Apple’s “secret audio lab”!

[pablolie]

Not that it means much (it doesn’t lol) but Apple and Samsung have something in common inside their “secret audio labs”!View attachment 401363
View attachment 401365

Ok flame on, lol.

No flame here. Their respective stuff via Beats or AKG is pretty good, but falls way short from those pics with super linear equipment. So it seems a bit cynical to me "our mass customers are too unsophisticated to appreciate this refinement".

 

[Old_School_Brad]

I repeat my comment about Beats and Apple... simply caring about mass preference rather than fidelity.

I disagree. Apple has shown, through products like the HomePod, AirPods Pro, and AirPods Max, that they are both committed to and capable of delivering high-fidelity audio. Spatial Audio, adaptive EQ and the option to adapt according to personal audiograms also supports the notion that they care.

 

[BJL]

I disagree. Apple has shown, through products like the HomePod, AirPods Pro, and AirPods Max, that they are both committed to and capable of delivering high-fidelity audio. Spatial Audio, adaptive EQ and the option to adapt according to personal audiograms also supports the notion that they care.

I add to this that Apple has for decades made great efforts to create products that have accessibility features. The forthcoming hearing software update is a perfect example - how great it is that we will get these helpful features without any charge as part of an update. Kudos to Apple for writing software for all customers, inclusive of people who are or have [fill in the blank]. This hearing health software must have been a very costly project, and maybe it is also good business for them, but I am certain that the company and involved employees' motivations go beyond just making money.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

I add to this that Apple has for decades made great efforts to create products that have accessibility features. The forthcoming hearing software update is a perfect example - how great it is that we will get these helpful features without any charge as part of an update. Kudos to Apple for writing software for all customers, inclusive of people who are or have [fill in the blank]. This hearing health software must have been a very costly project, and maybe it is also good business for them, but I am certain that the company and involved employees' motivations go beyond just making money.

Agreed. That's a whole other chapter I wouldn't even begin to unravel. -The software and ease of use is second to none.

And as I have stated before; It's entirely possible to appreciate and value what Apple creates while still believing that their overall business practices are questionable.

 

[antcollinet]

Agreed. That's a whole other chapter I wouldn't even begin to unravel. -The software and ease of use is second to none.

And as I have stated before; It's entirely possible to appreciate and value what Apple creates while still believing that their overall business practices are questionable.

They are a huge money making machine - one of the biggest in the world. Of course their business practices are going to be questioned.

Whether or not they are questionable is a whole other .... er.... question

 

[goat76]

Apple's lab makes you wonder what kind of research is going on. They have the budget to make Dr. Toole's lab at Harman look like a backyard operation by comparison.

I think all their audio research is aimed at a complete virtual reality with their Apple Vision Pro, and their push for spatial audio has probably much to do with that goal in mind. As of now, it may look like these things are separate things for different types of entertainment like games, movies, and music, but I think their main goal with all these investments is towards the same goal where most people's social platforming will be done in virtual reality. The 3D glasses must just come down to mass-market prices and pretty much everyone will have them.

This commercial video for Apple Vision Pro is a bit on the cheesy side, but it's not that hard to realize that the tech companies that have the best and the most complete package in virtual reality will be the main players in the future.

The more I delve into Toole's book, the more I realise that the science is not settled in many respects. An example is his chapter on reflections - ample data on side reflections, and woeful evidence on front/rear/vertical reflections. This is not a criticism of Toole, it is a criticism of the evidence that was available when he wrote the book. The studies he references are very few, the number of participants very small, and it looks as if the authors who published those studies were limited in budget.

About the bolded part...

I have only read snippets here and there from Toole's book, but in which part of the book those he talk about side reflection as "a good thing"?
In many threads here on ASR, some members are saying that Toole prefers early side reflections and that those are good things, but the strange thing is that the manual of Revel loudspeakers says that the most important locations for acoustic treatment are the first reflection points of the front and side walls. That doesn't seem to go hand in hand with Toole's preferences (and research?).

ACOUSTIC TREATMENT MATERIALS
The Revel PerformaBe models feature high-order filters that optimize the loudspeakers’ on-axis and off-axis response, minimizing sonic degradations that occur in overly “live” rooms (those with surfaces that are acoustically reflective). Many listeners choose to place acoustic treatment materials at the room’s primary reflection points to reduce these reflections. The most important locations are the first reflection points on the front and side walls. Either broadband acoustic absorbers or diffusers may be placed at the first reflection points on the rear wall.

 

[antcollinet]

This commercial video for Apple Vision Pro

Wow - it does look quite impressive. But then for £3.5K it should be. I think I'll be waiting a year or 5 to get one of those.

 

[Keith_W]

I have only read snippets here and there from Toole's book, but in which part of the book those he talk about side reflection as "a good thing"?

He discusses this in Chapter 7.6, especially 7.6.3 on speech intelligibility. He does not say that all reflections are good, they have to be within a Goldilocks zone. He also described an experiment in an anechoic chamber using a second speaker to simulate a side reflection and described the subjective result. I would have to re-read the chapter to get the exact quote, but I encourage you to read it yourself if you want to learn more. That chapter is a bit too long for me to type out the whole thing anyway

 

[goat76]

He discusses this in Chapter 7.6, especially 7.6.3 on speech intelligibility. He does not say that all reflections are good, they have to be within a Goldilocks zone. He also described an experiment in an anechoic chamber using a second speaker to simulate a side reflection and described the subjective result. I would have to re-read the chapter to get the exact quote, but I encourage you to read it yourself if you want to learn more. That chapter is a bit too long for me to type out the whole thing anyway

In my version of the book, chapter 10 describes speech intelligibility.

Toole seems to think that the "right" amount of early reflections in the listening room is needed to help with speech intelligibility. But that type of information should already be "baked" into the recording itself in the form of recorded reflections and/or added artificial reverb, and it should, therefore, come with the direct sound that "paints" the stereo illusion.

So if the aim is the hear the recorded information including the reflections or reverb that already should contain the speech intelligibility, the best way to hear that is to avoid strong early reflections that occur in the listening environment and instead maximize the direct sound ratio vs the listening room reflections.

 

[G|force]

 

[G|force]