I would, of course, completely agree that blind listening is the only real criteria that is valid. However, I have found something that works and is a lot easier. That is to always ground yourself in objective measurements.
In the loop of design, you must always confirm the subjective with the objective and visa-versa. If you think that you can hear something but can't measure it then you need to resolve that problem first. If you can measure something that you just can't seem to hear, then that measurement is a candidate for the trash bin (see below). After about 20 years of this I am now seldom surprised by a difference between what I measure and what I hear and this then beomes my "validity check" my grounding of the open-loop. It's not easy to learn to read the "right" measurements or even to take them, or to know whaich ones to take, but once you get there, you can cut out a whole lot of going in circles of subjective cut-and-try that end up being right back where you started from.
Example to wit - I don't do THD or IMD measurements at all anymore ( I do some low level linearity measurements on amps). I used to do a lot, studied the problem intently - nothing there, time to move on.
In the loop of design, you must always confirm the subjective with the objective and visa-versa. If you think that you can hear something but can't measure it then you need to resolve that problem first. If you can measure something that you just can't seem to hear, then that measurement is a candidate for the trash bin (see below). After about 20 years of this I am now seldom surprised by a difference between what I measure and what I hear and this then beomes my "validity check" my grounding of the open-loop. It's not easy to learn to read the "right" measurements or even to take them, or to know whaich ones to take, but once you get there, you can cut out a whole lot of going in circles of subjective cut-and-try that end up being right back where you started from.
Example to wit - I don't do THD or IMD measurements at all anymore ( I do some low level linearity measurements on amps). I used to do a lot, studied the problem intently - nothing there, time to move on.
gedlee, yes speakers are the last frontier, not electronics.
But as a hobby you muck about with what you like, and so an electronics kind of guy hears all sorts of amazing things when he alters some electronics, but I think their listening experiences are mostly 'exagerations'. I have sat with audiophiles and a CD player is swapped. The sound may change very slightly, but you wouldn't think so by listening to their comments. If a different speaker was introduced I think they would all suffer sensory overload.
But as a hobby you muck about with what you like, and so an electronics kind of guy hears all sorts of amazing things when he alters some electronics, but I think their listening experiences are mostly 'exagerations'. I have sat with audiophiles and a CD player is swapped. The sound may change very slightly, but you wouldn't think so by listening to their comments. If a different speaker was introduced I think they would all suffer sensory overload.
hey, good quote Brett! Pretty well sums up my thoughts, well at least that it is very possible that it works in a lot of cases.
Odds are that there MUST be some absolutely wonderful DIY creations (soundwise) out there, but I bet there are some horrors, notwithstanding the builders proud assertions to the contrary.
As I say, a bit like the saying 'looks that only a parent could love'. In our house that gets flipped upside down....to 'looks only a child could love' hahaha (and even then they always say to me when they bring a friend around for the first time, "Smile Dad!!grrr)
Gee you guys are polite! No particular overpriced commercial offerings you have heard that don't make the grade??
Still, the thought of hearing our own speakers blind against ones we previously dissed is the essential point that really intrigues me....But as John says, that kind of feedback must start to be some sort of independant confirmation.
Can fully understand this phenomenon, and strangely enough it for me really confirms the minds ability to fool our ears. So when a complete died-in-the-wool subjectivist says "I can clearly hear ____in the system and no way does my knowing what it is and when it's on influence me, my mind is not influenced"......
Maybe only I really suffer from this phenomenon but maybe some of you can relate to this. My music tastes are pretty eclectic, and often weird maybe. Definitely not mainstream, so in most cases when I play something I've just discovered or am really excited about they have never heard of the band even.
So I play them this, all excited about how great it is etc etc, BUT if for whatever reason I get the slightest inkling or thought that they don't like it, then suddenly even to me the song sounds bloody horrible and I sit squirming in agony at how horrible it is during the entire track!! I mean on my own I LOVE it and probably am really cranking it, but if I think the other person doesn't like it I simply cannot stand it and actively hate it.
Then of course they often turn around and say that they loved it heh heh.....who says our thoughts and conceptions cannot influence our hearing???
So, when someone is listening to our systems (and by default we are not in the lp where it all gels) and I notice a stray piercing treble sound (say) or a less than perfect bass response away from the lp, and figure that for those reasons it is less than enjoyable for the person auditioning it, gee those thoughts all compound and make it a truly horrible experience to have someone listen to your babies!!!! (esp if on top of that you think they don't like your music arrgggh)
Odds are that there MUST be some absolutely wonderful DIY creations (soundwise) out there, but I bet there are some horrors, notwithstanding the builders proud assertions to the contrary.
As I say, a bit like the saying 'looks that only a parent could love'. In our house that gets flipped upside down....to 'looks only a child could love' hahaha (and even then they always say to me when they bring a friend around for the first time, "Smile Dad!!grrr)
Gee you guys are polite! No particular overpriced commercial offerings you have heard that don't make the grade??
Still, the thought of hearing our own speakers blind against ones we previously dissed is the essential point that really intrigues me....But as John says, that kind of feedback must start to be some sort of independant confirmation.
fredex said:
Can fully understand this phenomenon, and strangely enough it for me really confirms the minds ability to fool our ears. So when a complete died-in-the-wool subjectivist says "I can clearly hear ____in the system and no way does my knowing what it is and when it's on influence me, my mind is not influenced"......
Maybe only I really suffer from this phenomenon but maybe some of you can relate to this. My music tastes are pretty eclectic, and often weird maybe. Definitely not mainstream, so in most cases when I play something I've just discovered or am really excited about they have never heard of the band even.
So I play them this, all excited about how great it is etc etc, BUT if for whatever reason I get the slightest inkling or thought that they don't like it, then suddenly even to me the song sounds bloody horrible and I sit squirming in agony at how horrible it is during the entire track!! I mean on my own I LOVE it and probably am really cranking it, but if I think the other person doesn't like it I simply cannot stand it and actively hate it.
Then of course they often turn around and say that they loved it heh heh.....who says our thoughts and conceptions cannot influence our hearing???
So, when someone is listening to our systems (and by default we are not in the lp where it all gels) and I notice a stray piercing treble sound (say) or a less than perfect bass response away from the lp, and figure that for those reasons it is less than enjoyable for the person auditioning it, gee those thoughts all compound and make it a truly horrible experience to have someone listen to your babies!!!! (esp if on top of that you think they don't like your music arrgggh)
gedlee said:
hey earl, I must say you raise talk about some points that often get raised and that I have often thought about.
Firstly, some of this goes right to the heart of some age old debates in audio. If you think that you can hear something but can't measure it then you need to resolve that problem first Is the 'problem' you mention that you have not performed the right measurement?, hence do you feel that with the proper equipment and technique that basically anything substantive you can hear you can measure? Of course the golden ears would have it otherwise, that there are things our superior ears can hear that still remain unknown to science.
I find it interesting that (if the above is true) that it is countered by the 'opposite', ie if you can measure something that you can't hear, then the ears are to be trusted. In other words, the era is still the final arbiter.
A nice balance I feel.
Again another question that often pops up (which I believe to be very true...edumacate me if I'm wrong). If two speakers measure 'the same' will they sound the same? I very much doubt it.
So when auditioning your own speakers with the two barrelled weapon of measurements and ears, (bit tricky to put in words my concepts, so think with it if you can) then obviously the measurements you see ONLY apply to those speakers that you hear. Obvious I know, but I;m getting more toward that even in this methodical approach it is still a closed loop, one that a blind test against the 'opposition' might break open.
Very clumsily worded, hope you can glean the obscure point I'm trying to make.
After all your experience with the iterative approach of measurements and listening, how would you rate your ability to predict the sound of a speaker from published data in stereophile say, how close to you often get and in what areas of the sound do you find things that cannot be predicted from the measurements???
Dunno, 'attack', decay etc etc, what sort of aspects of the performance lie outside published figures/measurements??
subjective Vs. objective (again)
nice line Cal!
OK, so back to Subjective Vs. Objective. and all the BS. (As if any wanted my opinion,anyways) Here goes:
I can enjoy lots of different "types" of speakers, but I find the best ones are the ones that may not measure well, but make me want to listen to all of my music and maybe go buy some more (regardless of the piece of equipment: amps, sources, speakers, etc)
Pride of building/design, etc, definitely can get in the way of being able to "realistically" analyze our own creations. That's why I prefer to ask some non-audiophile types to listen to whatever, and I refuse to provide them with any jargon or descriptions--I leave it to them to come up with their own. That way I don't provide them with anything, and I can get an honest opinion (my nephew who has great hearing--despite being a drummer, my daughter who can sing like an angel--perfect pitch, my wife who has no musical at, etc).
stew
Cal Weldon said:
nice line Cal!
OK, so back to Subjective Vs. Objective. and all the BS. (As if any wanted my opinion,anyways) Here goes:
- we all have personal listening limits based on age, gender, etc. (hence all listening is subjective)
- we all listen in different environments
- we all have different equipment
- we all have different tastes in music and genres
I can enjoy lots of different "types" of speakers, but I find the best ones are the ones that may not measure well, but make me want to listen to all of my music and maybe go buy some more (regardless of the piece of equipment: amps, sources, speakers, etc)
Pride of building/design, etc, definitely can get in the way of being able to "realistically" analyze our own creations. That's why I prefer to ask some non-audiophile types to listen to whatever, and I refuse to provide them with any jargon or descriptions--I leave it to them to come up with their own. That way I don't provide them with anything, and I can get an honest opinion (my nephew who has great hearing--despite being a drummer, my daughter who can sing like an angel--perfect pitch, my wife who has no musical at, etc).
stew
terry j said:
I would say they would if they measured the same with the right set of measurements.
The measurements in stereophile are not sufficient. Too course in polar maping and not plotted in a way that shows the right information.
"Measurements" might include some visual observations of the actual system or some details of its design. For instance I know that a 1" dome is going to sound strained on high level material and that its thermal characteristics will cause it to sound less dynamic. These things can be measured too, but its very difficult and not at all standard, however you can tell a lot by just knowing the design. These are not "blind" objective measurements of course, but they are data none the less.
But I believe with absolute certainty that I could examine a design, do the right set of measurements and tell you very accurately what the evaluation would be in a blind listening test (a good room is assumed, preferably mine). By this I mean that given several sets of speakers I could tell you how they would rank in order of preference.
"What does this mean for the humble DIYer who maybe buidls 2-5 speakers in his/her lifetime?
Would you then suggest kits from Madisound, Zalytron or Solen or ready made designs from Zaphaudio, Janzten, Troels, Tony Gee?"
Hello navin
No different from where I was when I built my first DIY speakers. I started with a pair of subwoofers using WinIsd to get me going. I used a pair of speakers I already owned as my first reference system to a 3 way system I cobbled together. I would say it's a safe guess that if you are considering building yourself speakers you probably already own a pair. That is your first reference pair. I added measurement gear and additional software when I realized how much fun I was having😀 I did it over time and went back and refined previous speakers when I had the capability.
Kit's make a lot of sense to see if you like doing this or not. If you do then you decide what you need and go from there. Don't let anything you read hear deter you. Give it a shot.
Rob🙂
Would you then suggest kits from Madisound, Zalytron or Solen or ready made designs from Zaphaudio, Janzten, Troels, Tony Gee?"
Hello navin
No different from where I was when I built my first DIY speakers. I started with a pair of subwoofers using WinIsd to get me going. I used a pair of speakers I already owned as my first reference system to a 3 way system I cobbled together. I would say it's a safe guess that if you are considering building yourself speakers you probably already own a pair. That is your first reference pair. I added measurement gear and additional software when I realized how much fun I was having😀 I did it over time and went back and refined previous speakers when I had the capability.
Kit's make a lot of sense to see if you like doing this or not. If you do then you decide what you need and go from there. Don't let anything you read hear deter you. Give it a shot.
Rob🙂
Hmm, interesting questions. In general, whatever I build always sounds great when I first "build" it. ("build" includes up to 3 months of tweaking). If it doesn't still sound great after several months of listening, I know it was just me.
For speakers in particular, the real test is whether I can close my eyes, listen to the singer, and say to myself, "That is exactly how a real person would sound if they were standing in front of me singing live".
JJ
Re: subjective Vs. objective (again)
Right you are Stew and if I can add to that:
-your brain/ear's ability to acclimate
-your mood at the time
-the ever popular elixers.
The earlier comment about hearing something wrong right from the get go is natural. That's when you're going to notice it the most.
I know when I have the flu, my speakers don't sound very good, but when it's beer time, they are Cal's gift to the speaker world.
Nanook said:
Right you are Stew and if I can add to that:
-your brain/ear's ability to acclimate
-your mood at the time
-the ever popular elixers.
The earlier comment about hearing something wrong right from the get go is natural. That's when you're going to notice it the most.
I know when I have the flu, my speakers don't sound very good, but when it's beer time, they are Cal's gift to the speaker world.
"I know when I have the flu, my speakers don't sound very good, but when it's beer time, they are Cal's gift to the speaker world."
I screwed myself up real good because of a head cold. I just didn't realize at the time just how messed up my hearing was from the cold. Changed stuff and wanted to kick myself for doing it after it all cleared up
Amazing sometimes how good things can sound after a couple of cold ones.
Rob🙂
I screwed myself up real good because of a head cold. I just didn't realize at the time just how messed up my hearing was from the cold. Changed stuff and wanted to kick myself for doing it after it all cleared upAmazing sometimes how good things can sound after a couple of cold ones.
Rob🙂
Hmmm...I didn't think this was a subjective vs objective at all. Then again, I'm not sure why anyone thinks that these 2 things are 'versus' anyway. I listen to things, but I definitely use a measure before I cut the wood when making my speakers.Nanook said:
Terry, I'd love to have somewhere like NRC so that I could compare my speakers with others (without seeing which was which). Is there anything like that around locally (Melbourne)?
I don't think so but there may be, where does Colin Whatmough test his stuff for instance??
Perhaps we should form a corporation and build one, Query??? How big does a high quality test room have to be?? How are they best constructed and how expensive would it be??
There are universities and tech colleges teaching this stuff here in Melbourne, do they conduct tests??
Perhaps we should form a corporation and build one, Query??? How big does a high quality test room have to be?? How are they best constructed and how expensive would it be??
There are universities and tech colleges teaching this stuff here in Melbourne, do they conduct tests??
Cloth Ears said:
not much help but I know of one in sydney. Alan from deqx was telling me about it, and they were going to hire it to measure some stuff they were developing...dropped big hints about going along to learn a bit, well not so much a hint (being on knees and pleading whilst holding onto his lapels could not be described as hinting could it? If so, I was hinting)
How do you reckon you'd go? or more importantly, how do you reckon you'd react if like Dave Moulton it was your baby that you marked down?
Weeeelllllllll!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know some of the stuff I just knock together has problems, but still listenable.
I'm sure that all of my earlier projects are bad by most peoples standards but they are party speakers and just have to be able to play the music loud.
My kids are musicians ( part time ) and critique strongly.
I think I got my son's 18th birthday present "Right " if we measured them and they were shown to be deficient I'd take it on the chin like a man and do better next time ( after crying like a baby for a minute or three )
Brett's post was accurate: if "I " build it it must be good or what would be the point.
However most stuff on sale is so bad that it's not hard to do better, in some cases much better. At the moment O do not own a reference system and I haven't yer been to A-1 Audio to listen to Colin Whatmoughs PARAGONS
http://www.whatmough.com.au/
Regards Ted
I know some of the stuff I just knock together has problems, but still listenable.
I'm sure that all of my earlier projects are bad by most peoples standards but they are party speakers and just have to be able to play the music loud.
My kids are musicians ( part time ) and critique strongly.
I think I got my son's 18th birthday present "Right " if we measured them and they were shown to be deficient I'd take it on the chin like a man and do better next time ( after crying like a baby for a minute or three )
Brett's post was accurate: if "I " build it it must be good or what would be the point.
However most stuff on sale is so bad that it's not hard to do better, in some cases much better. At the moment O do not own a reference system and I haven't yer been to A-1 Audio to listen to Colin Whatmoughs PARAGONS
http://www.whatmough.com.au/
Regards Ted
terry j said:
Probably not that well, but then I already have a pair of fairly good references that I use, so maybe I wouldn't actually be disappointed. I'd do it to try to find areas for improvement that I might not be able to find at home (anechoic does bring out some interesting things - like bass deficiencies - that a home listen won't show). The references are actually still in use in the lounge, while the experiments (or 'mess' as my spouse so lovingly puts it) are kept to the garage, due to my current skill with the veneer. It also means the sound isn't improvement enough for me to override SWMBO...
What I'd be interested in comparing would actually be any reasonably good speakers in a blind environment. I can generally pick differences between them in a sighted test, but I'd be interested to see (hear) how I would go if I couldn't see them. Would I be unable to pick the difference? Would I think that the same speaker in a different position was a different speaker?
Nice discussion. To throw a curve ball into the mix, pretend Mr. Moulton & partners are now firmly convinced their magnum opus Speaker D is truly inferior. The speakers are once again randomly re-labeled but this time instead of comparing speakers against each other they're assessed against a live, repeatable source. Woodblock strike, single guitar string pluck, any complex sound easily and mechanically repeatable. For simplicity assume an LEDE room to remove the backwave contribution.
To Moulton's surprise, this time his speaker wins. Possible? Are accuracy and preference inextricably intertwined or do training and expectation contribute strongly to the latter? Considering from birth most of us grew up listening to uni-pole dynamics everywhere - radio, TV, music systems, elevators and even 'live' performances - it's always been a question for me whether this has contributed more than accuracy to the strong preference for wide dispersion forward firing dynamic speakers.
To Moulton's surprise, this time his speaker wins. Possible? Are accuracy and preference inextricably intertwined or do training and expectation contribute strongly to the latter? Considering from birth most of us grew up listening to uni-pole dynamics everywhere - radio, TV, music systems, elevators and even 'live' performances - it's always been a question for me whether this has contributed more than accuracy to the strong preference for wide dispersion forward firing dynamic speakers.
subjective vs. objective
Ultimately, there should not be a VS between subjective and objective views. BUT, it almost always comes down to this.
My reference to subjective VS objective is due to another thread, and also the point of this one (at least as far as I have "read " into it): can we be objective regarding the quality of our own creations ?
The question should be, can we be objective at all if we all seek something different due to our in biases?
Regarding Floyd Toole (the famous sell-out ), someone I know personally had sent some "data" to the NRC, and was told directly that he was a liar by none other than that Toole himself. This particular fellow is an honest soul, and thankfully discounted Toole's "liar" comment, because he knew he wasn't.
Until meaningful measurements have been decided upon, everything is a c**p-shoot. And until there are meaningful measurements that can reconcile a listening experience to some sort of measurements all any can say is that example "A" measured "X" in the stated conditions, and that does/doesn't equate into a enjoyable/non-enjoyable listening experience or an accurate/inaccurate reproduction of recording "X".
Regarding objectiveness in measuring a piece of wood to cut to a particular dimension, accuracy can be checked, and there are standards of measurement that allow us to compare these dimensions. We simply don't have these same standards to measure to, regarding a musical experience, because the end experience is subjective.
finis
stew
Cloth Ears said:
Ultimately, there should not be a VS between subjective and objective views. BUT, it almost always comes down to this.
My reference to subjective VS objective is due to another thread, and also the point of this one (at least as far as I have "read " into it): can we be objective regarding the quality of our own creations ?
The question should be, can we be objective at all if we all seek something different due to our in biases?
Regarding Floyd Toole (the famous sell-out ), someone I know personally had sent some "data" to the NRC, and was told directly that he was a liar by none other than that Toole himself. This particular fellow is an honest soul, and thankfully discounted Toole's "liar" comment, because he knew he wasn't.
Until meaningful measurements have been decided upon, everything is a c**p-shoot. And until there are meaningful measurements that can reconcile a listening experience to some sort of measurements all any can say is that example "A" measured "X" in the stated conditions, and that does/doesn't equate into a enjoyable/non-enjoyable listening experience or an accurate/inaccurate reproduction of recording "X".
Regarding objectiveness in measuring a piece of wood to cut to a particular dimension, accuracy can be checked, and there are standards of measurement that allow us to compare these dimensions. We simply don't have these same standards to measure to, regarding a musical experience, because the end experience is subjective.
finis
stew
Stew, no arguments from me - was just clarifying for myself.Nanook said:
All my lounge room "measurements" are by ear (mine or my supposedly "I don't know about your music stuff" spouse), and as yet I haven't been required to fully finish any speakers to replace my current references. So I guess I'm objective when comparing in my own room. But I'm probably also looking[/u[ for faults in my own builds, so maybe I'm being a bit harsh without meaning to.
One of my instructors, back in the days when I was learning to cut code, used to use the axiom "It has to bloody well work and then work bloody well, otherwise it's just not good enough." I've carried this on over to most things - it means not much gets finished, but what is I can be truly proud of...
gedlee said:
Dr. Geddes, you might be able rank them in order of YOUR preference, but I doubt you would be able to tell other people's preference. There are definitely people prefering non-accurate, nicely coloured or whatever.
Or do you mean you can also anticipate which colourations and non-accuracy will be pleasant to the ear ? 😀
- Status
- Not open for further replies.