Funny!
I've read that Tom Cruise has a voice FX box to lower his voice and that it's in his contract the it always be used. Not sure if it's true, but it would not surprise me.
Yes.
And, of course, swapping polarity of power in will certainly alter the sound in most cases. Could be a test of people's hearing sensitivity, in fact ...
wait until you hear audio gear connected to diy built, separate ground connection!
most important is, the 5feet grounding rod must be gold plated, and installed to earth with bronze hammer.
yields ULTIMATE ground, sucking down all noise
Well... you know that soundstage is also affected by several environmental parameters as well as several psychoXXXX "situations". In order to build a protocol to measure soundstage, I guess you, at first, need a protocol "to measure emotions and their impact on the sound experience"
.... nice task I think you are right. From what you say, an analogy might be that literate readers of books don't care whether they are reading a battered paperback, a brand new hardback or the latest iPad. Whereas the unimaginative nerd is interested only in the quality of the paper and binding and can't even understand the words printed on it.
If the print is smudged or bits missing though it'll be hard to enjoy reading it. You may even miscomprehend the intended text and get totally the wrong end of the stick. Listening to overcompressed broadcasts on average car radio or kitchen radio I can't make out half the lyrics let alone any subtle nuance of a musician's performance/expression with his/her instrument.
This seems like the wrong way round: in life it is the sceptics who don't fall for the salesman's patter, and who check that their money is well spent; who check that the builder they hired didn't do a shoddy job. It is the sceptics who are the most critical of all. The 'non-sceptic' accepts whatever the salesman says, and just grins inanely as the door handle comes off in his hand.
I meant critically, to minute audio nuances - their neurons have probably been trained more in the musical expression area
I still remember once visiting a friend who had 'stacked Advents' in his untreated basement. He swore to me that a high end cassette recorder in that system made tapes that he couldn't tell from the original. Well, I couldn't tell them from the original either....on his basement system, anyway. However, I didn't generalize from that that cassettes were so good that there was no need to consider a higher accuracy medium.
I still remember once visiting a friend who had 'stacked Advents' in his untreated basement. He swore to me that a high end cassette recorder in that system made tapes that he couldn't tell from the original. Well, I couldn't tell them from the original either....on his basement system, anyway. However, I didn't generalize from that that cassettes were so good that there was no need to consider a higher accuracy medium.
Lots. And it's true of live music, as well- different people perceive it differently. But they all perceive it as live.
Personally, I'm building and designing for an audience of one, so I'm more concerned about whether things cause an audible change of not, rather than what changes will please the most listeners. Diy-er's privilege.
I've been finishing up finals at school. We 19 year olds have it rough!
I will get back to SE because I found an Oxford study that covers more succinctly what I intended to communicate. It is a study of various African cultures and their detection of bitterness and differences due to differences in genes.I also note quite a bit of bitterness here too!
Well... you know that soundstage is also affected by several environmental parameters as well as several psychoXXXX "situations". ..
Not just sound stage. I understand environmental variables impact perceived frequency response, as do my allergies. Is this a Wittgenstein moment, 'that which is difficult to measure must be ignored?'
Yes, I've seen that over and over again. Most musicians don't listen to the sound, they listen to the music. There is a notable category of exception, tho. All the conductors I've met or worked with have been interested in sound quality and Hi-Fi. I don't know why, but they are. One I worked for (Boulez) was so interested that he founded IRCAM.
It's a good analogy, but why fault the poor nerd who likes paper and printing? Everybody need a hobby.
A few years back I decided that I wanted to re-read "Little Big Man". So I got me to the book store and plucked a copy off the shelf. The latest printing was so bad, so smeary, tiny typeface, low contrast that I simply had no interest in it. I promptly went online and bought a 1970s edition that was very well printed and bound, and cheaper than the junk paperback at the store.
Sure, it was the same text, but the crap recent printing was so bad there was no way I would put up with it.
That's a key part of the 'problem', and why there's so much argument in audio circles: the overall system has to work well enough so that the variations are very obvious. If the gestalt of the whole shebang ain't up to it then your chances of picking up the subtleties are pretty remote ...
You go to listen to a friend's system: problem A screams at you in the face -- he says with a furrowed brow, I'm looking at problem B, have a listen, do you reckon solution A is better than solution B? And you say, well, first fix up problem A, because that's bugging me so much, I couldn't give a damn about what to do about problem B ...!!
To get some of the good oil, rather than snake oil, on what's going on with the more subtle aspects of good sound reproduction, could be an interesting technique in mixing in a deliberately distorted, and attentuated version of a musical track with the original. Say, Take Five (oh no ...!!), and extremely compress and clip that track, or worse, in a DAW, then attenuate that severely dirty version by 40, 60dB, whatever, and mix back in with the clean original. The distortion is now a known quantity, and perfectly correlates with the clean signal. This can be used to test people's hearing sensitivities, and, ability of systems to reproduce low level detail relatively straightforwardly ...
I'm repeating myself here, I know, but I feel it's worthwhile countering some of the negativity - this is an update to a chap's evaluation of how his system sounds after adding lots of very expensive "snake oil": My Experiences Building a Total Shunyata Zitron System--A Paradigm Shift - Page 2.
This rings the bells for me that he's managed to break through the quality barrier, albeit through very costly add-ons. The clear message is that such level of playback is the goal, and the corollary is understanding what needs to be done to make it happen at much more reasonable cost ...
This rings the bells for me that he's managed to break through the quality barrier, albeit through very costly add-ons. The clear message is that such level of playback is the goal, and the corollary is understanding what needs to be done to make it happen at much more reasonable cost ...
Pre-divorce says it all. Nordhost is right here in Framingham the home of Bose, somehow ironic.
Hopefully a few people will be able to read between the lines, and realise that this chasm between the objectivists and subjectivists can be bridged. In the middle, in the "darkness" there, are the answers, but they won't be brought out into the full light of day until sufficient people take the exercise seriously, of unraveling the nonsense on one side, and pushing past the stubborn desire to ridicule anything they don't fully understand, on the other ...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.