I tend to agree. The Fletcher and Munson curve, centering the max sensitivity of our ears around 3KHz seems more realistic in my book.Pavel is cautious and conservative on what he is doing.
6kHz is UHF for old guys like me.
I would like to know, in both case, the ratio of men/women involved in the statistical studies, knowing that women have a bandwidth shifted up to the high frequencies, or, not to be killed by a commando of Femen, men have a bandwidth shifted-down to lower frequencies ;-)
This is about psychoacoustics & the difference between perception of single tones Vs perception of noise - we are 12DB (a not insignificant figure) more sensitive to noise around 6KHz than to noise around 6KHz
When I first started playing around with crossovers and speaker voicing (by ear) I found later (after getting a calibrated measuring mic) that I dialed in a perfect ‘BBC’ dip from 1.8k-5k in my 10” two ways....I didn’t even know what the dip was until I started researching why I preferred this instead of flat fr.
I think People that enjoy listening on the louder side might benefit with a more relaxed presentation (at volume)
I think People that enjoy listening on the louder side might benefit with a more relaxed presentation (at volume)
Its not logical. The smearer appears to have a high sensitivity for detection of conspiracies that leads to excess false positives. Similar, but also different are those with very sensitive hearing, so much so that they get some false positives for audio equipment improvement material effects. In both cases the behaviors are annoying or worse to some members. However, we are in the Lounge, and this is the Blowtorch thread, a locale where members are given more free rein to express what they will, provided things don't get too out of hand. IMHO, the personal attack smear without proof thing has gotten out of hand more than enough and needs to come to a conclusion.
Keep plugging away and it will all become clear eventually
It’s all clear to me in an extra special sorta way
‘You float like a feather in a beautiful world And I wish I was special, your so f****** special’ - Radiohead
Is-it the result of a serious statistical study ?
If yes, I have learned something today and I thank-you for this.
Do you have any suggestions how to bring that (whatever it is) about in your role as hall monitor?
All right, I have exaggerated a bit.
In my case, 6kHz is VHF. 9kHz is UHF and 11kHz is microwave.
No, only with pure tones by the audiologist.
George
Attachments
With regard to this whole subjective vs objectivist thing.
In my book it’s quite acceptable to describe subjectively how something sounds. You put some opera on, the recording is great, the system is faithful (whatever your interpretation of that may be) and you go on an emotional journey.
The problem of course with this whole thing is when people try to ascribe their emotional experiences to technical aspects of the equipment and then open themselves up to ridicule by those who technically are highly proficient.
I am very comfortable describing my DIY amplifiers as sounding ‘liquid’ and ‘light and fast’ or ‘having an expansive sound stage’ because that’s what I experience when I put a record on and sit back to listen. That’s the soft, emotional stuff which is exactly what music and art brings out. But I draw the line for the most part at explains those experiences in engineering terms. Electrons feel nothing. Neither do transistors, or speaker cables or any other physical part of a Hi-Fi system.
And, whether people like it or not, visual cues play a seriously significant part in all of this. How many of you, after two or three glasses of wine at dinner in a nice restaurant have not looked across at you wife and thought ‘damn, you are beautiful’. It’s the same with Hi-Fi, but you can get that feeling without the alcohol.
The problem in all this arises when people coming from the subjective emotional side try to explain their experiences in electronic engineering terms.
Sorry, it does not work. It’s like trying to explain to an atheist why praying makes one feel good. There’s no connection there.
And the same applies in reverse of course.
So, kick back, have a drink, enjoy your music but don’t try to explain why it makes you feel good because you’ve just replaced a 10 foot $5 mains cable you used to quickly lash up your speakers with $1000 Nordost’s.
In my book it’s quite acceptable to describe subjectively how something sounds. You put some opera on, the recording is great, the system is faithful (whatever your interpretation of that may be) and you go on an emotional journey.
The problem of course with this whole thing is when people try to ascribe their emotional experiences to technical aspects of the equipment and then open themselves up to ridicule by those who technically are highly proficient.
I am very comfortable describing my DIY amplifiers as sounding ‘liquid’ and ‘light and fast’ or ‘having an expansive sound stage’ because that’s what I experience when I put a record on and sit back to listen. That’s the soft, emotional stuff which is exactly what music and art brings out. But I draw the line for the most part at explains those experiences in engineering terms. Electrons feel nothing. Neither do transistors, or speaker cables or any other physical part of a Hi-Fi system.
And, whether people like it or not, visual cues play a seriously significant part in all of this. How many of you, after two or three glasses of wine at dinner in a nice restaurant have not looked across at you wife and thought ‘damn, you are beautiful’. It’s the same with Hi-Fi, but you can get that feeling without the alcohol.
The problem in all this arises when people coming from the subjective emotional side try to explain their experiences in electronic engineering terms.
Sorry, it does not work. It’s like trying to explain to an atheist why praying makes one feel good. There’s no connection there.
And the same applies in reverse of course.
So, kick back, have a drink, enjoy your music but don’t try to explain why it makes you feel good because you’ve just replaced a 10 foot $5 mains cable you used to quickly lash up your speakers with $1000 Nordost’s.
Last edited:
I stopped to see any while the first I met, in the "Occupational Medicine", tested my ears with an headphone i knew to not be able to reproduce the last octave. Better to do-it by ourselves.No, only with pure tones by the audiologist.
Better to die ! ;-)
For the rest of your message, I don't follow-you neither. (No surprize ?) Careful critical listening is not at all emotional, but exactly the contrary. Difficult and boring. Like to make various electrical measurements we have to improve the quality of the measuring instruments (learning what and how to listen) and make sure the measurement process is correctly done to not introduce mistakes.
The two methods are not exclusive but complementary. Electrical measurements are very precise, objective, and gives precise results on a very limited aspect of the landscape. Listening is imprecise, subjective, subject to false positive or negative, but cover the whole aspect of the landscape. And, as the landscape is the goal, it looks obvious to look at it.
Last edited:
Not necessarily.
Some cognitive psychologists study such things, and even observe their own spiritual mental experiences at times. Doesn't mean they conclude its origin is due to other than natural biochemistry.
For music, musicologists are starting to understand in technical terms what tends to evoke frisson, awe, etc.
SoundAndMotion is trying to study the connection between emotion and audio equipment right now.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.