Yes, I used that paper as an example of the difference between early and late reflections to explain a point to Scottmoose, he didn't agree with it, called it a matter of opinion, so is that all it is?
Maybe these two papers are relevant. Which *might* make the discussion you were having conditional on something like speaker volume level. And there may be additional considerations. Luckily, Geddes is the expert so maybe he supplied an answer in the forum somewhere.
Lee, L. W. and Geddes, E. R. (2003). “Auditory Perception of
Nonlinear Distortion”, 115th Convention, Audio Eng. Soc.,
Preprint 5891.
Lee, L. W. and Geddes, E. R. (2006). “Audibility of Linear Distortion
With Variations in Sound Pressure Level and Group Delay”,
115th Convention, Audio Eng. Soc., Preprint 6888.
Lee, L. W. and Geddes, E. R. (2003). “Auditory Perception of
Nonlinear Distortion”, 115th Convention, Audio Eng. Soc.,
Preprint 5891.
Lee, L. W. and Geddes, E. R. (2006). “Audibility of Linear Distortion
With Variations in Sound Pressure Level and Group Delay”,
115th Convention, Audio Eng. Soc., Preprint 6888.
There are a couple of things that can be done as well to highlight differences:
1. Go into an adjacent room (connected but different room) and listen. It's very easy to hear the effects of the sound of the other room on the source (loudspeaker).
or
2. Do a simple recording of the sound in that room and then play it back and listen to the difference. (..it aurally "stamps" the room's signature onto the sound.)
BTW, though I didn't mention it before - this is all about reflected wavelengths: basically upper freq.s (though in larger listening rooms the freq. lowers some).
Modal differences (room alterations at lower freq.s) can and usually are heard as modifying the source.
1. Because of a nearly persistent preconception.
2. Because there are audible differences under extreme conditions.
3. Because the room is an audible problem in the modal region.
(..and numerous other reasons, most of which are linked with more extreme problems.)
This is all well and good but the OP's question was about the cost of the plans for LXmini, perhaps you should take this up on another thread?
-that portion of the thread is by any reasonable reading: concluded. 😉
It of course also has bearing on the design itself:
LXmini design
I should also note that there are plenty of threads discussing these topic as well.. it just seems to be forgotten or dismissed (regularly).
It of course also has bearing on the design itself:
LXmini design
I should also note that there are plenty of threads discussing these topic as well.. it just seems to be forgotten or dismissed (regularly).
Last edited:
Probably not many people are aware of it, I know Linkwitz mentions it, of course it's the degree that matters.
Because the 'processing' the brain has to perform to auto adapt could be better used. Once you have 'tailored'/ 'shaped' the room response to something easier to read for your mind you can focus deeper into the transcribed message.
It's like progressively peels layer of distortion upon an electronic circuit.
That said some artefacts will still remains: your analysis about early reflections of a 'small' rooms polluting those of a big room ( concert hall) is still valid.
There is ways to adress it but in domestic room most people would not implement it.
That may be the rate for US pro labour.
In the EU, you can calculate with 80€ per hour for a pro with own business.
If you search for half an hour, you probably will find someone who is glad to do the work for much less, because he (or she) has no full time workload actually, but is qualified to do this project.
I've read, in california a family needs approx $10K per month for a living. Thats a totally different world compared to europe with totally different prices for labour and living. Much more expensive, maybe comparable with swiss prices.
Last edited:
there should be no cost of labor discussion on this forum which should all be about donating time and sharing the passion. e.g. anyone who made a pcb and organized a GB here, spent hours on licking (sealing) envelopes to ship around the world knows that. S.L. also put sooo much time into his website in order to educate. Just putting documentation together for a speaker kit or an amp build takes time, and it is really a waste of time unless one is motivated by sharing.
It makes sense that the extra processing would be tiring, I imagine there have be studies into this too? 🙂
To be honest i think an issue should be treated at it's level first. In other words i think acoustic issues require acoustic treatments. Sure a dsp can help, room correction may help if implemented wisely and with finesse. Not something i've encounter many times.
I strongly believe that directly measuring how hard the brain is working to fill in the missing bits. New small, brain readers are staring to (maybe) be functional enuff to start exploring.
The less effort the brain takes to fill in the missing bits, the better the hifi. Questions arise. What is hardest to process? Frequency response? Phase response? Combing? The room/space?
It is the reason i often hammer on DDR. The more capable a device is at not burying the small details the less work the brain has to do.
Most of the research i have seen has been tangential.
dave
Way more ways to screw up with a room correction system as to gtet it right.
One should try acoustic solutions first before applyin ght band-aid.
dave