ATC speakers / Monitors

[RexrothPigeon]

I’m sure no one will need a blind listening test to hear the changes.

You seem to misunderstand the function of blind listening tests. It is not to find a way to notice something you wouldn't notice sighted; it's precisely the opposite. Sighted listening is inherently subject to other input and preconceptions. That's just how it works for humans, all of us.

 

[goat76]

You seem to misunderstand the function of blind listening tests. It is not to find a way to notice something you wouldn't notice sighted; it's precisely the opposite. Sighted listening is inherently subject to other input and preconceptions. That's just how it works for humans, all of us.

I already know all that.

What you seem to misunderstand is that my suggestion to you is that you try to place your loudspeakers on different surfaces, all from highly resonating surfaces to more rigid ones, with and without soft feet that decouple the loudspeaker from the surface, just to put the “snake oil” idea aside. Yes, I’m talking about listening for the extremes that are easy to hear without the need for a blind listening test.

“Snake oil” doesn't do anything to the sound, but decoupling your loudspeakers from the surface they stand on does, more or less, depending on the given situation/surface they stand on.

With the very cheap Sylomer feet I use, which completely decouple the loudspeaker from the stands, I don’t even need to bother with blind testing. And apart from the decoupling, they also protect the underside of the speakers and the surface they stand on. It's good practice.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

easy to hear without the need for a blind listening test.

again, this is backwards: Lots of imaginary effects are easy to hear sighted but somehow impossible to hear under blind conditions.

 

[goat76]

again, this is backwards: Lots of imaginary effects are easy to hear sighted but somehow impossible to hear under blind conditions.

No, it’s me explaining to you that when the sound difference is large enough, there is no f need to even think about a blind listening test!

 

[RexrothPigeon]

No, it’s me explaining to you that when the sound difference is large enough, there is no f need to even think about a blind listening test!

Yes, just like those guys who rave about fancy cables or ultra-high-bitrate files always say

 

[goat76]

Yes, just like those guys who rave about fancy cables or ultra-high-bitrate files always say

Yes, I’m exactly like those guys. We can leave it there.

 

[Rettica]

@RexrothPigeon did you yourself made a blind test to claim that speaker decoupling doesn’t matter?

 

[dfuller]

Agreed that it’s acceptabel, but it’s not as good as the Photoshop work suggests

View attachment 539232

GIMP's scaling tools are a bit of a trick. My bad, I'll update that later.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

@RexrothPigeon did you yourself made a blind test to claim that speaker decoupling doesn’t matter?

if you have a measurement mic you should easily be able to demonstrate these coupling and decoupling effects (and their audibility), so go for it--the onus is on the people making the claim

I'm not holding my breath though

 

[Rettica]

if you have a measurement mic you should easily be able to demonstrate these coupling and decoupling effects (and their audibility), so go for it--the onus is on the people making the claim

I'm not holding my breath though

I’m not making any claims, you do. I’m just asking

 

[RexrothPigeon]

Looks like this has come up before: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...e-positive-effect-or-fancy-accessories.59214/

Anyone on the fence, I highly recommend giving this a read: https://ethanwiner.com/speaker_isolation.htm

 

[dfuller]

@Geert Far as I'm aware this should be scaled correctly now - it's a little tricky getting this right. Regardless, still not bad, especially considering their active XO is about as barebones as it can get (just filters, no corrective EQ). My guess is that some of the hash is down to diffraction effects.

 

[DSJR]

Musical interlude. Just discovered the Seal version of the Jakatta single. Sounds great on the Zero 2s and makes me want my big ole ATCs again, as they were so good on earlier Seal music -

 

[Atc4ever]

After a musical interlude, let's get back to the hard work...

I have noticed that blind tests are mentioned few times as something of indisputed value, like it is a final judgment point.
Which it is not.
With so many well documented imperfections, blind tests and its conclusions are severely compromised.
But, maybe, just maybe it could be of some help to hifi enthusiasts. If you find a dealer who organize blind tests, you can try to use it to chose from a few components the one to take home and listen for a while and then decide to buy or to return. With a lot of "ifs"...

I always wondered who could ever have benefit of blind tests?
Possibly some makers of hifi goods.To correct some gross errors. Or to establish a statistics of what majority of users can or can not hear in order to tailor their market strategy or their products.
But, it seems to me, that for hifi hobbyst, like most of us, the whole idea is just a waste of time.

Nevertheless, I would like to hear from someone who actually participated in an organized blind test, what the conclusions were. And especially what benefit he personally got from participating in that venture

Ps...we all know that $$$ cables are a fraud. Without blind tests.

 

[DSJR]

I'm wondering if the days of clients having no idea what they want at this price level are still around? It may well be totally different in other more financially capable markets, but here, I think that well-off audio buyers will have researched a little what they'd like to own, whether B&W/PMC, KEF, Harbeth, Dynaudio, ATC or whatever. I think the days of multiple speaker dems may well be over, hauling heavy expensively finished boxes in and out of the dem room.

Maybe largely useless walls of speakers still features in other markets, but I maintain from long experience that the full potential of any speaker is severely diluted when demonstrated that way. Maybe pulling the playing speakers well forward of the others can help a little here.

 

[Purité Audio]

After a musical interlude, let's get back to the hard work...

I have noticed that blind tests are mentioned few times as something of indisputed value, like it is a final judgment point.
Which it is not.
With so many well documented imperfections, blind tests and its conclusions are severely compromised.
But, maybe, just maybe it could be of some help to hifi enthusiasts. If you find a dealer who organize blind tests, you can try to use it to chose from a few components the one to take home and listen for a while and then decide to buy or to return. With a lot of "ifs"...

I always wondered who could ever have benefit of blind tests?
Possibly some makers of hifi goods.To correct some gross errors. Or to establish a statistics of what majority of users can or can not hear in order to tailor their market strategy or their products.
But, it seems to me, that for hifi hobbyst, like most of us, the whole idea is just a waste of time.

Nevertheless, I would like to hear from someone who actually participated in an organized blind test, what the conclusions were. And especially what benefit he personally got from participating in that venture

Ps...we all know that $$$ cables are a fraud. Without blind tests.

Unsighted, level matched comparisons are the only valid method of determining whether there is an audible difference between two components.
Keith

 

[Blockader]

After a musical interlude, let's get back to the hard work...

I have noticed that blind tests are mentioned few times as something of indisputed value, like it is a final judgment point.
Which it is not.
With so many well documented imperfections, blind tests and its conclusions are severely compromised.
But, maybe, just maybe it could be of some help to hifi enthusiasts. If you find a dealer who organize blind tests, you can try to use it to chose from a few components the one to take home and listen for a while and then decide to buy or to return. With a lot of "ifs"...

I always wondered who could ever have benefit of blind tests?
Possibly some makers of hifi goods.To correct some gross errors. Or to establish a statistics of what majority of users can or can not hear in order to tailor their market strategy or their products.
But, it seems to me, that for hifi hobbyst, like most of us, the whole idea is just a waste of time.

Nevertheless, I would like to hear from someone who actually participated in an organized blind test, what the conclusions were. And especially what benefit he personally got from participating in that venture

Ps...we all know that $$$ cables are a fraud. Without blind tests.

Blind testing is the only thing that gives you the truth. Everything else is speculation. It is where the science of electronics meets psychoacoustics, and it does the one thing no other method can: it strips every variable out of the equation except the sound itself. No price tags, no brand names, no expectations, no knowing which box is playing. What is left is what you actually heard, not what you wanted to hear. It helps listeners to ground their perception and understanding to reality.

 

[caught gesture]

I always wondered who could ever have benefit of blind tests?

Someone considering buying high-resolution recordings of cds they already own because they’ve been persuaded that redbook quality is inferior to 24/96. Someone considering “upgrading” their DAC when their old DAC has all the connections and functionality that they need. Two benefits for you.

 

[Frank Dernie]

After a musical interlude, let's get back to the hard work...

I have noticed that blind tests are mentioned few times as something of indisputed value, like it is a final judgment point.
Which it is not.
With so many well documented imperfections, blind tests and its conclusions are severely compromised.
But, maybe, just maybe it could be of some help to hifi enthusiasts. If you find a dealer who organize blind tests, you can try to use it to chose from a few components the one to take home and listen for a while and then decide to buy or to return. With a lot of "ifs"...

I always wondered who could ever have benefit of blind tests?
Possibly some makers of hifi goods.To correct some gross errors. Or to establish a statistics of what majority of users can or can not hear in order to tailor their market strategy or their products.
But, it seems to me, that for hifi hobbyst, like most of us, the whole idea is just a waste of time.

Nevertheless, I would like to hear from someone who actually participated in an organized blind test, what the conclusions were. And especially what benefit he personally got from participating in that venture

Ps...we all know that $$$ cables are a fraud. Without blind tests.

Tough with speakers/room but I tested DACs level matched and blind and all the differences I had thought should be there were not.
The DACs were by dCS, Linn, Goldmund, Resolution audio, the DAC in my Metric Halo recorder and others I have forgotten.
With the levels matched to 0.1 dB (easy with DAC, impossible with speakers) and my daughter making the changes so I did not know what was playing they all sounded the same, or at least same enough for me not be able to tell a difference.

The dCS had switchable reconstruction filters and I could distinguish some of them consistently but when it had the classic correct filter it was the same as the others.

 

[Ultrasonic]

I'm wondering if the days of clients having no idea what they want at this price level are still around? It may well be totally different in other more financially capable markets, but here, I think that well-off audio buyers will have researched a little what they'd like to own, whether B&W/PMC, KEF, Harbeth, Dynaudio, ATC or whatever. I think the days of multiple speaker dems may well be over, hauling heavy expensively finished boxes in and out of the dem room.

Maybe largely useless walls of speakers still features in other markets, but I maintain from long experience that the full potential of any speaker is severely diluted when demonstrated that way. Maybe pulling the playing speakers well forward of the others can help a little here.

Where is "here" for context?