Affordable Accuracy Monitor Review

[richard12511]

Yeah, it was, that initial remark, but only in parts, maybe. Only that I responded, that my question (requirement) wasn't about "resonances" but about just humble broad-band deviations--as I said initially. You towed the topic on Your terrain, namely what is written somewhere, so You could defend Your standpoint referring to some authority, namely Toole in this case.

Of course my question isn't answered yet. You say: "Read the book!" I say: "It is exactly because it is not considered in the book / model." You say: "Resonances are." I say: "What the heck …?"

Where do you find Toole's book/research to be inadequate? Also, what is your experience? You seem very well informed.

 

[GelbeMusik]

I'm not "informed". I stated my caveat in 2 to 3 posts above. German recommendations for studio monitoring describe how deviations from "flat" shall not be distributed. Namely to be not distributed, but gravitating towards some center(s), which gives rise to true coloration. I didn't see anything around that lines in the Olive model ( You're right, the formulas didn't shock me )

Especially the "narrow band deviation" parameter exemplifies on ignoring wide band aberrations.

My original questions was, not published here, if there was something like a weighting of aberrations dependent on the frequency range in which they show up. Nope.

This all came up, because, erroneously people were aroused from good spinorama for cheap plus modding in contrast to less personal "preference". Black vinyl wood replica in curves. Seems some think quite apologetic, but, for sure linear independently to the original meaning

Tja ...

 

[amirm]

Yeah, it was, that initial remark, but only in parts, maybe. Only that I responded, that my question (requirement) wasn't about "resonances" but about just humble broad-band deviations--as I said initially. You towed the topic on Your terrain, namely what is written somewhere, so You could defend Your standpoint referring to some authority, namely Toole in this case.

Of course my question isn't answered yet. You say: "Read the book!" I say: "It is exactly because it is not considered in the book / model." You say: "Resonances are." I say: "What the heck …?"

The book addresses your question. Broadband resonances are not considered worse because they are broadband. They are considered worse because they increase the probability that musical notes hit them, making it easier to hear their impact. This goes against the intuition and lower amplitude deviations from flat would be less audible/impactful.

 

[amirm]

German recommendations for studio monitoring describe how deviations from "flat" shall not be distributed.

What does this mean "distributed?" I think I, and others are having trouble following what you are writing.

 

[Putter]

I don't read books. At least not in public. I don't follow books, never. I don't allow Toole to say what I am. I think there is a big misunderstanding. I'm actually a scientist. Again, considerations regard broad-band colorations, anybody?



Sorry. Some Tymphany tweeters measure quite well. With waveguide attached they are hard to beat. An XO of about 1kHz is possible and reasonable. My apologies.

I hope this doesn't sound insulting, but a scientist who doesn't read books.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Where in the measurements do you believe the waveguide colouration you mention is apparent? Looking at the on- and off-axis responses of the BS22, I don't see anything that stands out above 4-ish kHz:

Feel free not to weigh in deeper on this ofc

I'm totally winging it. It's just that I hear the same kind of coloration on a lot of tweeters with horns and wave guides, and I don't know what else to attribute it to. It can't be THD per se, because I don't hear it in tweeters with higher THD levels. It's kind of academic, though, because I would dispose of the stock tweeter in the same manner irrespective of the exact pathology.

 

[tuga]

And to be more specific, the study commonly cited to support this finding is this one.

Do note, however, that this finding is only about detection thresholds, not preference. The impact of low-Q, low-amplitude (i.e. "broad trends" in frequency response) on preference is controversial.

Toole's description of resonances is somewaht confusing.
He moves all too easily from speaker to room resonances and he seems to not make a distiction between peaks and dips in frequency response amplitude and their duration. It looks as though amplitude is given full attention whilst duration is neglected (aparently supported by his testing/research on audibility which I don't trust).

A key question is “what do we hear: the peak in the frequency response or the ringing?” For frequencies above about 200 Hz, the answer seems to be the spectral peak. Therefore the audibility of resonances will be best described by the frequency response curve. This topic is discussed in more detail in Toole and Olive (1988).

 

[amirm]

He moves all too easily from speaker to room resonances and he seems to not make a distiction between peaks and dips in frequency response amplitude and their duration.

Are you kidding me? That is like saying your doctor doesn't know what the common cold is.

And what is a "duration" in frequency response? Frequency response is not time.

 

[tuga]

Are you kidding me? That is like saying your doctor doesn't know what the common cold is.

And what is a "duration" in frequency response? Frequency response is not time.

Please stop with the Are you kidding me? attitude.

Time- vs. frequency-domain in a resonance

 

[mt196]

Sorry to bother guys, since a lot of expert people seem to be in this thread, I wanted to ask: if I know that a bass reflex port should be 1"x6-1/2" how can I find an equivalent one with different diameter (bigger)? Is there a formula? I am asking because I can only find 1"x4" and I don't think it is enough, while instead changing the diameter I can find something longer and thus more similar to the original one

 

[QMuse]

It looks as though amplitude is given full attention whilst duration is neglected (aparently supported by his testing/research on audibility which I don't trust).

A key question is “what do we hear: the peak in the frequency response or the ringing?” For frequencies above about 200 Hz, the answer seems to be the spectral peak. Therefore the audibility of resonances will be best described by the frequency response curve. This topic is discussed in more detail in Toole and Olive (1988).

How can anyone prove anything to you if you won't trust the expert who is trusted by his peers in the science community? Do you have any proof that above 200Hz it is not about center peak frequency and that ringing still comes to play there?

 

[tuga]

How can anyone prove anything to you if you won't trust the expert who is trusted by his peers in the science community? Do you have any proof that above 200Hz it is not about center peak frequency and that ringing still comes to play there?

Audibility tests are scarce, often with miniscule samples and not always using the most effective methodology.

This forum is supposed to be about Science yet people revere "the expert" as if he were God and the book as a Gospel.
"Science" didn't end there.

Besides, not all "peers" agree, one of the BBC papers says that high-Q resonances in the midrange may be audible if they hit the fundamental note of an instrument.

 

[QMuse]

Audibility tests are scarce, often with miniscule samples and not always using the most effective methodology.

This forum is supposed to be about Science yet people revere "the expert" as if he were God and the book as a Gospel.
"Science" didn't end there.

Besides, not all "peers" agree, one of the BBC papers says that high-Q resonances in the midrange may be audible if they hit the fundamental note of an instrument.

Science is about offering proof for your claims, and yet you offered none. On the other hand you are constantly negating the science work that has been proved.

So, once again, can you offer any proof that above 200Hz it is not about center peak frequency and that ringing still comes to play there?

 

[tuga]

On the other hand you are constantly negating the science work that has been proved.

I am only negating that it "has been proved". Spin-A-Ramen.

 

[richard12511]

Science is about offering proof for your claims, and yet you offered none. On the other hand you are constantly negating the science work that has been proved.

So, once again, can you offer any proof that above 200Hz it is not about center peak frequency and that ringing still comes to play there?

I wouldn't say it "has been proved", at least not in a mathematical sense. I agree with your question, though.

 

[QMuse]

I wouldn't say it "has been proved", at least not in a mathematical sense. I agree with your question, though.

This is about how we perceive the sound. It cannot be proofed using math, only with listening tests.

 

[richard12511]

This is about how we perceive the sound. It cannot be proofed using math, only listening tests.

I agree. I think your question to @tuga was sound.

 

[Thomas savage]

New topics new threads , some of this would of been better off in a separate thread.

This is a review thread .

 

[GelbeMusik]

The book addresses your question. Broadband resonances are not considered worse because they are broadband. They are considered worse because they increase the probability that musical notes hit them, making it easier to hear their impact. This goes against the intuition and lower amplitude deviations from flat would be less audible/impactful.

First, thank You for keeping this board. My post was originally about deviations from target curve. The "smoothness" was discussed. My quite humble research I did in the patent document from Olive. It appears not so confusing to me.

Simply spoken:

case (1): a drop in amplitude response by an amount of 2dB from 1kHz up to 4kHz
case (2): narrow wiggles of +/- 2dB from 3kHz to 12kHz

Case (2) would have lower rating. Reasoning is that the wiggles were indicative for resonances, Olive says. The use of this term became inflationary. But for sure case (1) would be more "colored"

Case (1) could be of quite trivial origin. Think of a too big resistor value in the x-over, which steps down the midrange speakers output too far. It is for sure not "resonance".

 

[amirm]

Please stop with the Are you kidding me? attitude.

Then stop posting outrageous statement to constantly dispute science. Present your own data and not declarations that are so ridiculous as to need calling out. What I responded to was the worst thing I have seen you say. That Dr. Toole doesn't know the difference between a dip and peak? It showed that you have not read or understood one line of what he has written.

You have been on this crusade since you joined. Time you come up with another reason to be here.