- Aug 31, 2017
....mmm...you keep making this point. No-one is idolising, Toole et al are just being used as the go to reference because it is very accessible and there is very little , if any, evidence to contradict the research that has been performed. If you think the research is wrong say so and point out why with your supporting evidence. Otherwise you have no point. We are not all blindly following the individuals. The science speaks for itself.
«Loudspeaker specifications have traditionally described the physical properties and characteristics of loudspeakers: frequency response, dimensions and volume of the cabinet, diameter of drivers, impedance, total harmonic distortion, sensitivity, etc. Few of these directly describe the sound reproduction and none directly describe perception of the reproduction, i.e., takes into account that the human auditory system is highly non-linear in terms of spectral-, temporal-, and sound level processing (see, e.g., ). This disconnect between specifications and perception have made it challenging for acousticians and engineers (and consumers) to predict how a loudspeaker will sound on the basis of these specifications».
In other words, despite «Toole et al.» it is «...challenging for acousticians and engineers (and consumers) to predict how a loudspeaker will sound on the basis of these specifications».
Do you understand my point? The research that has become gospel among many at ASR still makes it difficult to predict how a speaker will sound. The Revel Salón vs M2 anecdote that suprised so many may be one indication that we still have difficulty predicting speaker sound?