• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

"Things that cannot be measured"

Phorize

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1,539
Likes
2,070
Location
U.K
That's beyond crass.

You may feel that is the case, but if we all to start admonishing each other on the assumption that everyone else should calibrate to our own personal outlook, where does it end? As the saying attributed to the fictional Cardinal Richelieu goes, ‘you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.’
 

Hon

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2021
Messages
59
Likes
49
IQ can be measured. Stupidity can't be measured.

Pithy, this has some interesting ramifications. IQ is a sort of estimate of intelligence, isn't it? It's only a measure because it assigns a number--which may or may not be accurate at times other than when the number was assigned (and in fact, may be given as range rather than as a single hard number).

Stupidity, on the other hand, cannot be quantified, but it can be directly objectified: it is anyone who disagrees with my preferred choices for the best-sounding speakers. Right?
 

Cbdb2

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 8, 2019
Messages
1,549
Likes
1,525
Location
Vancouver
Why would you , its not a perceptual effects device folks like Walker were / are developing.

Unless its a codec I cant see why you'd listen to anything audio device wise. Even speakers , we know what they need to do well and the artifacts that colour sound or are undesirable if only purely from a technical POV .
...

If your talking about home audio, sure. Studio/instrument devices, not so. Compressors, distortion pedals, reverbs even mics with full measurements need to be listened to. These are however devices that dont necessarily need flat freq or low distortion, except the dynamics processor, but how do you measure the distortion of a modulated signal.
But these might also fall in the perceptual effects category.

Has anyone seen anything about measuring instruments? These days, that speaker measurement rig and a robot player should give repeatable results. Do you think a Stradivarius measures different than a $300 violin? It must, but Is there a correlation? If there was it might make some subjectivists think twice about measurements.
 

Phorize

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1,539
Likes
2,070
Location
U.K
IQ can be measured. Stupidity can't be measured.
Well, I suppose we could count election poll results as a useful heuristic for societal stupidity, if not a precise measure or one for individuals.:)
 

KSTR

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Messages
2,729
Likes
6,098
Location
Berlin, Germany
Examples???
The AKM <--> TEAC co-operation in developping the AK4490 DAC chip would be one example :
https://velvetsound.akm.com/us/en/voices/interviews/teac-round-table-discussion/
Of course this is AKM's marketing version of the story and has to be taken with a grain of salt but shows the mentality. I've also had personal contract to a Japanese audio engineer and he shared similar stories. Products delevelopped is primarily measurements-driven first but then later subjective audio impressions (even with the risk of them being arbitrary) are used to change things, to "fit to taste" of whatever listening panel. Even if that compromises some measurements as long as it remains in the commonly accepted "good enough" regions. And they do all of that with great care and seriousness and respect for each other. By this, neither party gets hurt.
 

StefaanE

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2020
Messages
528
Likes
930
Location
Harlange, Luxembourg
Stupidity, on the other hand, cannot be quantified, but it can be directly objectified: it is anyone who disagrees with my preferred choices for the best-sounding speakers. Right?
Wrong, it’s anyone who gives this type of provocative answer.
 

direstraitsfan98

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
826
Likes
1,226
Emotion can be heard. And I’m not talking about the emotional connection m between the listener and the program. The emotion I speak of is what separates a good piano performance to a great one.

Go to your local opera or orchestra sometime. Nothing in that venue can be measured by a machine...
 

SIY

Grand Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
10,471
Likes
25,186
Location
Alfred, NY

scott wurcer

Major Contributor
Audio Luminary
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
1,501
Likes
2,822
Actually they don't look identical. "Frequency Response" means a FR of magnitude and phase and when you have one FFT block of FR data you can go back to the original time-domain signal by iFFT (with any FFT window implicitely applied to that reconstruction, which is why, for example, FFT/iFFT-based convolvers don't use any window functions).

No need to add to this, you can poorly apply any tool (or simply not know all the subtleties in using a particular tool). This does not make anyone ignorant or stupid but they should be willing to step back and consider input from those that do.
 

Sawdust123

Member
Joined
May 3, 2019
Messages
49
Likes
160
The problem we have regarding measurements is NOT our ability to measure. The problem is knowing WHAT to measure. And there is rightly considerable debate on this matter.
  • We use sine waves because they are simple to use and can be easily calibrated. Music is clearly not a sine wave.
  • We test into purely resistive loads because they allow simple comparison. Speakers are not purely resistive.
  • We test anechoically because room reflections are unpredictable. We never listen anechoically.
We could produce testing that is more representative of real-world conditions but the debate has been over how to do so in a controlled and repeatable fashion so it can be used as a basis for comparison. For instance, we could test amps into a reactive load but which real-world speaker should that load represent? We could add reflections into a speaker test but whose room should that represent? Any "real world" test scenario is going to be a far cry from actual real world usage. We are still left pondering the relationship between the test and what we experience.

I don't think the testing methodology relevance problem will ever sufficiently satisfy the majority. Nevertheless, I do think there needs to be more transient test signals and more reactive load testing. In my years of selling test equipment, I regularly encountered companies that had devised their own tests to test their products. They felt their tests gave them unique insight and were a competitive advantage. They were reluctant to share their methodologies with any standards efforts.

I have sat on several audio standards working groups where new tests were being pondered. These efforts would frequently get off into pie-in-the-sky methodologies. My contribution was often a commentary of the practicality of the suggested test methodologies using the test equipment that currently existed in the marketplace. Some ideas were scuttled because there was no practical means for the average company to implement the test being considered. However, ideas that we may not have been practical 5 years ago may be practical today. The situation is never static.
 

Lambda

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Messages
1,791
Likes
1,525
@scott wurcer i assumed its obvious i'm not talking about FFT as the mathematical concept or algorithm in generals but "FFT in Audio Measurements" and the way they are presented here.
Obviously if one has all the data the FFT function is reversal.

But also kind of Obviously several seconds of audio capture express as one "FFT measurement" screenshot do not contain all the data.
And because of this extreme data reduction (cause for example by averaging) and because we don't see the complex output.

There is the possibility for audible flaws to "hide" in this processed data.

So wen i said there are Things that cannot be measured with "FFT"
This dose not contain the whole story and not all flaws would properly show up in this "FFT"
Screenshot_2021-02-28_22-27-41.png
 
Last edited:

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,988
Likes
36,190
Location
The Neitherlands
There is the possibility for audible flaws to "hide" in this processed data.

Only if the flaws are 'random' which flaws won't be. They will repeat and stand out as 'poles' or when a bit 'random' as an elevation or skirting in the FFT.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,452
Likes
15,797
Location
Oxfordshire
Emotion can be heard. And I’m not talking about the emotional connection m between the listener and the program. The emotion I speak of is what separates a good piano performance to a great one.

Go to your local opera or orchestra sometime. Nothing in that venue can be measured by a machine...
The emotion is in the performance, not created by the equipment.

If the recording is half way to being well done any emotion in the performance will be felt in the reproduction.

In fact IME getting the emotion from a superbly emotional performance doesn't need especially high quality reproduction, since it often comes from rubato and keying/fingering subtleties which are perfectly well heard on a modest hifi system.

I would much sooner hear one of my great Artur Schnabel Schubert recordings - which were historical from a SQ pov - than some of those awfully banal high quality recordings used at shows.

The musicality is blindingly obvious despite the historic recording quality.

IME when an audiophile says "musical" or "analogue" they are usually referring to a system with rolled off treble...
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,988
Likes
36,190
Location
The Neitherlands
What would cause a constantly changing or sparse distortion ?
 

Lambda

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Messages
1,791
Likes
1,525
What would cause a constantly changing or sparse distortion ?
In general digital problems. clock drift, bit flips in some byte patterns, beat frequency of close but not locked clocks.
On the analog side maybe. DCDC converters that change the frequency randomly, maybe because of temperature or load variations.
Or because they intentionally do spread spectrum.

We could speculate a lot of reasons, whats the point? :rolleyes:
 
Top Bottom