• 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!

John Kenny

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Messages
568
Likes
18
Although the title of the thread is somewhat misleading, by using the word "preference" it confuses the message. The message being that, given 5 different sounding speakers, the Harman results indicate that we all gravitate towards the same relative grading of the sound (Preference as used in the thread title)

I don't find this at all surprising as knowledge of auditory processing suggests that we use internal auditory models to evaluate what we are listening to. I'm not talking about having an internal model of a speaker stored in our brain, I'm talking about models of how sound behaves in the natural world to which we compare reproduced sound. The more aspects of the speaker sound that match to aspects of our internal models the more realistic we will judge the sound to be & the more we will prefer it. As these models are built in all of us from our auditory experience of the real world they will mostly be very similar to one another.

So even though we don't know what the internal model & we don't know all the aspects that define "natural" sound to us, the Harman work & Griesinger before establish that the off-axis & reflected sound is a determining factor in this perception of naturalness
 
Last edited:
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,303
Likes
233,678
Location
Seattle Area
I is Infinity Primus 362 ($500 a pair),
g108P362BG-o_front.jpeg


and P is Polk Rti10 ($800).
419HH9GH9QL.jpg
 

Dynamix

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
593
Likes
211
Location
Nörway
Can we please stop writing "Harmon"? It's Harman. Why is this so difficult, I keep seeing "Harmon" all over the web...

It's an "a", not a frickin' "o"...
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,303
Likes
233,678
Location
Seattle Area
Sorry, I should have mentioned that there are many tests they have done with similar lettering. I was giving the data for the paper that was on preferences of young people.

In the picture I showed:

index.php


M is Martin Logan of course. I is the JBL. And P is the B&W. I think :). The forth one you reported was missing in my evaluation.

If you want more accurate data I can go back and find them in the papers.
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,173
Likes
16,930
Location
Riverview FL
Wow, looks like he singled one out for an embarrassment session.
 

FrantzM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
4,303
Likes
7,626
I tend to support the conclusions of the study. Were these peer-reviewed? The very fact that Harman (not harMON :mad:, for crying out loud!! :D) conducted these would make them suspect for some. Their conclusions align with my hunch: Psychology much more than biology guides our preferences.
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,173
Likes
16,930
Location
Riverview FL
As the title indicates, Dr. Olive wanted to see if their trained speaker listeners were biased to like their own speakers and hence, their preference did not match the general population. Instead of quoting the paper, allow me to post a graph from a powerpoint by Dr. Olive on this research:

index.php


The horizontal axis is the name of the different groups that participated in the test. As you can see, one group was HiFi reviewers and the other of course the HARman trained listeners. The vertical scale is the preference. Each horizontal line graph represents a different speaker being blind tested by each group.

As I look back at this graph, I now remember the impression both me and my Audio Buddy (we could both be loosely classified as "musicians", John perhaps a little less loosely) had when (20+ years ago) we initially listened to (and subsequently bought into) some M's... (which we both still use)

"They don't sound like speakers"

We considered that to be a compliment, in case you're wondering.
 
Last edited:

tuga

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
3,984
Likes
4,281
Location
Oxford, England
In my view there seem to be a few pitfalls to the Harman testing chain & methodology, and I don't agree with their interpretation of the 'preference' data.

• the small (268) sample

• listener capabilities - both Harman's and Electronic Industries Association of Japan research points at trained listeners performing significantly better; it would be interesting to see data referring to speaker preference evaluation tests in listeners homes in stereo with their system and preferred music (the intended application), perhaps we'd be surprised by the variance in preference and even the lesser significance of frequency response flatness above Schroeder?

zrsbP1W.png

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sound-Repr...Loudspeakers-Engineering-ebook/dp/B0BM4RTBK5/

• the inadequate setting up or positioning of the speakers - a speaker driven to the middle of a room by a clever shuffler mechanism with no regard for its inteded positioning or optimal speaker/boundary distance is a mistake, or stereo pairs with no toe-in (seems to favour speakers with smooth off-axis behaviour)

HccNsOq.png

Xf7UV8N.png


• the mono assessment for preference evaluation - Harman's reseach data seems to indicate that narrow directivity speakers fare a lot worse when listened to in mono but not in stereo; the authors then appear to have assumed that because mono listening allows for better discrimination of differences and issues that the results of the preference evaluation in mono are representative of listeners' tastes, but I would argue that speakers are meant to be listened in stereo pairs (with possible added complementary speakers) and thus speaker preference evaluation tests has to be performed with adequately positioned stereo pairs

4c9Cq8s.png

xM0bDh4.png

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sound-Repr...Loudspeakers-Engineering-ebook/dp/B0BM4RTBK5/

• the musical programme (and the interpretation of the data which led to it) - same as above, it is assumed that using pop/rock programme is the most adequate but some listeners may find other genres more discriminating and even recordings that they are familiar with; besides, some issues may only be revealed with selected programme (see below) which seems to indicate that different and specific programme should be used to identify particular issues

A/B testing
Now the alarming fact is that A /B testing may under certain circumstances give rise to completely wrong results when comparing the sound quality of two loudspeakers.
If pink noise is used as a convenient source, and a deep narrow crevasse produced in it, it has been shown that the effect will be almost inaudible.
If this is listened to for, say, half a minute as if programme were being used to judge a loudspeaker, and then the crevasse is switched out so that a uniform spectrum is produced, the ear will hear a strong colouration at the frequency of the crevasse.
It seems that there are two mechanisms at work; the conscious one ignores the crevasse but the subconscious one detects it clearly.
When the uniform condition is suddenly heard the subconscious mechanism comes forward and points out that there is now a considerable amount more sound energy at the frequency of the crevasse, and as that condition had been accepted as satisfactory the only conclusion to be reached is that there is now an excess in this region and that the sound must now be highly coloured.
Transferring this to loudspeakers it is implied that if one with a crevasse is first listened to then it will probably appear that one with a uniform response is coloured.

BBC R&D enginer H.D. Harwood (Harbeth) – "Some Factors In Loudspeaker Quality" (Wireless World, May 1976)
https://www.americanradiohistory.com/UK/Wireless-World/70s/Wireless-World-1976-05.pdf
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom