|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
98.223.15.64
In Reply to: RE: " Intelligibility has a specific meaning and can be measured, unlike fidelity is not a subjective thing " posted by beppe61 on April 09, 2014 at 23:17:04
Hi
What I mean is that intelligibility can be measured, if you use random words (not sentences) and can only make out half of them, you have 50% and don’t have good intelligibility.
To have intelligibility, one must convey the information within the audio signal and a key part of that is preserving time.
On the other hand, what is enjoyable, what sounds good can’t be quantified anywhere nearly as easily, it is subjective based on how it sounds to the listener and like the choir example, one doesn’t need to preserve of convey the “information” to sound good.
One can go to a concert or large live event and not understand many of the words but still very much enjoy the show.
The best way I have found to subjectively quantify a loudspeakers faithfulness is a generation loss recording, just like with other parts in the chain, the more generations one can record and play before being unlistenable, the more faithful that element is to the input signal.
If you do this outdoors up in the air, the only thing you hear is what the loudspeaker does transmogrifying the signal.
The MTF measurements I mentioned are a measure of resolution, if you Google “modulation transfer function measurements” and examine the many examples of it’s use in optics, you can get an idea why that is the key to the STIpa measurements used to predict inteligibility.
In audio, the loudspeaker is modulated on and off at a given base frequency and if what reaches the mic is either full or zero modulation, then the the MTF is 100% at that modulation rate.
Keep in mind, this is what I see not a universal belief but it has been the direction I have gone at work in large scale sound to preserve intelligibility and fidelity.
If you have ever been to a large stadium or concert and heard a CD being played, you have a base line for what line arrays sound like. The larger they are, the more they disperse time information, the less intelligibility they have, the less they are able to produce a mono phantom image in a stereo configuration.
Here are a couple examples of what can be done in large scale where everything is harder, these systems can produce a stereo image, have very high intelligibility and articulation, both nonexistent when there are many arrivals in time like a typical array produces.
Again, if you have been to a large stadium before and heard the typical state of concert sound, pop on some headphones and compare that approach to these large stadiums using loudspeakers and layouts driven by preserving signal information..
https://www.dropbox.com/s/tnsw5mb4v5vdlwq/20120726122124.mts
https://www.dropbox.com/s/oyosfc3adc6j1du/20130723135350.mts
We don’t advertise like the marketing driven companies but we do get press every so often;
http://www.psam.uk.com/danley-loudspeakers-infiltrate-sports-market
Best,
Tom
Follow Ups:
Hi and thanks a lot for the valuable reply but a large live event is very far from my situation (small to medium listenig room).
I am looking for a speaker that makes me wonder if i am listening to recorded human voice of real human voice.
And then the rest will follows automatically.
I really do not know if systems extremely good in open space can be scaled down for home listening.
I tend to think so anyway.
Thanks a lot again.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 04/12/14
You don't need to advertise...the people will find you on their own.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: