Do driver materials influence subjectively perceived sound textures if measurements are identical?

[ctrl]

Agreed, from that point of view. I am trying to be cautions in what assumptions we make without stating. For one thing, in visual perception the patterns of light that fall on the retinas is rather different from what subject report seeing. Second, reading @Floyd Toole 's book gives me the impression that we are capable of some similarly clever tricks in hearing.

As already mentioned, everything that has to do with spatial perception and partly tonality is certainly not optimally reproduced via headphone using binaural recordings of a dummy head because HRTF is individually slightly different. So, as is so often the case in science, a small uncertainty remains.

But the question of the OP was "If all things equal measuring on the machine..." and the quoted master thesis shows, even if not all "things" are equal, no more distinction can be made.

What is also missing using binaural recordings via headphone is the sensation that the sound pressure fluctuations trigger on the entire body (but if "all measured values are the equal", this also does not matter).

But perhaps it is the case that the measured sound pressure signal at the simulated eardrum captures everything that a headphone can do to a human listener. It seems likely. Now, assuming that's the case, what is OP's question driving at?

I'll stick with tweeter examples, assuming we have a $1000 diamond tweeter or one with a new fairy dust material and a $20 metal tweeter and all measured values of both tweeters are very similar (on- and off-axis measurement, distortion and decay), will these two tweeters nevertheless be audibly distinguishable?

The scientific research that I know and that deals with it says no, as long as the known parameters (on- and off-axis measurement, distortion and decay) remain very similar.

This is quite plausible, since it is very likely that there are no undiscovered, mysterious sound pressure transmission mechanisms that are not detected by measurements (and would play a major role in auditory perception by human hearing) - so that rules out such things as "telepathic material waves" or the like, except when using fairy dust tweeters
.

 

[dogmamann]

I had a canton reference k series speakers which had ceramic tungsten drivers and ceramic coated tweeters. Canton being nice never mentioned it had a sound, but it’s for stiffness and lightness they used that combo. I felt I have heard that kind of fidelity on other speakers, and nothing special of the material alone.

But I was surprised to see some people’s comments on hifi forums mentioning, they could hear the difference because of the ceramic!!

 

[MaxwellsEq]

But I was surprised to see some people’s comments on hifi forums mentioning, they could hear the difference because of the ceramic!!

I wonder if it's to do with visual clues like cables (copper = soft, silver = bright).

i.e. darker coloured silk/plastic domes sound dull; lighter coloured ceramic and aluminium etc. sound bright.

 

[tuga]

I wonder if it's to do with visual clues like cables (copper = soft, silver = bright).

i.e. darker coloured silk/plastic domes sound dull; lighter coloured ceramic and aluminium etc. sound bright.

Maybe it’s experience with inadequately-filtered drivers.

 

[FeddyLost]

do driver materials influence subjectively perceived sound textures if measurements are identical?

If you'll manage to make drivers with different materials with all measurements really identical, I'm sure they will sound indistinguishable.
But it's barely possible, because all materials are different and you'll barely make "paper" cone equal to some "metal" one.

 

[DSJR]

I read somewhere that Kapton voice coil formers could at one time affect the perceived sound in the upper mids for some reason. I can't point to the article let alone measurements and in any case, so many speakers Amir tests have severe issues at these upper hundred Hz and lower kHz regions which, apart from surrounds not maybe matching the cone properly, seem to be port, box and dispersion issues with maybe some intermod added in from cone resonances further up perhaps?

I think with current speaker tech, the importance is to get the best possible 'blend' between woofer-mid and tweeter and I still feel a damned good dose of listening is important in addition to the basic measurements being right! Some tweets like lower crossover frequencies a darned sight better than others seem to do.

 

[Head_Unit]

Unfortunately, speakers measurements only tell part of the story at this point in time, as opposed to measuring electronic gear,

Yeah! I'd say that even with electronics the measurements that get made are very limited, such as amps being measured only with resistors and nobody measuring noise modulation any more.

 

[kongwee]

Identical never mean the same. You are listening a range of frequency, not seeing a line. You have neumann and genelec on graph. Super imposed them above 2kHz to 10kHz they aren't the same at 2dB different. That aweful lots of frequency we can hear.

 

[Chrispy]

Wbat are "sound textures" outside of your own imagination/perception?

 

[confucius_zero]

Wbat are "sound textures" outside of your own imagination/perception?

the taste of salt and sugar however sugar-free sugar tends to be sugar-tasting sodium so...?