

  • B-Clip

    Votes: 5 10.0%

  • C-Clip

    Votes: 3 6.0%

  • D-Clip

    Votes: 7 14.0%

  • E-Clip

    Votes: 13 26.0%

  • F-Clip

    Votes: 5 10.0%

  • G-Clip

    Votes: 7 14.0%

  • H-Clip

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Jump to Latest
#61
xrk971 said:
Clip 3 (jazz) was perhaps the most instructive clip of all and gives a broad dynamic range of textures, percussion, and frequencies.
Click to expand...

For blind listening, I can listen one file once and know which one it is, in a situation where no one else can listen any difference (not this situation which is too easy because of big difference and uncontrolled file preparation). But choosing which one is "better" is much more difficult.

I chose clip 1 because I need to hear the midrange, and I need to compare the sound of Norah Jones from each sound clip to her sound that I'm familiar with (with my speakers/systems).

Regarding preference, of course there is effect of 2nd harmonic that can make sound so seductive. One may prefer that, one may not. It can soften sharp sound also.
 
#66
for the most part just listening to clips 1&2 on a cheap "Nakamichi" branded headset , they could all pass as acceptable - they filter/center the opening guitar "power" chords different with perhaps 3 groups where those in a group sound similar - same for drums (low tuned snare!) - G sounded initially screechy on the female vocal - I pick the cheapest thing when finally revealed that goes reasonably high and doesn't sound muted on the guitar track. C was one of the higher centered guitar drivers with my cans. Thanks for the heroic effort in setups and recording.
 
#69
I used the tournament style bracketing as was suggested. I created random pairings for each song sample. I got a different favorite for each song. For example (using made up letters), I liked Y best with clip 1, Z best with clip 2, and X best for clip 3. Anyone else face this dilemma? Although there was a single one that always made it to the last pairing, I guess I'll vote for that one.

xrk971, thanks again for doing this. I think it's a lot of fun.
 
#70
matt_garman said:
I got a different favorite for each song. For example (using made up letters), I liked Y best with clip 1, Z best with clip 2, and X best for clip 3. Anyone else face this dilemma? Although there was a single one that always made it to the last pairing, I guess I'll vote for that one.

xrk971, thanks again for doing this. I think it's a lot of fun.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I had the same experience. In the end, I tried them in four different systems and chose the one that sounded best across all four systems.

Good fun. 🙂
 
#71
peterbrorsson said:
There were two that was close to each other. However one had some weird break up at Norah Jones voice at the end of clip, so it fell out. Recording or driver??

Peter
Click to expand...

That would be the driver - the recording is technically sound in all cases - I checked to make sure mic was not clipping. Processing all done same way to get -0.5dB peak value.

There are actually 2 sets of drivers that are similar. You can see the votes showing this.
 
#72
matt_garman said:
I used the tournament style bracketing as was suggested. I created random pairings for each song sample. I got a different favorite for each song. For example (using made up letters), I liked Y best with clip 1, Z best with clip 2, and X best for clip 3. Anyone else face this dilemma? Although there was a single one that always made it to the last pairing, I guess I'll vote for that one.

xrk971, thanks again for doing this. I think it's a lot of fun.
Click to expand...

You are welcome. In the end pick the driver that you would plunk down hard dollars to buy and valuable time to build a box for. Ultimately it is whatever you think you can enjoy listening to for a long time without discomfort or fatigue. Vivid or interesting sounding only lasts for so long and does it translate across all genre's?
 
#73
xrk971 said:
Ultimately it is whatever you think you can enjoy listening to for a long time without discomfort or fatigue. Vivid or interesting sounding only lasts for so long and does it translate across all genre's?
Click to expand...

Agreed. However, the ability to determine long-term enjoyment is not easily facilitated by this test, as currently implemented. Say I pick driver X as my favorite: no way I'm going to listen to three 45-second clips over and over to judge long-term effects (e.g. fatigue/discomfort). Next time, you'll have to record full albums with each driver. 😉 (just kidding!)

I was actually thinking about that as I was listening. On some selections, I thought I picked up on more "sparkle", as though I was saying to myself, "This sounds more detailed, more crisp." But then I started second-guessing myself, would I indeed want to listen to this for hours on end? Am I hearing "false" detail? Is it just hotter high-frequencies?

Going from very foggy and terribly suspect memory here, and probably based on hearsay anyway, but: I thought I heard once that some less-reputable audio shops will bias the higher frequencies a bit on whatever it is they want to sell. This is based on the premise that in general, most people initially prefer accentuated highs, although this effect goes away in the long term. Again, I vaguely remember hearing that somewhere once, it could be crap I dreamed or heard from an even more disreputable source (like the Internet 😉).

But, above all, as you emphasized in the first round, this is primarily to have fun, and in that regard, I personally call it a huge success. I'm not sure about everyone else, but I also find it a good way to exercise critical listening skills.
 
#74
I agree on the critical listening skills and I would encourage folks to talk about how they listened and judged and what drivers had what characteristics, BUT do it with a false name like Matt Garman did: driver x vs driver etc to not influence people until after they vote and the reveal is out.
 
#75
xrk971 said:
That would be the driver - the recording is technically sound in all cases - I checked to make sure mic was not clipping. Processing all done same way to get -0.5dB peak value.

There are actually 2 sets of drivers that are similar. You can see the votes showing this.
Click to expand...

But now you're influencing people, or? ;o)

However, I had the same behaviour of a previously owned speaker. It behaved extremely well on most music. Then suddenly, it bite the ears of ones head if certain notes were hit….
 
#76
xrk971 said:
I agree on the critical listening skills and I would encourage folks to talk about how they listened and judged and what drivers had what characteristics, BUT do it with a false name like Matt Garman did: driver x vs driver etc to not influence people until after they vote and the reveal is out.
Click to expand...

I think that cone materials do have their own sound, especially when running full range like in this test.

I just checked again the very first post to guess which is which based on cone material and I was a bit surprised that I couldn't guess the one that I put in rank number one (actually I have another driver that I will rank as #1 due to its extra-ordinary midrange, but I feel the midrange is too dominant and at least requires a tweeter in a 3-way, so it is a "special case driver").

Initially I thought this #1 driver was Titanium cone Tang Band but just found out that the Tang Band here is a different one, a paper cone one. I thought a paper cone cannot outperform exotic cone materials for dynamics and detail so I looked at others and could only see 2 aluminum cones. But I usually don't like aluminum cones (without proper XO). So I guess #1 is the mystery driver.

My favorite midrange at home is a fiberglass (and I found they require proper XO as they are unnatural imho), so I put those with fiberglass very high on the list even tho I feel #1 is how the vocal should sound (less perfect than my speakers but tonally close) 😀

Paper cone drivers I put in the middle as they are good for easy listening especially on vocal. I heard they tend to give seducing vocal but less details.

Three drivers at the bottom has a unique contender. One for having advanced cone material, the other two I believe the cheapest of the bunch (usually small diameter).

I have no idea what X had on mind when he choose the mystery driver. It must contain a surprise element I believe 🙂
 
#78
I think if there is a concern that poll result may affect later voters, voters can send their preference and only administrators/OP that will "cast" the votes. There is also benefit that we can use weighting (done off line on a spreadsheet by administrators/OP) so even if a driver never get to #1 of each individual choice, if it consistently get high preference, it can be the #1 driver.
 
#80
xrk971 said:
I agree on the critical listening skills and I would encourage folks to talk about how they listened and judged and what drivers had what characteristics, BUT do it with a false name like Matt Garman did: driver x vs driver etc to not influence people until after they vote and the reveal is out.
Click to expand...
With due respect, I'm not sure I agree with this. While I sympathize with the ideal of critical listening, telling others how you made your choice may end up 'instructing' others on how to listen in a way that produces a certain set of preferred or desired results. Thus it could have the same kind of effect as a leading question, which pushes the listener to select according to the criteria of some external authority rather than their own particular preferences.

I say let people choose for themselves, and let the preferences fall where they may rather than trying to push them in a certain direction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom