Let's see the 5 conclusions again:
1. Auditory capacities of humans are massively overestimated by audiophiles (and probably by most humans as well)
2. Frequency Response is King.
3. Once EQ'd, a 10$ midrange can mimic a 1500$ midrange, if within mechanical/electrical limits.
4. DSP/EQ/in-room measure tools might be the best investment an audiophile can make in our era.
5. Others will have to continue spending hundreds and thousands for a natural uncorrected FR.
I see no conclusion here that could be considered exaggerated, hyperbolic or downright impossible.
In fact, i welcome you to read about this very interesting article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
And most specifically, about the Replication:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#Other_components
One thing to understand here: the blind test organized in my lab is repeatable.
If anyone want to do so, just contact me. I'll be happy to give all information needed to repeat the exact same test in the same type of controlled-environment: From the room's dimensions, acoustic treatments, chair's model, room temp/humidity, noisefloor, equipment, music excerpts/lenghts, etc...
1. Auditory capacities of humans are massively overestimated by audiophiles (and probably by most humans as well)
2. Frequency Response is King.
3. Once EQ'd, a 10$ midrange can mimic a 1500$ midrange, if within mechanical/electrical limits.
4. DSP/EQ/in-room measure tools might be the best investment an audiophile can make in our era.
5. Others will have to continue spending hundreds and thousands for a natural uncorrected FR.
I see no conclusion here that could be considered exaggerated, hyperbolic or downright impossible.
In fact, i welcome you to read about this very interesting article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
And most specifically, about the Replication:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#Other_components
One thing to understand here: the blind test organized in my lab is repeatable.
If anyone want to do so, just contact me. I'll be happy to give all information needed to repeat the exact same test in the same type of controlled-environment: From the room's dimensions, acoustic treatments, chair's model, room temp/humidity, noisefloor, equipment, music excerpts/lenghts, etc...
Nothing in your example(s) indicate that the test was "seriously flawed and a complete waste of time".
I'd suggest the OP subscribe to AES e-library to source tons of info on this subject. Also review previous subjective tests by JBL/Harman. Many of your conclusions and claims, while based on some logic, don't meet all of the criteria required..... If you want merit, you have to take your conclusions and have them peer reviewed by several people with authority in the subject matter. Like I said, there is value here, just don't pretend like your assumptions are anything more than a hypothesis. Some of your conclusions agree with previous research and some don't. If you think you are on to something new, forget about this forum and push it up the chain. Otherwise, this will never realistically affect change...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If round trip tickets, meals and accommodations are included in that invitation; I would be happy to be a trial subject in your test. I am in SoCal by the way.
I agree here. That's how crossover design goes for me. I get beautiful measurements and I think it sounds good for a day or two. Eventually, my ears tell me I'm happy after several iterations. My wife usually laughs and rolls her eyes when I say I think I've got it right this time
Every listening session tends to be at a different volume and song selection... When I no longer want to change anything, I've usually finished a fantastic speaker. The time it takes me to get to that finished state tends to be faster with better reviewed drivers in my experience.My false belief according to this thread is that miniDSP doesn't sound as good as a passive crossover with matching acoustic response. I perceive a loss of imaging every time I try it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.
For anyone who thinks that the test proves that all these drivers sound the same once equalised. I'd just buy the cheapest hifi you can, Eq it flat, and sit back listening to your favourite music with a nice smug feeling.
Well, i don't, sir.
The fundamental thing to understand here, is my affirmation in the post #11 of this thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...ocking-results-conclusions-2.html#post4812713
That is well beyond some mere speaker testing or analysis.
That is about a 500 millions$ market that is based on a lie: see conclusion #1.
That is about speakers, amplifiers, pre-amplifiers, source, digital audio formats/resolution, cables, etc...
The moment one can demonstrate that a ''cheap'' kit made of generic components can MIMIC a kit made of exotic cables, amplifiers, speakers, HD files, etc... It's the end of HiFi hobby/market as we know it.
Hyperbolic ? If you wish so.
But true, nonetheless.
That's an interesting comment.
First, you CANNOT take just any cheap driver and make it do anything, even with the best EQ one can dream of... That is why it's important to understand the ''within mechanical/electrical limits'' in my conclusion #3.
Frequency response and potential SPL output are both limited, for all drivers on the planet. You won't be able to get in-room 40hz @ 120db with a 1'' dome. For obvious reasons.
Directivity, power response, emissive surface/point of source, etc... are all very important factors as well.
The point here is i think that, within mechanical/electrical limits, an EQd driver can mimic another one. And, so far, nothing shows that tweeters or woofer will be different. Except the limits in the 1st and 10th octave makes the ''cheap component'' a bit more difficult to find.
The ''good'' news ?
Most commercial exotic (expensive) loudspeakers don't have flat in-room 20-40hz nor 10-20khz.... So i see no problem to successfully mimic most of them.
Everyone here is annoyed by his own current system somehow, otherwise no reason to spend time in audio forum, I guess.
I spend my time in this forum because it makes me feel better, plus I learn all
kinds of useful stuff.
Btw, does anyone know where I could download without restraints and free of
charge a copy of an article by James K. Iverson, The Theory of Loudspeaker
Cabinet Resonances in the Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, April 1973,
Volume 21, Number 3 ?
So this was very unscientific by all means. What I do when designing crossovers is model the transfer function of the crossover from the loudspeaker design software and then overlay miniDSP 4x10 output measurements over the XO transfer function. Phase is a part of the measurement but I focus on response primarily. This isn't 100% to be sure and I definitely concur that lots of other variables could be at play. I do this to get an idea of what it's going to sound like before building XO. Yes I take acoustic measurements but I don't have good A/B acoustic measurement data as I don't measure DSP on the same day as its really a design tool...
Additionally I have LX521 with ASP and miniDSP. Although the transfer functions between ASP and DSP here are completely different, I feel like depth of image is significantly better with ASP... I have no explanation and blind tests may debunk what I think completely...
I know several others completely disagree. I'm just perpetuating audiophila here
. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah i know, given my past on forums, that could've been the case...
But this particular test was organized and conducted with care and seriousness, i was even a bit paranoid watching for any methodology flaws that i might have miss. And i sure will continue the test with more participants, for statistic validity, and i will also try with different equipment (such as DAC, amplifiers) to be 100% sure every rock wasnt left unturned.
For that, i welcome all members to continue giving feedbacks/comments in the ''i need help'' thread, and maybe read the 100+ pages (especially at the end) to point any flaws that might be real.
But, as of now, i see absolutely no sign the 5 conclusions I made on page 1 could change.
But how do you mimic, speaker cone breakup, CSD, harmonic distortion etc? Or do you think those things don't make any difference?
Please refer to conclusion #1.
Like i said previously, we have an ongoing matchup of drivers that are 1/2 octave different.... and some (most) people just don't spot it.
That is HUGE.
Please refer to the FR graph of both EQ'd drivers:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...d-testing-need-your-help-115.html#post4807958
Can we all agree this SHOULD be easy to identify ?
Not to mention directivity, SPL variation, Sd and other factors could just enhance even more the contrast between the two drivers..?
Skeptical ?
The test is active, you are all welcome to contact me and go through that test and experience it by yourself. Even inspect the equipement, etc... Will be my pleasure, just contact me by PM. The lab is about 30min from YUL airport. I can even arrange transportation.
Last edited:
My goal in this hobby of ours has never been to just get/build something that
sounds fantastic and be done with it, rather to have an ongoing journey of learning
things and improving my woodworking skills while harvesting the satisfaction
of being creative.
I could never be happy with the cheapest hifi equalized to death. It has to be
better than that, like Peerless HDS. That's where I'd draw the line.
Last edited:
I think the elephant in the room here, is the conclusion #1.
Well, i welcome all of you to read that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_pill_and_blue_pill
The red pill and its opposite, the blue pill, are popular culture symbols representing the choice between embracing the sometimes painful truth of reality (red pill) and the blissful ignorance of illusion (blue pill).
Well, i welcome all of you to read that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_pill_and_blue_pill
The red pill and its opposite, the blue pill, are popular culture symbols representing the choice between embracing the sometimes painful truth of reality (red pill) and the blissful ignorance of illusion (blue pill).
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
