Exactly! Unless your listening to 1 stereo mic pair. (which is very rare these days) the sound stage is manufactured in the mix. And transparency (depending on your definition (no veil)) is the lack of distortions, non linear compression, and phase anomalies. And speaker wires (unless there overly capacitive etc. (like some of the esoterics)) dont effect either! (more fuel for the fire)
It was a study of sound cards in an experiment; so, there is not a reference on the smallest tolerance that helps a person spot the differences in sound cards. You can try it yourself with some reliable headphones, several different sound cards and RightMark Audio Analyzer.
However, beware of the "stuck at 48k" sound cards, because those could throw off your testing unless all audio files used are only at 48k.
Be sure to try and have the headphones operate at the same output level throughout the testing because the response curve of the ear varies by spl.
This is a fun experiment.
I think you'll find it odd that a really wacky measuring card will sometimes do fine for the ear, while an almost perfect card, with a slight decrease in output at both far ends of the audio spectrum may be perceived as very poor. The point is to decipher which errors "sound fine" and which errors "sound awful" in order to figure out the tolerances of your ear.
The proportionate difference between measuring equipment and ears is probably quite similar to audiology charts; however, ears that are accustomed to high fidelity class equipment will make somewhat different results than average.
All that I have to say for sure on this is that the speaker itself seems to be the best place to favor the ear, because, at that point, there won't be gain on error. The ear requires less accommodation at higher sound pressure levels than it does at lower sound pressure levels.
Thus, these two things are different:
"It sounds better when you turn it down" may be an overdo on frequency response curve.
"It sounds worse when you turn it up" may be gain applied to error.
See the difference?
I'm so sorry that I'm not gifted at explanations.
I'm a bit too young to have used punchards properly, but I did experience the joys of loosening up the reader clamp and then hiding out to watch the panic action as quite a few cards sailed through the air. lol!! 😀
Agreed. Think movies. My Oppo has a mixdown-to-stereo setting that folds Dolby Pro Logic 2 encoding to front left and right retaining the full matrix. It's proven priceless for playing around and tuning the system. I very strongly suspect the encoding makes use HRTF for solidify effects. The result at its best is a (completely artificial) wrap around sound field filling the room in front of the speakers as well as behind, fully consistent with the action on the screen.
The balance is fragile, easily damaged by lack of damping on a side wall 6 feet from the nearest speaker. Properly dialed in however, regular minimally-mic'd recordings benefit tremendously as well.
Think of movies as an suite of artificial setup signals that greatly magnifies small flaws.
planet10: I stepped up to that great old mainframe. The 1130 was a mini.
Used to mix TV and Movies in Dolby logic, it worked ok as long as you new the limitations. Dolby logic just uses phase tricks to encode 4 channels into 2. Anything thats out of phase in a stereo signal ends up in the surround channel automatically (so you would always get reverb steering back there wether you wanted it or not. which is what happens when you use a Logic decoder on stereo program). The pain was trying to mix in Logic and make it compatible in stereo, mixdown to stereo is just out putting the two tracks left and right, (theres no "mixdown"). This takes the centre channel and turns it into a phantom centre which totally affects your soundstage. If you panned something into the middle of the room in Logic it would totally disappear in the stereo mix! Thank god for discrete 5.1
Sorry, more off topic ramblings, Friday night and my second rum.
Last edited:
I have two comments on this one.
Measuring is so very useful because it does seem to point the way, just like a signpost with an arrow on it. Unfortunately, much of the measuring isn't audio centric for ears and so the proportions seem to be off a bit.
The information provides "which way" but I think it doesn't quite do "how much"
As far as your specialty components are concerned, I think its quite obvious that they will work within the application that you have specified.
However, do please consider that the effectiveness may vary considerably depending on application.
Its important to be specific about the application, and here's why. . .
In a closely related topic, here is the capacitor chart to accommodate various size inductors so that they perform with less ringing. In this chart, the inductors are power transformers, not voice coils. This chart can do 1 cap at the ac side of the rectifier or 1 cap of that same value paralleled to each of 4 diodes (as seen in radio).
Unfortunately, if the capacitive effect is wrong then the inductor's ringing may worsen. So, its necessary to be specific in order for this sort of thing to work.
Attachments
Maybe nitpicking and OT regarding the spice program, but why mdB? When I went to school a deci=1/10, milli=1/1000.
It's like writing mmm=millimetermeter.
Or this mdB is an accepted term?
Peter
It's like writing mmm=millimetermeter.
Or this mdB is an accepted term?
Peter
What is "it?" Where would I find details on this experiment? Problem is, your explanations use a lot of unfamiliar terms in unfamiliar ways, so a dummy like me can't make heads nor tails of it.
Yes, I know that, but basically it means 1/1000 of 1/10 of a Bel= microBel
It should be mB.
Oh well..
SY,
That's exactly what I mean. I just refer to the correct Latin prefixes.
If this is considered old text and wrong, then I'm lost.
SI prefix - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Peter
That's exactly what I mean. I just refer to the correct Latin prefixes.
If this is considered old text and wrong, then I'm lost.
SI prefix - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Peter
But AFAIK, the decibel is not an SI unit. Anyone have a copy of IEC 60027-3?
If you have never compared what Bud is speaking of (Enable process specifically), how can you make such bold claims. That sounds like a "close minded" statement to me, but I never go into a listening session with any good or bad expectations. It is what it is. A chance to audition and compare. Nothing more nothing less.
Even if it is not an SI unit, there's no reason to use prefixes in a wrong way.
Ah well, I have the flu and getting bored staying at home. Enough of this bickering.. Excuse for the thread diversion and back to the petite problems with few millimetermeters of copper
Peter
The problem seems to be within the explanation, and so here is a replacement:
Check out published audiology data on ear loudness curves. The ear cannot provide a flat response; therefore, an error in the frequency response of the equipment that worsens this situation may be perceived as very poor equipment even though this error may be so small that its technically insignificant on electronic measuring.
Therefore the technically insignificant benefit given by some of these speaker cables may be plausible in some cases.
Because of this, I think that its very important to state the application (speakers and amp) for which a given specialty cable has a perceived benefit.
Hey Daniel,
what we are getting is what was the test? Was it something you did? Someone else? Was it published or at least written up?
Any evidence that points to an asymmetrical or vastly non-linear subjective vs. objective result is interesting and worthy of note. Well, at least to me it is.
what we are getting is what was the test? Was it something you did? Someone else? Was it published or at least written up?
Any evidence that points to an asymmetrical or vastly non-linear subjective vs. objective result is interesting and worthy of note. Well, at least to me it is.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.