• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Was this aimed at ASR?

smallricey

Active Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
108
Likes
17
No. They just play music and you get to vote how correct the sound of one speaker is versus another. If you like more bass than a speaker has, then you will vote it less good, etc.
gotcha, that make sense.
 

KeithPhantom

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
641
Likes
658
And, no, preference is not more important than accuracy. But we don't know how to reach it. I thought this was ASR and not a subjective site. We can still have opinions about the science though.
Do not confuse total accuracy with subjective opinions. People are people and they are not rational. We can't even get to a target response curve that objectively will please everyone, because everyone's body is different and it is completely unrealistic to expect complete agreement between all humans in existence. Also, if you are in pursuit of a better sound, complete accuracy may or may not please you, so why settle for something you don't like?

For the individual, getting their preferred sound is what is most important and fidelity to the source may not be in those preferences, this is something I respect and endorse, but the best way to achieve that goal is to make all gear as flat and faithful to the source, then add all the decorations you deem necessary to please you. Enjoy the music the way you like it, after all, you bought it; if you want to play it the way the artist/label/producer want or your own way depends on your own choice, and this is something to respect.
 

March Audio

Master Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
6,378
Likes
9,317
Location
Albany Western Australia
@amirm,).

And, no, preference is not more important than accuracy. But we don't know how to reach it. I thought this was ASR and not a subjective site. We can still have opinions about the science though.

Don't we? The researched showed that the speakers that had flat anechoic on axis responses with smooth off axis responses were preferred.

Isn't a flat anechoic response exactly what you would expect to be accurate?

You would say a dac with a flat response was accurate, so why not a speaker?
 

March Audio

Master Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
6,378
Likes
9,317
Location
Albany Western Australia
@amirm, again, I have no problem accepting this as a reference. I actually think it is extremely helpful to have it as a reference. This is an independent issue of accuracy to live unamplified music, but I don't think there is a practical way of doing this (to date).

The problem with live unamplified music as a reference is that microphones simply don't "hear" like humans do. A microphone will never capture what you hear if you were personally in the room. They don't have a brain "processing" the sound. Reproduction will only ever be a facsimile.
 
Last edited:

CtheArgie

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 11, 2020
Messages
509
Likes
773
Location
Agoura Hills, CA.
Don't we? The researched showed that the speakers that had flat anechoic on axis responses with smooth off axis responses were preferred.

Isn't a flat anechoic response exactly what you would expect to be accurate?

You would say a dac with a flat response was accurate, so why not a speaker?

G'day March!

So, I "believe" that flat speakers should be more accurate. But the Harman curve tell me that this is not the preferred curve. We are again confusing "accuracy" with preference. I thought my first post described the issue of preference in the methodology used. It is like more people prefer chocolate ice cream, that doesn't make it the best one. There is no "accurate" chocolate ice cream, i am afraid. (Too bad!)
 

March Audio

Master Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
6,378
Likes
9,317
Location
Albany Western Australia
G'day March!

So, I "believe" that flat speakers should be more accurate. But the Harman curve tell me that this is not the preferred curve. We are again confusing "accuracy" with preference. I thought my first post described the issue of preference in the methodology used. It is like more people prefer chocolate ice cream, that doesn't make it the best one. There is no "accurate" chocolate ice cream, i am afraid. (Too bad!)
G"day :)

Aahh don't confuse in room measured sound with anechoic . Not the same thing :). In room measurement will exhibit a slope with an anechoicly flat speaker. People still prefer the flat more "accurate" speaker. Our preferences really do tie in with what's intuitively and technically more accurate.
 
Last edited:

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,335
Likes
6,700
G'day March!

So, I "believe" that flat speakers should be more accurate. But the Harman curve tell me that this is not the preferred curve. (Too bad!)

What do you mean by this? The Harman curve is a flat line. In their tests the speakers who's response was closest to a flat line(ie most accurate) were also the most preferred. This is what the research showed.

You might be confusing the Harman anechoic curve with the Harman room curve.
 

Paperdragons

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
50
Likes
40
Location
Amsterdam
Just saw this posted on the Stereophile website. Can’t help but think the author had a specific target in mind.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/hoisted-your-own-petard

Not really getting that vibe. Maybe the “using their measurements to attack them” bit but I haven’t seen anyone here argue that neutral speakers are the only ones able to be enjoyed. I’m sure i’m not the only one on this forum who enjoys reasonably elevated but clean bass response over flat.
 

b1daly

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 15, 2018
Messages
210
Likes
358
Earlier posted and already answered: "There are plenty of fish in the sea ."
You mean in the sense of there being different types of audiences for audio writing and different types of interest in audio equipment?

Don‘t you think that the ‘golden ears’ framework is long past it’s ‘sell by date?’

I think I missed your other comment on the subject...
 

Inner Space

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,285
Likes
2,938
You mean in the sense of there being different types of audiences for audio writing and different types of interest in audio equipment?

Don‘t you think that the ‘golden ears’ framework is long past it’s ‘sell by date?’

I think I missed your other comment on the subject...

I assume he meant there were plenty of alternative manufacturers lining up for ad space. If manufacturer A storms off in anger, manufacturer B takes his place, and so on. Seems likely, although the fish stocks in the sea must be thinning out somewhat, and downward pressure on retail prices will affect ad budgets.
 

North_Sky

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 31, 2019
Messages
2,741
Likes
1,553
Location
Kha Nada
I can easily see Amir doing measurements for Stereophile, and Stereophile audio reviewers writing subjective reviews for Amir right here @ ASR.

...The perfect marriage between analog, digital, objective, subjective, poor, rich, solid state, tubes. During a pandemic it's a great antidote ... no mask needed and no social distancing required working from home. Just desanitize that keyboard that's all.
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,273
Likes
9,790
Location
NYC
You mean in the sense of there being different types of audiences for audio writing and different types of interest in audio equipment?
Nope.
I assume he meant there were plenty of alternative manufacturers lining up for ad space. If manufacturer A storms off in anger, manufacturer B takes his place, and so on.
Yup.
Seems likely, although the fish stocks in the sea must be thinning out somewhat,.........
Could be that they are thinning but I have not felt any effect so far.
..............and downward pressure on retail prices will affect ad budgets.
Not something I know anything about.
 

b1daly

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 15, 2018
Messages
210
Likes
358
Actually, classical economists think that humans are RATIONAL! This is why Kahnemann and Tversky's research was so fundamentally disruptive!

And thanks for your kind comments.

I am truly interested in Toole's work from the methodology point of view, though I am becoming convinced that their results are completely valid for the recording and reproduction of amplified music.

My work is not on consumer testing but on clinical trials design, analysis and interpretation. This is why I am interested in methodology. The way you set up the experiment (clinical trial) strongly influences results.

I don’t think classical economists think humans are primarily. rational decision makersI took economics in college and I don’t remember this. As I remember the idea this refers to is simply that humans respond to incentives based on their own preference. There shouldn’t be any conflict between this model and findings from behavioral science that humans have a bias where they prefer avoiding loss more than obtaining gains through risky methods. That might have been a new understanding of human psychology but it doesn’t break the economist model, it actual strengthens it because it allows more accurate understanding of how different scenarios incentivize behavior.
 

b1daly

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 15, 2018
Messages
210
Likes
358
All listening tests are subjective. What else would it be? Again, none of us ever have a control when we evaluate speakers. We can't look for it in controlled testing when it never exists in reality.

Fortunately we all seem to have a sense of what is right or this hobby would not exist!
In the Harman speaker test is the listener asked to simply rank the speakers by preference or is the suggestion to rank based on perceived accuracy also included?

I know for me this would be a significant deviation.
 

John Atkinson

Active Member
Industry Insider
Reviewer
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
165
Likes
1,022
I assume he meant there were plenty of alternative manufacturers lining up for ad space. If manufacturer A storms off in anger, manufacturer B takes his place, and so on.

Exactly the case. When I joined Hi-Fi News magazine in 1976, the magazine's editor was John Crabbe, from whom I learned my craft. John passed away in December 2008 and in an essay for Stereophile in which I commended on his passing - see https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/communities/index.html - I wrote: "Soon after becoming HFN's editor in 1964, John had written that a magazine's reviewers 'have a mandate to write what they think, even if some feelings are hurt.' John taught me that this is the ground on which a review-based magazine stands.

"It was John Crabbe who defined for me the relationship between a magazine's editorial integrity and the advertisers who financially support it (readers, sadly, are never a significant source of income, given the high costs of distribution): 'If you tell the truth about components you review, there will always be a small percentage of companies at any one time who are not advertising in your pages. But if you publish the truth, you will have a good magazine. And if you have a good magazine, you will have readers. And as long as you have readers, disgruntled advertisers will eventually return. But if you don't tell the truth, you won't have a good magazine. And if you don't have a good magazine, you won't have readers, at least not for long. And if you don't have readers, you won't have advertisers.'"

A philosophy that is as true now as it was a half-century ago.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile
 
Top Bottom