 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
107.142.146.197
In Reply to: RE: SINAD denier, stop the steal! posted by 13th Duke of Wymbourne on June 14, 2024 at 12:46:29
I guess simplistic metrics work for simplistic folks.
Follow Ups:
Denialism of measurements and graphs will only get you so far! In fact, it could even be revealing of a. . . uh. . . simplistic mind set. ;-)
Belief in simple interpretation of measurements will only get you so far.
But, in general, I believe that there IS a correlation between the sound and most measurements.
Believe what you want. Unless the data is processed with an algorithm like the Gedlee metric or what Cheever came up with, you will not find a correlation between what people like and measurements. This was known as far back as the 1930s and 40s, because D.E.L Shorter from the BBC was trying to find such an equation to correlate the listening impressions with the measurements.
Raw THD and IMD numbers will not give you a good agreement with listening. Even looking at a raw FFT will not tell you too much. IMD also plays a big role but not the amount...the composition and that is very complex.
There is a program that allows you to add specific amounts of distortion to an audio file and then you can listen, if so inclined. I dabbled and found I could not distinguish what I thought were high levels of harmonics so I went back to just enjoying music :) And, as I've noted a few times recently, I have become primarily a vinyl listener in the past 2-3 years and LP reply is rife with non-idealities (that puts some of arguments about digital artifacts to shame) but it sounds really nice (because of vs. in spite of?)
Measurements in high-end audio are a moveable feast - a designer can use them if they show the product in a good light or declare them fake if they don't. I have the 'comfort' in my design day-job of having specs so I know when I am done. My head would like to solve all objective-subjective related discrepancies but my heart likes to think there are unsolved mysteries.
One final point, measurements - whether you think them valid or not - are usually taken with calibrated equipment. Audiophiles' opinions are never calibrated :)
Very interesting software. Keith Howard made something simpler many years ago and I tried and found I could clearly hear differences between different distortion patterns.
What would be really interesting would be to simulate existing amp profiles and see if one can hear the difference and then if one has access to those amplifiers, see if there is a similar response with the real thing rather than a simulation. My guess is that there are other things the software doesn't account for, like back EMF of a speaker for example.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
