a loudspeaker is creating sound, too, otherwise you wouldn't hear it.
i get your point, and that's why good microphones and good recording devices and a good cartiridge and needle and good EVERYTHING in the chain from source to replication is important.
and, your point misses the 'truth' of, say, synthesizers. they electronically create waves that don't exist as sound until they hit the speakers.
i get your point, and that's why good microphones and good recording devices and a good cartiridge and needle and good EVERYTHING in the chain from source to replication is important.
and, your point misses the 'truth' of, say, synthesizers. they electronically create waves that don't exist as sound until they hit the speakers.
mwaters10 said:
No, not at all. The concert hall modifies the violin's sound yet the ear still considers it natural and real. Within reason another room modifying the sound of the violin + concert room doesn't by necessity trash the illusion of 'real'. You're arguing a false dilemma in which only The One True Sound of Violin in One Hall fosters the illusion. If that were true a live band wouldn't be recognizable as such from outside due to irreparable 'wall and window distortion'.
SY said:
Could be, but I went through a period in getting re-habituated to sound, where I was very OCD about the sound in my room environment where I spent most of my time. My Dad was running this cooling fan everyday in his room next to my room. I wouldn't let him move it. This is different from the Air Conditioner I mentioned in my paper. Sometimes he would accidentally bump the fan. I could tell if it moved about a quarter of an inch and I'd have to go in there and adjust it. I couldn't even make out the sound in my room unless it got real quiet at night and I stood next to the door. But I had aversion to the sound and I could feel it if it changed. It drove me crazy.
Anyway, someone needs to do some good blind testing. Unfortunately, I can't do good blind testing do to my condition. I can't always list to music for long periods.
Mark Hayenga made up this phase shift audibility test. You, have a reference track with no phase shift to compare to other tracks with varying phase shift. It's much like Charles Hansen's test, but the music tracks are kind of short. I couldn't tell a difference, except I thought maybe I could on one or two tracks. Nothing for sure. I need to try listening more to the tracks, see if I can here a difference.
It's interesting, I thought It would be easy to tell a difference.
http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=32280
Where did you get that conclusion from ?
What I was saying was that loudspeakers are not musical instruments, they do not make the music, they only replicate it, and they replicate it inaccurately. If you want to argue they are accurate, then demonstrate that they are. The violin is accurate, of course the accoustics play their part, but they are accurate to begin with, whereas the loudspeaker is not.
Depending on the specifics I can actually hear phase shifts on my setup. Now can I hear it if both channels have the polarity inverted? No probably not. But if something is out of phase relation I will pick up on it pretty quick with my specific speakers. I bet the speaker is the bottleneck in most phase listening tests. Anyway things like reverbs that are out of phase appear to come from behind me on my speakers in the sweet spot. It's one of those things that once you notice you sort of pick up on.
Oh I see what type of phase shift he is talking about. I would not be able to hear what he is testing for. But if one of those channels was thrown out of wack with the other it is very easy to hear.
Oh I see what type of phase shift he is talking about. I would not be able to hear what he is testing for. But if one of those channels was thrown out of wack with the other it is very easy to hear.
mwaters10 said:
Sorry, didn't realize we've moved on from 'rooms' to 'straw men'. But that's been much the story throughout this discussion, jumping to the next 'but..but..but' whenever a point you've made is proven incorrect. Frankly the notion driver science hasn't progressed since the 107 isn't even worth more comment than this, and that's coming from someone who loves his ancient 12" Tannoy Golds.
mwaters10 said:
Supposedly International Audio Group did a double blind test with a live band and a recording of that same band played over the speakers where the judges couldn't tell the difference. I really don't trust a test like that coming from a manufacturer of speakers but it sounds like a cool idea anyway.
there are many elephants in the room. with audio, you don't know the problems until you hear something that doesn't have them, and then they become obvious.
phase shifts are pretty obvious once you know what they sound like.
phasing since the seventies, ....on purpose.
seriously, though, just a TINY delay is easy to hear, once you know what it sounds like. the 'untrained ear' i hear so much about may think it sounds great, and would never notice the incoherency in certain frequency bands . how else to account for the popularity of pitch corrected vocals in dance music?
phase shifts are pretty obvious once you know what they sound like.
phasing since the seventies, ....on purpose.
seriously, though, just a TINY delay is easy to hear, once you know what it sounds like. the 'untrained ear' i hear so much about may think it sounds great, and would never notice the incoherency in certain frequency bands . how else to account for the popularity of pitch corrected vocals in dance music?
Perhaps the test was flawed.
A more sensible test would be to compare a live performance of musicians that did not involve amplfiiers, microphones etc ..
Live bands mostly use amplified PA systems.
If you listen to a choir or opera in concert hall, and then listen to the recording with hi-fi, I think the difference is more than night and day. Anyone who can't hear the difference must be tone deaf.
Well I am a little surprised, and I agree with you, that the test being peformed by loudspeaker manufacturers may have been something to do with it.
The first thing that struck me listening to Tosca performed by the Welsh National Orchestra, male voice choirs sound awful on hi-fi, especially CD. There is just no comparison to the real thing.
Anyway yeah the first thing I thought was the test is flawed because of the recording chain. I don't think it mentioned any specifics about reference mics and preamps etc... So the whole chain would most likely have some sort of an emphasis and a de-emphasis somewhere. (perhaps the speakers used were offset with EQ by ear)
For instance if I wanted to load the test I would hire a golden ear mixer/recorder and have them not only record the band but master it while the band played the same song in the middle of the engineers speakers (the same ones used to fool the judges). This would be so that he could a/b his recording with the live band. It would work in this case but does it mean that the speakers will always perform that way? Not likely.
For instance if I wanted to load the test I would hire a golden ear mixer/recorder and have them not only record the band but master it while the band played the same song in the middle of the engineers speakers (the same ones used to fool the judges). This would be so that he could a/b his recording with the live band. It would work in this case but does it mean that the speakers will always perform that way? Not likely.
mwaters10 said:
this sounds exactly like people talking about speaker cable. completely subjective and unprovable. perhaps you just expect it to sound way better.
on the other hand, i've heard MANY things sound way beter once the acoustic 'uglies' were removed. vocalists with nasally, piercing voices, bright steel guitars that bite way too hard, or reeds that are like test tones. a nice big room can make a bagpipe sound awe inspiring, but listen to one in a closet for too long and you may need mental health professionals to 'tweak' you afterwards.
my buddy was just recording some bagpipes, and the close mic is BRUTAL to listen to. i think death metal may be sweeter to the ear.
but, take those same pipes and put them through some (artificial electronic!!) processing, and all of a sudden noise becomes music.
Re: Testing 1..2...3
You lads may laugh, but you're on the right track!
I've thought about it, many times. No kidding.
Pain is the greatest teacher. Why do you think the nuns rapped you on the knuckles with that ruler? And how shy of touching doorknob are you after a long, dry winter? Hmmmm......?
So where's the feedback in these cable tests? How can you possible improve your skills if there is no negative feedback? Or even possitive feedback. It's a valid point.
Precisely, my dear Watson! That's one of the tests that got me thinking.
Time to do some cable zapping!
You lads may laugh, but you're on the right track!
dzzmiller said:
terry j said:
auplater said:
I've thought about it, many times. No kidding.
Pain is the greatest teacher. Why do you think the nuns rapped you on the knuckles with that ruler? And how shy of touching doorknob are you after a long, dry winter? Hmmmm......?
So where's the feedback in these cable tests? How can you possible improve your skills if there is no negative feedback? Or even possitive feedback. It's a valid point.
rdf said:
Precisely, my dear Watson! That's one of the tests that got me thinking.
Time to do some cable zapping!
You're joking aren't you ?
You don't really think that the difference between live performance and hi-fi is comaparable to differences with cables ?
In my experience the difference between real and hi-fi makes all cable discussion insignificant.
Key said:
but, the 'straw man' that gets burned is that live is always better than reproduced.
i'm positive they had to do some very careful, detailed set-up to 'fool' the listeners, but the fact is, the listeners could not tell the difference, so, any losses and gains in the recording chain would have to sum back near zero to fool the judges. what happens in the middle is not relevant to the outcome.
i like the 'golden ear' part. a real phenomena.
reference bob ludwig.
Good points.
But another thing that could load the test that I just thought of. This is probably more important. A skilled musician can "ride a mic". I think I have done a little of this but I wouldn't call myself a jazz musician or anything. But from my perspective I sort of shift my tone and dynamics a little to optimize the mic. This same sort of thing can be done with the musician to get them to say match the sound of a speaker. Just thinking of ways to load the test haha.
But another thing that could load the test that I just thought of. This is probably more important. A skilled musician can "ride a mic". I think I have done a little of this but I wouldn't call myself a jazz musician or anything. But from my perspective I sort of shift my tone and dynamics a little to optimize the mic. This same sort of thing can be done with the musician to get them to say match the sound of a speaker. Just thinking of ways to load the test haha.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.