Bill, I have given you suggestions of things that you can try and have already given you too much information. In the meantime I am not interested in the slightest in debating the issue of who can hear what, you might be fooled easily but that does not mean everybody.
BTW just what does this mean -
Dan.
Something lost in the translation maybe?
Dan.
Hi Dan,
A subjective measurement is a measurement with your ears. And because this site is about audio, this is what matters. Iow can you hear it or not.
An analogy: Think of a complex electronic circuit with power and a signal. Now you want to know what the voltage is at point A. You put one pin of the multi meter at point A. But where do you put the other pin? If you put the other pin at a random place in the circuit, do you think you get a value that has any merit? Imo the chance of that is slim. You need to place the other pin at a reference point. Usually this is signal earth. Now you can get a value that you can use. Iow if you don't use the proper protocol to measure, your measured value will have no merit.
Exactly the same goes for a subjective measurement. If you don't have a fixed reference point, your measured value will have no merit. And the only way to get a fixed reference point is to only use your ears as input for your subjective measurement.
Best Bill.
A subjective measurement is a measurement with your ears. And because this site is about audio, this is what matters. Iow can you hear it or not.
An analogy: Think of a complex electronic circuit with power and a signal. Now you want to know what the voltage is at point A. You put one pin of the multi meter at point A. But where do you put the other pin? If you put the other pin at a random place in the circuit, do you think you get a value that has any merit? Imo the chance of that is slim. You need to place the other pin at a reference point. Usually this is signal earth. Now you can get a value that you can use. Iow if you don't use the proper protocol to measure, your measured value will have no merit.
Exactly the same goes for a subjective measurement. If you don't have a fixed reference point, your measured value will have no merit. And the only way to get a fixed reference point is to only use your ears as input for your subjective measurement.
Best Bill.
Correct. The actual L in such a point depends on where you were before. Sort of magnetic memory. Don't think it is Barkhausen though..
I remember seen somewhere laser interferometry which has shown that a standard surround behaved different to the cone. This is not only a problem at x-max. At some frequency the surround is completely out of phase and especially with larger high x-max drivers the surround surface is quite large. So a more convoluted shape could lead to a more complex vibrational behavior which may reduce this interference but I can not see how it eliminates it.
This only works if you don't know what speaker is modified.
As soon as you do know what speaker is modified and what speaker is not, your brain will use that as extra input for its perception and thus you don't use the same fixed reference point for your measurement.
Speakers just looking the same doesn't mean anything, your brain is not allowed to know what speaker has the mod. In fact it goes even further: No one in the test room is allowed to know what speaker has the mod, because they will unconsciously give clues.
Not the same Bill - you assumed that one speaker was modded, but unknown which. To really make it DB, you should also not disclose whether any speaker was modded at all, or that both are unmodded, or both modded. Be devious
Jan
the claim is that the magnetization curve is now independent of the signal and voice coil position
Who gives a toss, what works works, what doesn't walks. You could try this experiment/advice for yourself, in fact it would take less time than you have spent in front of your PC arguing about the suggested mod experiment. Maybe I have spent too much time dealing with/repairing audio but I have no problem picking significant mods from the standard item, if you tried you might find that you can do so also. This is why I say trust your ears but this is dependant on experience and practice, how old are you and what is your experience with audio electronics ?.
Dan.
Not the same Bill - you assumed that one speaker was modded, but unknown which. To really make it DB, you should also not disclose whether any speaker was modded at all, or that both are unmodded, or both modded. Be devious
Jan
Yes.
But to be completely honest, this specific tests is doomed from the start.
Speakers placed at different points in a room will certainly sound different.
True honesty is difficult.
If you truly trust your ears, why do you use other inputs to your brain as well?
And you are asking me for an argument from authority, that is a logical falacy on top of a logical galaxy.
One needs to be very suspicious if something resembling the truth is your goal. I remember a friend of mine said "I don't trust anyone, I never have", but it was said in such a way and the context was such that it was anything but a negative thought.Be devious
What ????.....my inputs to you are encouraging and kindly but you want to argue and continue arguing FFS.
You are arguing about cases where a difference is extremely minor and the subject is a novice.
In the case of obvious difference the 'blindness' of the test does not matter except for when formal records are required.
I think you should try some On The Fly modification sighted testing for yourself and learn to discriminate fine differences as a first step.
Dan.
That's why Harman developed the Speaker Mover. These guys were dead serious about DB tests. And some of their results are interesting.
Jan
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.