@ Bonsai,
sorry, while talking about the meaning of thresholds in general, i totally forgot to address the specific graph, which wasn´t the result from the adaptive experiments but from the method of constant stimulus.
The authors tried to find out which parameters of presentation give the best results.
On this said experiment they used the constant stimulus procedure for the mentioned ITDs. 9 trained listeners each got 100 presentations for each ITD.
(different number of ITDs tested for the two stimuli, though).
So on each data point they had 900 responses from the listeners.
@ scott wurcer,
I´ve mentioned a couple of posts before the work from Choisel/Martin:
Choisel, Sylvain and Martin, Geoff. Audibility of Phase Response Differences in a Stereo Playback System. Part 2: Narrow-Band Stimuli in Headphones and Loudspeakers. AES Convention 125 (October 2008), 7559.
@ Evenharmonics,
Which is without doubt an interesting tale; please cite some relevant good experimental results from the literautre where the "head in the vice" feature was examined as the independent variable.
Which makes a nice tale and hypothesises too; if you can cite some relevant (good) experimental results addressing these two questions, i´m all ears. (no pun intended)
sorry, while talking about the meaning of thresholds in general, i totally forgot to address the specific graph, which wasn´t the result from the adaptive experiments but from the method of constant stimulus.
The authors tried to find out which parameters of presentation give the best results.
On this said experiment they used the constant stimulus procedure for the mentioned ITDs. 9 trained listeners each got 100 presentations for each ITD.
(different number of ITDs tested for the two stimuli, though).
So on each data point they had 900 responses from the listeners.
@ scott wurcer,
I´ve mentioned a couple of posts before the work from Choisel/Martin:
Choisel, Sylvain and Martin, Geoff. Audibility of Phase Response Differences in a Stereo Playback System. Part 2: Narrow-Band Stimuli in Headphones and Loudspeakers. AES Convention 125 (October 2008), 7559.
@ Evenharmonics,
Which is without doubt an interesting tale; please cite some relevant good experimental results from the literautre where the "head in the vice" feature was examined as the independent variable.
Which makes a nice tale and hypothesises too; if you can cite some relevant (good) experimental results addressing these two questions, i´m all ears. (no pun intended)
Last edited:
i dont think thats what fixed it as it was a gradual (over 20 minutes or so) come back......just a funny reaction i had, like a dying child or something!
You are free to disagree as much as you want. Given that most audiophiles don't work on their room acoustics, listening position change is much bigger audible issue, even at 1 inch shift. Have you measured your listening room acoustic response?
yes....in fact i tune to it at LP, speaker crossovers included.
calibrated mic...not ears! lol
use the ears to hear and mic to see what i like.....i know i like a rolled off top
Last edited:
Man, your just like a bald eagle holding too large a salmon, you just can't give it up.
Nobody has ever mentioned sub microsecond ITD audibility. EVER. So stop making things up.
As to trying to be important, what do you think you are trying to do right now?
Pay attention, please learn and understand what is being said. You are never going to speak coherently on this topic otherwise.
jn
Agreed. At 2 uSec, 60 % accuracy is certainly not entirely guessing.
And it is not dithered.
So, headphones may make the thresholds lower, we know dithering does. So the data, while hinting at 2uSec, doesn't truly mean in the wild 2uSec with or without dither.
jn
Those are no tales. They are all over audio forums, including this very thread.
Once you cite the proof I asked way back about that debilitating stress causing listeners to not hear difference in level matched DBT but did hear it when the stress is removed in level matched DBT.
I would like to see a three speaker set, where the center speaker provides a spacial reference. I've not seen anything on that.
I looked up the source the study used. I see it can do 192k sample rate. But I can't find any specification on it's interchannel delay capability. I guess any software they used would have to delay via the digital samples? I wonder if they verified that what they requesting of the unit actually happened as they expected?
jn
Klipsch did it for a while in fact the Cornwall originally was a center speaker for the klipschorns.
Looks like the MRI scanner is off the menu. Knowing that it is not going to work means progress (somewhat) in the right direction.
OK, let's try the objective > subjective > objective route.
First - make as many cables as possible:- different lengths, different types of conductive metals/materials, different wire gauges, number of strands, number of wires, twist or plait, different sleeve materials, different thicknesses of sleeve materials.
Second - listen and find an observable (and hopefully) musical difference.
Third - if a subjective difference is found ....... measure it.
Standard experimental methodology.
ToS
OK, let's try the objective > subjective > objective route.
First - make as many cables as possible:- different lengths, different types of conductive metals/materials, different wire gauges, number of strands, number of wires, twist or plait, different sleeve materials, different thicknesses of sleeve materials.
Second - listen and find an observable (and hopefully) musical difference.
Third - if a subjective difference is found ....... measure it.
Standard experimental methodology.
ToS
Test track played in entirety with averaging....Dayton imm6 mic
Attachments
Ah, sorry. I meant using a speaker in the middle as a location reference as part of an ITD localization test. I would find it difficult to determine if an image shifted in the wild without a known reference. I would want simultaneous stimuli, maybe a drum center speaker, then shifting ITD on a female vocal that had no ILD, then do both.
Jn
Except for insulting everybody’s intelligence and basic common sense. Happens that “close minded” rely on intelligence and common sense.
I wonder how klipsch did do it ....summed mono?
I think using a stereo image to simulate a point source is well....the point isn’t it?
Referencing that to something in the wild is slightly redundant as it only exists in a artificial environment......basically what I’m getting at is nothing in the wild is in stereo?
Edit....forgive any ignorance on my part!
Last edited:
Exactly, we are so lucky that our brain can't handle the awful reality of stereo reproduction
Exactly, we are so lucky that our brain can't handle the awful reality of stereo reproduction
I was just thinking JC did a pretty fine job of it with this Hint.....
Now that it coughed up the furball it’s got the best stereo imaging I’ve ever heard!
Oh, yah......that’s what I meant by that’s the point!
You know what’s really cool is a flat screen between the speakers....the phantom center affect is crazy! It takes a little jockeying to get it right though.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.