Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[fineMen]

C'mon, this is just a designer's put on a less thought-over question. I would never accuse Klaus Heinz of being inaccurate with the response. And then again, why the heck would it matter?

He could have told, that the studio equipment is reference for home audio for logical (!!) reasons. Hence, all should buy his designs!

(How often will we ventilate the miss-guiding claim that there is some original in the recording to be revealed by 'TRUE' gear? What the f*. Did YOU ever recorded something? Let alone mixing it to a stereo panorama?)

 

[clearnfc]

I will say this. Not everything can be measured. Psycho- acoustics is one aspect of audio that cannot be measured by any equipment. No doubt you can create sound effects that mimic a bee flying around and pple can hear the bee buzzing around. Its like holographic sound or imaging or staging (doesnt matter what terms you use).

However, there are currently no means to record the sound and show on a computer screen or on paper etc where this bee appears to be flying. Only humans listening to the sound can tell (subjectively).

This is like a one way hash scenario where you can easily get the hash form the password but getting password from the hash is almost impossible.

When you record the sound, you get "gibberish" waves thats akin to surface of ocean. Deciphering this "gibberish" to show that data will be an incredible breakthrough.

I am very certain you cannot decipher it from sinad, thd, fr sweeps. Current measurements will not show this.

 

[dc655321]

However, there are currently no means to record the sound and show on a computer screen or on paper etc where this bee appears to be flying. Only humans listening to the sound can tell (subjectively).

What a load of crap.
You have confused what you don’t know with what is not known by others.

Do you not think the creators of stereo illusions understand how to create them with amplitude and phase panning? Such features can of course be quantified.

Interpretation of effects is the human aspect.

 

[clearnfc]

What a load of crap.
You have confused what you don’t know with what is not known by others.

Do you not think the creators of stereo illusions understand how to create them with amplitude and phase panning? Such features can of course be quantified.

Interpretation of effects is the human aspect.

Nay, I don't talk to your kind. So, put me on your ignore list. I will do the same.

don't bother replying, I won't be able to see it anyway.

 

[Vacceo]

The claims sound pretty reasonable to me...
View attachment 197859

It is extremely easy to distinguish what is distortion on the source and what is distortion from the gear.

Pro tip: you need your eyes, not your ears.

Sorry, I cannot stand hipsters like Darko.

 

[storing]

However, there are currently no means to record the sound and show on a computer screen or on paper etc where this bee appears to be flying. Only humans listening to the sound can tell (subjectively).

This is demonstrably false. It's basic physics. You need multiple microphones (though theoretically I guess if you know the size of the room you could probably figure out location based on how long it takes the different reflections to arrive, if you can distinguish them) , but humans also have more than one ear plus it's shaped to allow encoding e.g. vertical distance. The difference in time between arrival of the sound on the microphones is an exact function of the position relative to the microphones. I assume if you search the internet for 'record spatial audio' or so you'll find in-depth explanantions. Radar works with a similar principle btw.

Please take some time to read here and on other sites on subjects like this instead of dismissing things directly, essentialy due to lack of knowledge. You'll realize there's still much to learn.

 

[clearnfc]

This is demonstrably false. It's basic physics. You need multiple microphones (though theoretically I guess if you know the size of the room you could probably figure out location based on how long it takes the different reflections to arrive, if you can distinguish them) , but humans also have more than one ear plus it's shaped to allow encoding e.g. vertical distance. The difference in time between arrival of the sound on the microphones is an exact function of the position relative to the microphones. I assume if you search the internet for 'record spatial audio' or so you'll find in-depth explanantions. Radar works with a similar principle btw.

Please take some time to read here and on other sites on subjects like this instead of dismissing things directly, essentialy due to lack of knowledge. You'll realize there's still much to learn.

Good!! Then show me how you measure these without resorting to subjective listening test. Not even amirm could, so show it to me since just basic physics.

Online LEDR™ Sound Test | Listening Environment Diagnostic Recording Test

Audio Test Tones : check your stereo system for correct imaging

www.audiocheck.net

Lastly, do note that spatial audio recording is not the same as psychoacoustic effects. There is some similarity but its not the same.

Also, "Staging or imaging" is not about reflections off walls.

 

[SIY]

There seems to be a tendency in this thread to equate "listening tests" with the word "subjective." Tests, in and of themselves, are not subjective. Conclusions drawn from tests can be objective or subjective. In the history of audio science there have been many listening tests. Bell Labs conducted many of them. The conclusions of those tests were objective, because efforts were made to relate human reaction to a given auditory input by using quantifiable and repeatable terms.

Perhaps it would be better to use the terms "controlled" and "uncontrolled" for these tests instead of "subjective". Jim

This seems vaguely familiar...

 

[clearnfc]

There seems to be a tendency in this thread to equate "listening tests" with the word "subjective." Tests, in and of themselves, are not subjective. The simple physical act of hearing is, likewise, not subjective. Conclusions drawn from tests can be objective or subjective.

Perhaps you were using the word in the sense that you had "subjected" yourself to a hearing test. That's using the word in a different sense.

In the history of audio science there have been many listening tests. Bell Labs conducted many of them. The conclusions of those tests were objective, because efforts were made to relate human reaction to a given auditory input by using quantifiable and repeatable terms.

Perhaps it would be better to use the terms "controlled" and "uncontrolled" for tests instead of "subjective". Jim

You are on my ignore list so i really recommend you to ignore my posts, unless you need to report them to the mods. Save yourself some time and energy.

 

[clearnfc]

This seems vaguely familiar...

Same goes for you. Pls ignore all my comments.

 

[Mart68]

I'd have thought that if you know nothing about something it would be better to ask questions of the people who do know, and learn something.

Instead there's seem to be these people who join just to display their ignorance and then put on ignore anyone who tries to educate them.

If there's a point to that exercise I'm not seeing it.

 

[SIY]

Good!! Then show me how you measure these without resorting to subjective listening test. Not even amirm could, so show it to me since just basic physics.

Online LEDR™ Sound Test | Listening Environment Diagnostic Recording Test

Audio Test Tones : check your stereo system for correct imaging

www.audiocheck.net

Lastly, do note that spatial audio recording is not the same as psychoacoustic effects. There is some similarity but its not the same.

Also, "Staging or imaging" is not about reflections off walls.

The effects are all done using calculated and measurable changes in frequency response and phase. The trick is knowing how an effect is coded, then measuring to see if the result conforms to the intention. Virtual source positioning is an extremely active area of development, especially for gaming, and a few minutes going through the patents and JAES/JASA will give you far more information on how this is being implemented in software/plugins/DSP.

 

[Voo]

thank goodness we have so many choices to audition and test drive. if everything measured and sounded the same I might just not like this hobby anymore.

 

[Xulonn]

It's amusing how some fools join ASR to promote their false beliefs, and then use the forum member ignore feature to create a bubble where they cannot see the rebuttals of their painfully obvious misunderstandings and errors. Note how they often boldly post announcements of their "Ignore" actions as if that somehow bolsters the supposed validity and superiority of their silly claims and positions.

I still laugh at such displays of ignorance by those who contradict and denounce actual audio experts - engineers and scientists who have actually worked and published their findings in peer-reviewed journals.

 

[Ken1951]

We need always be conscious of the fact that there are people who are actually neither fools nor ignorant, but instead receive gratification from fomenting trouble and antagonizing anyone who will treat with them. It's an increasingly popular game on the internet nowadays. Jim

Probably working on their Provocateur merit badge for another woo-woo site?

 

[dc655321]

We need always be conscious of the fact that there are people who are actually neither fools nor ignorant, but instead receive gratification from fomenting trouble and antagonizing anyone who will treat with them. It's an increasingly popular game on the internet nowadays. Jim

I think you’re being too generous - it is idiocy given courage by anonymity.

 

[clearnfc]

I'd have thought that if you know nothing about something it would be better to ask questions of the people who do know, and learn something.

Instead there's seem to be these people who join just to display their ignorance and then put on ignore anyone who tries to educate them.

If there's a point to that exercise I'm not seeing it.

I dont want to go too much off-topic so i will just say this:

Its entirely up to the reader's own freewill to choose whether to accept or believe what is posted in this forum (even the internet and published media).

You are free to think what you want of that person (be it ignorant, stupid, fool etc... Anything). You can also try to convince the person, but you cannot force a person to believe and accept what is posted (mental conditioning is a different thing).

I am very sure you would have come across words like agree to disagree or feel free to ignore if you disagree on the internet.

Lastly, i can assure you that this is my last post in this thread. So, you can carry on your discussions and ignore me.

 

[Xulonn]

Its entirely up to the reader's own freewill to choose whether to accept or believe what is posted in this forum

Agreed - of course one can chose to be ignorant and refuse to accept evidence based facts.

However, I find it interesting to observe people who come to a science-based forum to express and defend opinions based on willful ignorance and science denial - and then take offense when their unsupported beliefs are challenged by those who understand and accept verified and accepted scientific findings.

 

[Mart68]

I dont want to go too much off-topic so i will just say this:

Its entirely up to the reader's own freewill to choose whether to accept or believe what is posted in this forum (even the internet and published media).

You are free to think what you want of that person (be it ignorant, stupid, fool etc... Anything). You can also try to convince the person, but you cannot force a person to believe and accept what is posted (mental conditioning is a different thing).

I am very sure you would have come across words like agree to disagree or feel free to ignore if you disagree on the internet.

Lastly, i can assure you that this is my last post in this thread. So, you can carry on your discussions and ignore me.

If you have an alternative position then support it with facts, evidence and logical argument. If you can't do that then you don't actually have an alternative position even if you think you do.

 

[Karls_speaker_works]

This thread was interesting ... then it degenerated into a food fight