Excellent, thanks. So in layman’s terms, it weights the type of harmonic distortion based on the number of the harmonic and its relationship to amplitude, all to better correlate to our understanding of psychoacoustics. (Did I get that right?)
So, can one of you math whizzes (
@MZKM ?) take an FFT provided by
@amirm and generate the metric for some speakers already tested?
Oh your just outright dangerous arnt you!
In all fairness, we know that:
-Harman group products are science and fact focused.
-Revel and JBL (for instance) are designing for very low distortion.
-It's not easy or cheap to do.
- in many designs (More JBL) they will drastically cost save on things that are not strongly audible (such as cabinet thickness)
-yet they spend considerable money on copper Faraday rings etc on their drivers.
They clearly take great efforts to lower distortion.
The higher distortion IL10 measured extremely well, yet amir (and myself in this case) rate the speaker as lacking detail.
I have subjective experiences that I would happily add, but that's enough for me to come to the conclusion that although as toole says pattern control accounts for 70% of preference (or so) that's Vs speakers with poor pattern control.
Against many modern designs with excellent control, distortion likely correlates with preference.
The more I read geddes papers, the more I think he is under appreciated (but perhaps a bit blunt)
'Geddes is a blunt Toole'
Lol.