Measuring for tonal characteristics

[Mivera]

♦ http://www.stonessoundstudio.com.au/stone/diy_speaker_info/diy_driver_types_p3.htm

Awesome link Bob! But if the Revel Salon2 uses Titanium and Beryllium cones and domes, does that mean that other speakers that use other materials aren't as good? And if they are as good, does that mean regardless of material used they will sound exactly the same? If they don't, what measurement characteristics can we look for to paint an accurate picture of the tonal attributes that differ between them?

The Focal "Tioxid" treatment is an awesome example. You used to be able to order them with or without the titanium dioxide coating. But they measured exactly the same. You could measure both and overlay the plots over one another on a chart, but sounded completely different.

 

[NorthSky]

I slightly edited/added to my prior post → http://www.audiosciencereview.com/f...or-tonal-characteristics.171/page-9#post-4130

Revel, B&W, Focal-JMLab, Triangle (French design too), KEF, PSB, Paradigm, Dynaudio, JBL, MK Sound, Martin Logan, Aerial, Wilson Audio, mbl, Sonus Faber, Magico, Rockport Technologies, Snell, Vandersteen, Vivid, etc.; we can examine all their drivers and complexities and tonal characteristics, various sizes for matching room's dimensions and acoustics till the end of times, and meanwhile listen to some music from one pair or two of them in our own rooms.

Will it be a Canadian design made in Singapore, or an American design made in China, about an Italian design made in Taiwan, or a Scandinavian design made in Hong Kong, or a French design made in Vietnam, or a German design made in the Philippines? ...A Japanese design made in Brazil, or vice versa? ...And with drivers made in-house or off the shelves from other countries? ...A direct radiating, a horn loaded, an electro-stat, acoustic suspension, ported and phase tuned, or a bipolar?

Is this for stereo analog or multichannel digital? ...Solo (headphones), or orgies (disco)?

So many tones so little time...

 

[Blumlein 88]

snippage..... Put the Revel Salon2 beside the Vivid Giya 3 and compare. I can assure you they won't sound 100% the same. Does that mean 1 is better than the other one?

Yes one is better than the other. Otherwise you are arguing there is no fidelity.

 

[Mivera]

I slightly edited/added to my prior post → http://www.audiosciencereview.com/f...or-tonal-characteristics.171/page-9#post-4130

Yes great material Bob! There's simply no best way to build a speaker. There's no best dispersion pattern, no best tonal balance, build quality, aesthetics or anything. Human ears aren't precision measurement microphones in a anechoic chamber. We all hear different, and we all have different tastes. If there was only 1 best way, then we should probably all just eat blue algae for every meal 365 days a year because it's perfect, and it's what everyone should want and need.

 

[Mivera]

Yes one is better than the other. Otherwise you are arguing there is no fidelity.

You are obviously lost. Have you been for a hearing test lately?

 

[Mivera]

How people hear is based on numerous factors. Shape of the outer ear, inner ear, heredity, how it's connected to our brains, history of loud noise subjected etc. Did you work at a noisy construction site your whole life? If so, then your hearing is probably worse than most. Many musicians have poor hearing due to many years of loud exposure to live music at high levels. This is why many of them can't hear the difference between run of the mill pro sound stuff, and high end audiophile stuff. Here's a basic chart showing us what happens to hearing simply with age:

So if you fell onto the category of the orange 60 year line, would fidelity mean the same thing as when you were 20? Does it matter how flat the response is from the speaker, when your personal measurement microphones are so out of calibration? No it doesn't. This is why personal taste is what determines the best speaker for you.

 

[Blumlein 88]

You are obviously lost. Have you been for a hearing test lately?

Pot calling the kettle black much?

Fidelity is a standard. Eschewing that one is lost in a sea of preference. Preference has its place especially in the end result. Mistaking it for performance is going to get you lost in the woods. Of course find someone lost in the woods and you have the chance to peddle them the solution.

 

[Blumlein 88]

How people hear is based on numerous factors. Shape of the other ear, inner ear, heredity, how it's connected to our brains, history of loud noise subjected etc. Did you work at a noisy construction site your whole life? If so, then your hearing is probably worse than most. Many musicians have poor hearing due to many years of loud exposure to live music at high levels. This is why many of them can't hear the difference between run of the mill pro sound stuff, and high end audiophile stuff. Here's a basic chart showing us what happens to hearing simply with age:

View attachment 653

So if you fell onto the category of the orange 60 year line, would fidelity mean the same thing as when you were 20? Does it matter how flat the response is from the speaker, when your personal measurement microphones are so out of calibration? No it doesn't. This is why personal taste is what determines the best speaker for you.

Would be nice to know the source of your chart. I am near the 60 year mark. Hearing (tested two years ago) is right around the 40 year curve in your chart. Give me fidelity to 20 khz, and as my hearing declines the good speaker will still produce the best fidelity whether it sounds the same to me or not. If you are arguing I should boost the highs to make up for age, then you are only making my point about preference vs fidelity.

Most people with age also have less sharp filtering in the cochlea. Somewhat different than you imagine they also become overly sensitive to excess hype in the highs. Eventually preferring a more rolled off top end to prevent irritation. Still give me the full 20 khz and I can filter as needed for my personal needs.

 

[Mivera]

Would be nice to know the source of your chart. I am near the 60 year mark. Hearing (tested two years ago) is right around the 40 year curve in your chart. Give me fidelity to 20 khz, and as my hearing declines the good speaker will still produce the best fidelity whether it sounds the same to me or not. If you are arguing I should boost the highs to make up for age, then you are only making my point about preference vs fidelity.

You can have 2 speakers measure impeccable, and they simply won't sound the same. What determines one is better, is the one that you like better. That all that matters. It could be a paper cone full range speaker with no crossover components in the signal path, or a 5 way super tower with beryllium cones and 4th order crossovers. Some will have better attributes in some ways, and some will have better attributes in other ways. There's no perfect way to build a speaker. It's a balance of compromises.

 

[NorthSky]

You guys just hit another very important aspect of speaker's overall tonal characteristic and pleasantness/naturalness; listener's age and shape of his angular ears.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Obviously you just don't understand. Different cone/dome materials have different tonal qualities. Even when they are used in Harman products. Even if Harman engineers pop the drivers in their cabinets they aren't immune to this reality. And at some point a designer made the decision to use that material.

This seems to be how you think the design process went:

1: They hired engineers who never heard a speaker before in their lives

2: Did up the driver designs in CAD based on theoretical data

3: Designed cabinets based on theoretical calculations

3: Built crossovers based on theoretical calculations.

4: Once together they went direct to measurement sweeps for evaluation.

5: Made changes to the drivers/cabinets/crossovers based 100% on measured data

6: Once they were satisfied with the measured data, they went direct to blind testing with thousands of listeners, comparing against all of the competition.

If this is how things went, I'm not sure why the listening tests were even required? They already knew based on the data that they were perfect speakers. What more could listening tests possibly bring to the table?

While I appreciate all the effort you've put in to speak on my behalf and help me with all the things I don't understand, none of the above is either relevant nor accurate. Here's the point I'm making, and it's the only point, regardless of how many words you put in my mouth or how far you wander from the point: The premise of your argument here is that sound cannot be predicted by measurements. The premise of Harman's research and design methodology is to predict sound with measurements. No one is saying it's the only thing they do, but it is central to their design methodology.

You really don't have to impress me with your encyclopedic knowledge of what I don't understand or obfuscate the central point with nuance that I actually do understand. What you do need to do, to hold on to a bit of credibility, is something that you seem to find impossible: Admit that you're wrong or tell me how Harman is wrong, and how they're getting those results in spite of that. While I understand that measurements are not the only thing they do, I'm confident that Harman's engineers could look at the measurements you've posted here (or perhaps better measurements) and tell you that those tweeters would sound different. It's obvious that you cannot do that. And really, that shouldn't be at all surprising, or even humbling. You're one guy with some ideas, who hires engineers to execute. They are the world's leading audio company. It was never going to be a fair contest.

Tim

 

[AJ Soundfield]

You obviously don't understand what the topic of this thread is about. It's about measuring for tonal characteristics.

What part of my unambiguous explanations about your posited examples are you not comprehending? I clearly explained, based on the (quite basic) measurements you provided, why the SS drivers would sound different. It's not due to unknown, mystical, magical reasons like an infant or an audiophile would believe.
Now of course, an educated adult would apply the scientific knowledge that is widely available, while an infantile person would be forced to rely on oft repeated fairy tales, belief and "listening", their only choice, due to basic science ignorance and incomprehensibility. That's fine if that's ones limitations. No shame there.

cheers,

AJ

 

[AJ Soundfield]

You can have 2 speakers measure impeccable, and they simply won't sound the same.

You can't have 2 speakers (or anything else) measure the same and sound different (unless you're forced to peek). If you believe that, cite an example.

 

[Mivera]

You can't have 2 speakers (or anything else) measure the same and sound different (unless you're forced to peek). If you believe that, cite an example.

I've already made several examples. Anyways looking at data on paper does not tell you exactly what the differences will translate to in tonal characteristics.

 

[Mivera]

What part of my unambiguous explanations about your posited examples are you not comprehending? I clearly explained, based on the (quite basic) measurements you provided, why the SS drivers would sound different. It's not due to unknown, mystical, magical reasons like an infant or an audiophile would believe.
Now of course, an educated adult would apply the scientific knowledge that is widely available, while an infantile person would be forced to rely on oft repeated fairy tales, belief and "listening", their only choice, due to basic science ignorance and incomprehensibility. That's fine if that's ones limitations. No shame there.

cheers,

AJ

I'm glad I'm ignorant, because it allows me to make products that not only measure impeccable, but audiophiles who like spending lots of money on gear enjoy. That's what matters to me. To me a good product is one that passes both subjective and objective tests. 100% of my target audience listens to music with their ears.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I'm glad I'm ignorant, because it allows me to make products that not only measure impeccable, but audiophiles who like spending lots of money on gear enjoy. That's what matters to me. To me a good product is one that passes both subjective and objective tests. 100% of my target audience listens to music with their ears.

So you aspire to be Harman only more expensive.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

I've already made several examples.

Nope, not a single one.

Anyways looking at data on paper does not tell you exactly what the differences will translate to in tonal characteristics.

No, it doesn't tell you. And my explanations are clearly having no effect.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

it allows me to make products that not only measure impeccable

I obviously missed that thread. Measurements? Where?

audiophiles who like spending lots of money on gear enjoy.

Sure, that's their prerogative. Some people need $100k watches and $1 million rings and gold chains, etc. to be happy. Lots of folks love fashionable jewelry. That's great for the economy.
However, some of us actual enjoy music though, especially with a semblance of realism.

To me a good product is one that passes both subjective and objective tests. 100% of my target audience listens to music with their ears.

Right, which is exactly why they have to stare at and fondle stuff for 2 months to sort out the "sound".

 

[Mivera]

So you aspire to be Harman only more expensive.

Any sane, rational person knows that you can't do any better than a Harman product. If you can't find a Harman product that fits your needs and budget, it's you that's the problem, not the product.

 

[Mivera]

I obviously missed that thread. Measurements? Where?


Sure, that's their prerogative. Some people need $100k watches and $1 million rings and gold chains, etc. to be happy. Lots of folks love fashionable jewelry. That's great for the economy.
However, some of us actual enjoy music though, especially with a semblance of realism.


Right, which is exactly why they have to stare at and fondle stuff for 2 months to sort out the "sound".

What I'm more curious about is why you even bother selling speakers when Harman has far better options available for less money? Are you claiming you're a better engineer than Sean Olive? Or do people buy from you based solely on having a stronger reputation?