Bass and subwoofers

[j_j]

this may well be an unpopular view. I do not care. measurements done right carry weight for me. Being able to evaluate the methods used and the results achieved goes a long way towards convincing me the measurements were done right. If anyone has problems with this view, let them complain, but this is what I accept and rely on when I cannot evaluate equipment personally.

Measurements can almost always show if something is wrong. They can't necessarily show that something is right, at least at this point in time. Some things you can count on:
measurements have better absolute sensitivity than ears
measurements can handle higher levels the ears
measurements can show errors in frequency response, impulse response, phase spectrum
measurements can capture evidence of nonlinearities
measurements can capture radiation patterns of transducers

HOWEVER that is all showing the nonexistence of problems.

Now, for some things (electronics, etc, where the "goesinta" is known exactly and the "comesouta" is likewise captured precisely) a clean measurement is quite conclusive.

For things like soundfield cues, etc, on the other hand, not so much. For "sounds like the original performance" (assuming there is one, it's not 100% electronic) there is a lot of illusion, sparse sampling, etc, that becomes involved very quickly. Once perception is involved, listener experience, training, and preference all come into play.

2024-01-31-What Does Accurate Mean - PNW AES Section

What Does “Accurate” Even Mean? Presented by James D. (jj) Johnston Chief Scientist Immersion Networks Meeting Produced by Dan Mortensen – AESPNW Committee, Dansound Inc. Video frame of James D. (jj) Johnston discussing accuracy at the PNW Section, January 31, 2024. Video frame of James D. (jj)...

pnw.aessections.org

 

[livinon2wheels]

Measurements can almost always show if something is wrong. They can't necessarily show that something is right, at least at this point in time. Some things you can count on:
measurements have better absolute sensitivity than ears
measurements can handle higher levels the ears
measurements can show errors in frequency response, impulse response, phase spectrum
measurements can capture evidence of nonlinearities
measurements can capture radiation patterns of transducers

HOWEVER that is all showing the nonexistence of problems.

Now, for some things (electronics, etc, where the "goesinta" is known exactly and the "comesouta" is likewise captured precisely) a clean measurement is quite conclusive.

For things like soundfield cues, etc, on the other hand, not so much. For "sounds like the original performance" (assuming there is one, it's not 100% electronic) there is a lot of illusion, sparse sampling, etc, that becomes involved very quickly. Once perception is involved, listener experience, training, and preference all come into play.

2024-01-31-What Does Accurate Mean - PNW AES Section

What Does “Accurate” Even Mean? Presented by James D. (jj) Johnston Chief Scientist Immersion Networks Meeting Produced by Dan Mortensen – AESPNW Committee, Dansound Inc. Video frame of James D. (jj) Johnston discussing accuracy at the PNW Section, January 31, 2024. Video frame of James D. (jj)...

pnw.aessections.org

well said, I was coming at this from the perspective of the acute lack of "stereo stores" like were so prevalent 40 years ago. Now we have to evaluate equipment almost exclusively on reviews and published specs. Features are important too. But its measurements that spell out for me what sort of performance I can expect, yes mostly on electronics. Speakers are best evaluated in person. But to visit stores that are close to me is a full day's commitment of several hours of driving and the time investment and inconvenience of that has me taking a different tactic. Especially since I don't get around very well any more. I am buying equipment only from vendors who allow an in home trial. That way I get to test it in the environment it will actually live in and if I do not like it it gets shipped back at some inconvenience and expense, but without all the travel. Not a perfect plan but one that has so far worked fairly well as I rebuild my audio life.

 

[Thomas Lund]

There seems to be no published info or video of his speech in Copenhagen though. In case you were there, was it as provoking as you assumed it would be?

Geoff Martin gave a fine talk, but he concentrated on the least controversial side of measurement-hubris: Its snapshot nature.

Still pictures hide, for instance, sample-slips, that may be prevalent in computer-based audio. Snaphotting also allowed 0 dBFS+ level in pop music to stay unnoticed, before our studies decades ago.

Geoff did not, however, discuss temporal qualities of reproduction, like AEV. Such joy will have to wait for a future conference