• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Role of the "Mind" in subjective audio evaluation???

Blumlein 88

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
6,495
Likes
6,227
Sorry, it does. The theory of why, and discovery of how, things work is often appropriated and extended into being used to positively assert that "such and such must be the case", or "such is impossible" - the history of science is littered with the debris of discarded or insufficiently comprehensive ideas - how many people slaved away, "proving" that it was impossible to go faster than the speed of sound without destroying the vehicle ...
Maybe like ...............................................zero.
 

March Audio

Major Contributor
Manufacturer
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,910
Likes
3,729
Location
Perth Western Australia
As an example, and a deliberate exercise, you record a jazz trio with each player in a separate environment: one in a small recording booth; another in a larger, conventional room; the third is a performance space - and put that together in a mix. When listening you can hear that each player is in their separate space, which overlay each other - and you can switch your subjective focus to each of those recorded environments, which co-exist as they emerge from the speakers.

That's the intent of what I'm saying.
Yes you can hear the relative level of ambience (reverberation) an acoustic space has, but a microphone will not accurately capture what a human subject hears in that space.

Try it yourself, record your hifi playing with your phone or preferably something better. With an omni mic it will sound very reverberant compared to what you heard with your ears.
 

March Audio

Major Contributor
Manufacturer
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,910
Likes
3,729
Location
Perth Western Australia
Sorry, it does. The theory of why, and discovery of how, things work is often appropriated and extended into being used to positively assert that "such and such must be the case", or "such is impossible" - the history of science is littered with the debris of discarded or insufficiently comprehensive ideas - how many people slaved away, "proving" that it was impossible to go faster than the speed of sound without destroying the vehicle ...
Sorry it doesnt.
 

March Audio

Major Contributor
Manufacturer
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,910
Likes
3,729
Location
Perth Western Australia
OK Frank, try this. Linked below is a test recording I made playing with different mic configurations, XY, stereo spaced pair and ORTF. Mics are Rode NT5 cardiod (nothing special). This is in my low reverberation theatre room and I essentially walk around the room. You can easily hear how spatially different the mic set ups sound, and even with directional mics how reverberant the room is compared to what I hear when in that space - It just aint the same tonally, or spatially.

http://gofile.me/6r8Us/Z3cvCKZWA

Recordings are a judgement on microphone position, proximity, number of, type (omni/cardiod) and FR response characteristics. The recording engineer makes a subjective judgement on a load of variables.

If you believe you are hearing the actual recording space as it sounds in real life you are in cloud cuckoo land.
 
Last edited:

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
139
Location
Australia
Maybe like ...............................................zero.
Then your reading of the history of that goal is different from mine ...
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
139
Location
Australia
Sorry it doesnt.
Which simply means you haven't experienced it - I have, as have others, on their own versions of systems that worked well enough to pull it off.

Thanks for putting up that clip - haven't the time to look at it now, but intend to do so, later in the day ...
 

Blumlein 88

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
6,495
Likes
6,227
Then your reading of the history of that goal is different from mine ...
Give some examples as I don't know of any. Supersonic speed was a problem, maybe some believed it would never be solved for aircraft. It was a well known fact for bullets, rockets, artillery shells and other objects. So who were these people slaving away to PROVE you couldn't exceed sonic velocity? Give me a history lesson. I must have slept through that class when it was covered.
 

March Audio

Major Contributor
Manufacturer
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,910
Likes
3,729
Location
Perth Western Australia
Which simply means you haven't experienced it - I have, as have others, on their own versions of systems that worked well enough to pull it off.

Thanks for putting up that clip - haven't the time to look at it now, but intend to do so, later in the day ...
I can assure you that your experience is entirely unique.
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
139
Location
Australia
Give some examples as I don't know of any. Supersonic speed was a problem, maybe some believed it would never be solved for aircraft. It was a well known fact for bullets, rockets, artillery shells and other objects. So who were these people slaving away to PROVE you couldn't exceed sonic velocity? Give me a history lesson. I must have slept through that class when it was covered.
Hell's bells ... I should have picked an easy one - like Dark Matter ...

This, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2412barrier.html, was pretty typical of what one came across when the Sound Barrier - note the word, Barrier - was mentioned.
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
139
Location
Australia
I can assure you that your experience is entirely unique.
And I can assure you that I have pointed to corresponding experiences a number of times, including on this forum - possibly you were otherwise engaged?
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
139
Location
Australia
The mind is like the stimuli of our emotional audio receptions...the music floating in the air. Can the mind differentiate levels of emotion from different levels of distortion?
Only in the sense that obvious distortion turns me off, Bob - if I'm not aware of flaws in the sound I can "let go", the rhythm and impact of the music takes me to a good place - if I hear the defects then my rational mind takes over, and it becomes like listening to someone talking - my emotions are not engaged at all, unless it's some favourite pop song, etc.

The obsession with high impact sound reinforcement systems killed my interest in live shows years ago - I had no interest in subjecting myself to crappy sound, from people who didn't have a clue about how to get it right.
 

Blumlein 88

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
6,495
Likes
6,227
Hell's bells ... I should have picked an easy one - like Dark Matter ...

This, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2412barrier.html, was pretty typical of what one came across when the Sound Barrier - note the word, Barrier - was mentioned.
Typical Frank drivel.

I said it was a problem. Some believed it might be a problem without a solution for aircraft. Your link more or less agrees. Now where are the people slaving away to prove the barrier was impossible to cross? Never mind, I don't even care. You are going back on the ignore list permanently.
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
139
Location
Australia
Good thing you don't know that I sometimes spill food on my shirt front - that would mean I deserve to be stoned, methinks ...
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
139
Location
Australia
OK Frank, try this. Linked below is a test recording I made playing with different mic configurations, XY, stereo spaced pair and ORTF. Mics are Rode NT5 cardiod (nothing special). This is in my low reverberation theatre room and I essentially walk around the room. You can easily hear how spatially different the mic set ups sound, and even with directional mics how reverberant the room is compared to what I hear when in that space - It just aint the same tonally, or spatially.

http://gofile.me/6r8Us/Z3cvCKZWA

Recordings are a judgement on microphone position, proximity, number of, type (omni/cardiod) and FR response characteristics. The recording engineer makes a subjective judgement on a load of variables.

If you believe you are hearing the actual recording space as it sounds in real life you are in cloud cuckoo land.
OK, have listened. Yes, different qualities to the captures, but the strongest characteristic I picked was the variation in treble quality - this was quite striking, implying you either used different recording setups, or there were different warmup times of the equipment - any thoughts on the cause of this? I've noted this on commercial recordings, and it's very irritating that it wasn't picked during mastering, for something one paid for.

Not quite sure what you mean by the mics versus what you hear in the space - are you talking about your own voice, or the recording played?
 

March Audio

Major Contributor
Manufacturer
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,910
Likes
3,729
Location
Perth Western Australia
OK, have listened. Yes, different qualities to the captures, but the strongest characteristic I picked was the variation in treble quality - this was quite striking, implying you either used different recording setups, or there were different warmup times of the equipment - any thoughts on the cause of this? I've noted this on commercial recordings, and it's very irritating that it wasn't picked during mastering, for something one paid for.

Not quite sure what you mean by the mics versus what you hear in the space - are you talking about your own voice, or the recording played?
Im afraid Frank you have jumped to incorrect conclusions there. The only difference is how the microphones are set up (which direction they point). Otherwise everything ekse is entirely identical.

Please look up microphone set ups - x y, ssp stereo space pair and ortf.

I am totally bemused as to why you cant hear the reverberant and different tonal quality of the recording. Whilst you wont be familiar with the sound of my hifi, its plainly obvious that it doesnt sound like listening to it in person.

Btw my system has no noticeable variation in audio quality due to warm up. I would suggest anybodies system that does should reconsider the quality of their kit.

This is a start

http://www.dpamicrophones.com/mic-university/principles-of-the-xy-stereo-technique

Just go through the plethora of mic set ups at the bottom of the article. They all make the recording space sound different. As I said previously, the sound of the recording is an engineered contrivance and not what an individual hears when in that space.
 
Last edited:

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
139
Location
Australia
I am totally bemused as to why you cant hear the reverberant and different tonal quality of the recording. Whilst you wont be familiar with the sound of my hifi, its plainly obvious that it doesnt sound like listening to it in person.

Btw my system has no noticeable variation in audio quality due to warm up. I would suggest anybodies system that does should reconsider the quality of their kit.
I didn't say I can't hear the difference in presentations - one version, for example, makes the soundstage much wider. But what intrigues me is that the tonal quality in the treble differs considerably, typically caused by warmup, etc issues. This could be due to playback chain, or recording chain, or both.

You're implying you can't hear this variation - is this correct?
 

March Audio

Major Contributor
Manufacturer
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,910
Likes
3,729
Location
Perth Western Australia
..mmmm...you said

Not quite sure what you mean by the mics versus what you hear in the space - are you talking about your own voice, or the recording

To me the differences between the sound in the recording and what I hear in the space in terms of spatial, reverberation and tonality are blatantly obvious. Perhaps you cant hear it, I dont know. IIRC, you used to post youtube videos of recordings of hifis playing saying it accurately demonstrated their sound.

Im not implying anything. I clearly said you jumped to the wrong conclusion. Btw I have never heard equipment change its tonality in any significant way due to warm up. If you have I would suggest you throw the kit in the trash; its of very poor design.

Its good you are starting to acknowledge that the recording is not an accurate representation of what a person hears in the space.

The high frequency change is due to the microphone polar response. The mics frequency response changes with the direction of the incoming sound. Also the mix of direct and reflected sound changes slightly with the microphone position.

Polar_pattern_Cardi.png
 
Last edited:

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
139
Location
Australia
The high frequency change is due to the microphone polar response. The mics frequency response change with direction. Also the mix of direct and reflected sound changes slightly with the microphone position.
Meaning that you can hear the variation in the samples posted? If so, how could you characterise that, in a subjective sense?
 

Blumlein 88

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
6,495
Likes
6,227
So BE718 is saying he can change the sense of space which might include how much relative treble by picking different mic patterns. Which means the space you hear is up to him to a large extent. And none of them are what you would hear if your ear was where the microphones are.
 
Top Bottom