JSmith
Master Contributor
Some don't care about that though... they just want a device that shows engineering excellence in general.audibly sufficient
JSmith
Some don't care about that though... they just want a device that shows engineering excellence in general.audibly sufficient
Where as said just the SINAD value is not a sufficient indicator though.Some don't care about that though... they just want a device that shows engineering excellence in general.
To not confuse readers and give them a stick to beat ASR it could be as simple as embedding those words on top of each SINAD chart......SINAD is a technical measurement and not directly related to perception or audibility.
That is a tricky question.That said, if one had a choice between 2 devices with the same functions/connectivity, decent aesthetics and the same price range, yet one was 110dB SINAD and the other was 55 SINAD... what would be the reason to pick the lower SINAD device?
Cameron still owes us one ....I might be willing to place a bet on a blind listening test.
I'm working on this one! This comes up about every other time we're in the same "room" (both physically and online).Cameron still owes us one ....![]()
Because we are intelligent beings who are capable of understanding what we have read and watched without it needing spelled out everywhere the term is found.I don't know why it is left open to interpretation?
Where do you get that from and is there a health warning at such concerts?The full dynamic range of a live concert is objectively not something we should be recommending to end users, because it implies peak and rms levels exceeding safe recommendations for human exposure.
It is an incredibly good indicator of such. I know, because I see it every time I review something.Where as said just the SINAD value is not a sufficient indicator though.
Of course it has that implication. The point is that we did not invent sinad. Nor did we invented the notion of showing its relative value to others. The value, what it measures, and how it looks are facts. Folks had not seen them in this manner. Now that they have, they infer logical conclusions from it. The companies that produce sub-part SINAD are the ones that created the outcome you seem to not like. It is not our doing.So I'm trying to reconcile these three paragraphs - in and of itself, paragraph one makes sense as an argument: one can show an ordinal list without implying that falling to one end of said list is good or bad.
This is wrong on both fronts. I can have digital silence and then peaks of 120 dB in the same program. Crest factor has nothing to do with it. You are confusing short-term DNR with system required DNR. Nor is hearing damage going to occur due to short peaks of music. See this video of mine:In order to use more than approximately 100dB of DNR - assuming that the content which we played back had such dynamic range to begin with, I should note - we would require either extremely high crest factors or RMS levels unsuitable for sustained exposure without hearing damage.
Assuming that this is the paper of Louis's that you're referencing, the peak levels he gives are 129 and 123dBSPL. Based on the WHO assessments of noise-induced hearing loss risk, this would imply that the sum of peaks in a given day's exposure must be meaningfully less than 1 minute to avoid exceeding Leq75dB, which was the threshold for hearing loss risk. Perhaps more pertinently, the crest factor would need to meaningfully exceed 30dB (which would be, for music, quite high) for the average level to not be in the range of threatening permanent hearing loss over album-length exposure.Where do you get that from and is there a health warning at such concerts?
I mean, you definitely didn't invent SINAD, since it's just THD+N. I would argue that the value of THD+N as a measure was well-assessed decades ago as "limited", but that's neither here nor there. I'm not sure at what point you perceived me to be asserting that you invented THD+N as figure of merit, nor why you seem to think that my concern is products I "like" having "bad" SINAD. I kind of suspect that we've reached the point in this dialogue - and this does seem to be a recurring theme of us trying to talk - where we are talking past each other, so I guess I'll stop feeding into a cycle of miscommunication, my apologies for being unable to find consensus here.Of course it has that implication. The point is that we did not invent sinad. Nor did we invented the notion of showing its relative value to others. The value, what it measures, and how it looks are facts. Folks had not seen them in this manner. Now that they have, they infer logical conclusions from it. The companies that produce sub-part SINAD are the ones that created the outcome you seem to not like. It is not our doing.
I appreciate you very much, @amirm, and think you have done wonders for the community. But I don't see anything remotely out of line with what @Mad_Economist has said here. IMO even at ASR people pay too much attention to SINAD, and on Reddit it's worse. I agree that it's better that they look at SINAD than "luscious blacks and rhythmic, soulful bass," but it does take on more meaning than it should. This also goes for ASR's detractors on Reddit, who accuse ASR about fixating on SINAD far more than ASR actually does. Which @Mad_Economist goes out of his way to acknowledge.Until then, pointing the arrow at us as if we have created a problem is totally out of line. Your favorite product has too low of a SINAD? Go ahead and prove to me its efficacy regardless. Don't complain about SINAD itself. And certainly don't create FUD around how it is measured, etc.
I really disagree. SINAD is the first measurement of note that is reported, every time. And it's not just a raw table. You say "higher is better," and you color code different sections with "Excellent," "Good", "Fair," and "Poor." I don't think it's disingeneous to call that a ranking. Your headphone sensitivity ratings don't say "higher is better," or color code the measurements into Excellent-to-Poor categories.You are not hearing me and repeating exactly what I was responding to. The SINAD is just a number in the dashboard. I simply put it in a table so that members know how that number compares to other numbers. That is all it is. A way to organize presentation of a number. I organize other numbers like this such as sensitivity of headphones. Are you going to say just because I do that, we rate headphones by their sensitivity???
I really disagree. SINAD is the first measurement of note that is reported, every time. And it's not just a raw table. You say "higher is better," and you color code different sections with "Excellent," "Good", "Fair," and "Poor." I don't think it's disingeneous to call that a ranking. Your headphone sensitivity ratings don't say "higher is better," or color code the measurements into Excellent-to-Poor categories.
Musicians seating in front of the brass sections very often wear earplugs, but I haven't seen yet a first violinist or a conductor with ear protection.Concerts are absolutely a risk for hearing loss, although if we're talking about acoustic orchestral arrangements that would heavily depend on your seat. I'm probably safe enough sitting in the nosebleed section, I reckon.
Why is that a bother to people?I really disagree. SINAD is the first measurement of note that is reported, every time. And it's not just a raw table. You say "higher is better," and you color code different sections with "Excellent," "Good", "Fair," and "Poor." I don't think it's disingeneous to call that a ranking.
Because far more people want to associate the chart with SQ and audible "differences" than good engineering.Why is that a bother to people?
Okay, this one I have to jump back in for, I know a concert violinist who has already experienced meaningful hearing loss in his 30s, and not just in the ear next to his instrument. Concert musicians should absolutely wear hearing protection during performance and rehearsal, and it's tragic to me how many people who love music are getting hearing damage in the process of creating it.Musicians seating in front of the brass sections very often wear earplugs, but I haven't seen yet a first violinist or a conductor with ear protection.
It generally isn't. People love rankings.Why is that a bother to people?
I ask again: why do folks create videos over and over to complain about this?Because far more people want to associate the chart with SQ and audible "differences" than good engineering.
At some DAC threads there's parties going on about how better a 115dB SINAD DAC sounds in comparison to a 110dB SINAD,6 months older one for example.